Adjuvant gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus capecitabine in node-positive extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: the STAMP randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The effectiveness of gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy is unclear in cholangiocarcinoma. We investigated the role of adjuvant gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GemCis) in a homogeneous group of high-risk patients with resected, lymph node-positive extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Adenocarcinoma of perihilar or distal bile duct with regional lymph node metastasis who underwent curative-intent surgery (R0/R1) was eligible. Patients were randomized to receive GemCis (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, cisplatin 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) or capecitabine (1250 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14) every 3 weeks for 8 cycles. Primary endpoint was disease-free survival. Secondary endpoints were overall survival and safety. All p values are 1 sided and were considered significant if <0.1. Between July 2017 and November 2020, 101 patients (50 in the GemCis and 51 in the capecitabine group) were included in the intention-to-treat population. Perihilar and distal bile ducts were the primary sites in 45 (44.6%) and 56 (55.4%) patients, respectively, and 32 (31.7%) had R1 resections. Median (1-sided 90% CI) follow-up duration was 33.4 (30.5-35.8) months. In the GemCis and capecitabine group, 2-year disease-free survival rates were 38.5% (29.5%-47.4%) and 25.1% (17.4%-33.5%) [HR=0.96 (CI, 0.71-1.30), p=0.430], and median overall survival was 35.7 months (29.5-not estimated) and 35.7 months (30.9-not estimated) [HR=1.08 (CI, 0.71-1.64), 1-sided p=0.404], respectively. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 42 (84.0%) and 8 patients (16.0%) in the GemCis and capecitabine groups, respectively. No treatment-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In resected lymph node-positive extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, adjuvant GemCis did not improve survival outcomes compared with capecitabine.

Clinical outcomes of second-line therapy following disease progression on first-line modified FOLFIRINOX for borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) is one of the standard first-line therapies in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC). However, there is no globally accepted second-line therapy following progression on mFOLFIRINOX. METHODS: Patients with BRPC and LAPC (n = 647) treated with first-line mFOLFIRINOX between January 2017 and December 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. The details of the treatment outcomes and patterns of subsequent therapy after mFOLFIRINOX were reviewed. RESULTS: With a median follow-up duration of 44.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 42.3-47.6), 322 patients exhibited disease progression on mFOLFIRINOX-locoregional progression only in 177 patients (55.0%) and distant metastasis in 145 patients (45.0%). The locoregional progression group demonstrated significantly longer post-progression survival (PPS) than that of the distant metastasis group (10.1 vs. 7.3 months, p = 0.002). In the locoregional progression group, survival outcomes did not differ between second-line chemoradiation/radiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy (progression-free survival with second-line therapy [PFS-2], 3.2 vs. 4.3 months; p = 0.649; PPS, 10.7 vs. 10.2 months; p = 0.791). In patients who received second-line systemic chemotherapy following progression on mFOLFIRINOX (n = 211), gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel was associated with better disease control rates (69.2% vs. 42.3%, p = 0.005) and PFS-2 (3.8 vs. 1.7 months, p = 0.035) than gemcitabine monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The current study showed the real-world practice pattern of subsequent therapy and clinical outcomes following progression on first-line mFOLFIRINOX in BRPC and LAPC. Further investigation is necessary to establish the optimal therapy after failure of mFOLFIRINOX.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for distal bile duct cancer: an inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis of outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) has been extended to periampullary cancers, but the oncologic outcome of MIPD for distal bile duct cancer (DBDC) has not been confirmed yet. METHODS: Patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for DBDC of stage I-IIb from 2015 to 2019 at a tertiary referral center were identified and divided into open PD (OPD) and MIPD groups, the latter including laparoscopic and robotic procedures. Survival was compared between the two groups after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using predetermined factors, and exploratory mediation analysis was performed using surgery-derived outcomes. RESULTS: MIPD (n = 81) group had more female patients (46.9% vs 31.6%, p = 0.011) and longer operation time (366.2 min vs. 279.1 min, p < 0.001) than the OPD (n = 288) group before IPTW. Otherwise, intraoperative and immediate postoperative outcomes were comparable between the two groups. In oncologic outcomes, MIPD group showed comparable 3-year overall survival (78.2% vs 75.0%, p = 0.062) and recurrence-free survival (51.2% vs 53.4%, p = 0.871) rates with OPD group before IPTW, and MIPD was not related with survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-1.26, p = 0.18) and recurrence (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.67-1.53, p = 0.949) after IPTW with consideration of potential mediators. Sensitivity analysis using propensity score matching also showed similar results for survival (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.32-1.44, p = 0.312) and recurrence (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.67-1.88, p = 0.653). CONCLUSION: MIPD and OPD groups showed similar postoperative and oncologic outcomes. MIPD could be a considerable treatment option without oncological compromise in high-volume centers.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery is becoming increasingly popular in the field of pancreatic surgery. However, there are few studies of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and feasibility of RDP for PDAC. METHODS: Patients who underwent RDP or laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for PDAC between January 2015 and September 2020 were reviewed. Propensity score matching analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of the 335 patients included in the study, 24 underwent RDP and 311 underwent LDP. A total of 21 RDP patients were matched 1:1 with LDP patients. RDP was associated with longer operative time (209.7 vs. 163.2 min; P = 0.003), lower open conversion rate (0% vs. 4.8%; P < 0.001), higher cost (15 722 vs. 12 699 dollars; P = 0.003), and a higher rate of achievement of an R0 resection margin (90.5% vs. 61.9%; P = 0.042). However, postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B or C showed no significant inter-group difference (9.5% vs. 9.5%). The median disease-free survival (34.5 vs. 17.3 months; P = 0.588) and overall survival (37.7 vs. 21.9 months; P = 0.171) were comparable between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: RDP is associated with longer operative time, a higher cost of surgery, and a higher likelihood of achieving R0 margins than LDP.

Predictive Performance of Current Nodal Staging Systems in Various Categories of Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Nodal staging systems (NSS) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) classify patients on the basis of number of metastatic lymph nodes (MLN), metastatic/retrieved lymph node ratio (LNR), and log odds of positive LN (LODDS). The relative prognostic performance of these NSS, however, remains unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 2584 patients who underwent surgery for PDAC between 2010 and 2019. Subgroups of each staging system were classified using K-adaptive partitioning method and assessed by comparing time-dependent areas under the curve (AUC) 5 years after surgery. RESULTS: Patients were subgrouped by MLN (0, 1-3, ≥ 4), LNR (0, 0-0.23, > 0.23), and LODDS (< - 3.5, - 3.5 to - 0.970, > - 0.97). All three NSS were independent prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). The AUCs for OS were comparable for the MLN (0.622), LNR (0.609), and LODDS (0.596) systems. Subgroup evaluation based on 12 retrieved lymph nodes (RLN), R1 resection, and extent of resection showed that the AUCs of the MLN and LNR NSS were comparable for OS and RFS regardless of the number of RLNs, R1 resection, and extent of resection. By contrast, the AUCs of the LODDS NSS were lower. CONCLUSION: The NSS based on the number of MLN is the best prognostic indicator, with prognostic performance comparable to the other NSS and greater convenience for practical use. This NSS was applicable regardless of the numbers of RLN, R1 resection, and extent of resection.

Impact of enhanced recovery protocols after pancreatoduodenectomy: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This individual-patient data meta-analysis investigated the effects of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols compared with conventional care on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched systematically for articles reporting outcomes of ERAS after pancreatoduodenectomy published up to August 2020. Comparative studies were included. Main outcomes were postoperative functional recovery elements, postoperative morbidity, duration of hospital stay, and readmission. RESULTS: Individual-patient data were obtained from 17 of 31 eligible studies comprising 3108 patients. Time to liquid (mean difference (MD) -3.23 (95 per cent c.i. -4.62 to -1.85) days; P < 0.001) and solid (-3.84 (-5.09 to -2.60) days; P < 0.001) intake, time to passage of first stool (MD -1.38 (-1.82 to -0.94) days; P < 0.001) and time to removal of the nasogastric tube (3.03 (-4.87 to -1.18) days; P = 0.001) were reduced with ERAS. ERAS was associated with lower overall morbidity (risk difference (RD) -0.04, 95 per cent c.i. -0.08 to -0.01; P = 0.015), less delayed gastric emptying (RD -0.11, -0.22 to -0.01; P = 0.039) and a shorter duration of hospital stay (MD -2.33 (-2.98 to -1.69) days; P < 0.001) without a higher readmission rate. CONCLUSION: ERAS improved postoperative outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy. Implementation should be encouraged.

Enhanced recovery protocols consist of interdisciplinary interventions aimed at standardizing care and reducing the impact of surgical stress. They often include a short period of preoperative fasting during the night before surgery, early removal of lines and surgical drains, early food intake and mobilization out of bed on the day of surgery. This study gives a summary of reports assessing such care protocols in patients undergoing pancreatic head surgery, and assesses the impact of these protocols on functional recovery in an analysis of individual-patient data. The study revealed the true benefits of enhanced recovery protocols, including shorter time to food intake, earlier bowel activity, fewer complications after surgery, and a shorter hospital stay compared with conventional care.

Double Ki-67 and synaptophysin labeling in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor biopsies.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) are frequently detected on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) specimens. The conventional methods for evaluating the Ki-67 labeling index (Ki67LI) in EUS-FNAB specimens are laborious, and their results are difficult to interpret. More practical and easy methods for evaluating the Ki67LI in PanNETs from EUS-FNAB specimens is increasing in need. METHODS: We used double Ki-67 and synaptophysin (double Ki-Syn) antibody cocktail; Ki67LI, total Ki-67 positive cells, and total tumor cells were counted and compared with those detected on conventional single Ki-67 immunostaining (single Ki-67) of 96 PanNETs [Grade 1 (G1), 68 cases (71%); G2, 26 (27%); G3, 2 (2%)] from EUS-FNAB specimens. RESULTS: The tumor grading between double Ki-Syn and single Ki-67 immunolabeling was highly concordant (correlation, 0.95; Fisher's exact test, P < 0.001). Seven EUS-FNAB specimens (7%) had discrepant results, of which 2 were removed through surgical resection and showed the same tumor grade as that detected on double Ki-Syn immunolabeling. Fifty-four specimens (56%) had higher Ki-67 positive tumor cell counts on single Ki-67 immunolabeling. Sixty-two specimens (65%) had higher total tumor cell counts on double Ki-Syn immunolabeling. The number of specimens with less than 500 total counted tumor cells were significantly reduced when double Ki-Syn immunolabeling was applied [P = 0.046; single Ki-67, 17 specimens (18%); double Ki-Syn, 9 specimens (9%)]. CONCLUSION: Double Ki-Syn immunolabeling enables the accurate counting of the number of proliferating tumor cells without including inflammatory and contaminant epithelial cells compared with single Ki-67 immunolabeling in PanNETs from EUS-FNAB specimens.

Clinical outcomes of EUS-guided transluminal drainage with a novel lumen-apposing metal stent for postoperative pancreatic fluid collection after pancreatic surgery.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided transluminal drainage (EUS-TD) is increasingly used for the treatment of postoperative pancreatic fluid collections (POPFCs). A novel lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) was recently developed and used for the drainage of POPFCs. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel LAMS in patients with POPFCs. METHODS: Forty-seven patients with symptomatic POPFCs who underwent EUS-TD with a novel LAMS (Niti-S SPAXUS; Taewoong Medical Co, Ltd, Ilsan, South Korea) between April 2019 and July 2020 were included in this study. Clinical outcomes, including technical success, clinical success, and adverse events, were retrospectively evaluated. RESULTS: EUS-TD was technically successful in 41 of 47 patients (87.2%). Clinical success was achieved in 37 of 41 patients (90.2%). The mean procedure time was 13.7 ± 3.5 minutes. The mean POPFC size was 59 ± 18.9 mm. The mean time interval from surgery to EUS-TD was 24.2 ± 37.6 days. Five patients experienced 6 procedural adverse events (12.8%): 4 (8.5%) POPFC infections and 2 (4.3%) distal stent migrations. The 4 patients with POPFC infection underwent additional endoscopic interventions. Of the 2 patients with stent migration, 1 underwent laparoscopic exploration and surgical extraction of the stent and 1 (2.1%) experienced POPFC recurrence, which was managed with percutaneous drainage. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-TD for symptomatic POPFCs with a novel LAMS is technically feasible and effective, with an acceptable adverse event rate. Further larger-scale prospective studies are required to confirm the findings of this study.

Effectiveness of early endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage for postoperative fluid collection.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative abdominal fluid collections (PAFCs) are a potentially fatal complication of pancreatobiliary surgery. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage has recently been shown to be effective in treating PAFCs of more than 4 weeks old. Little is currently known, however, regarding the EUS-guided drainage of PAFCs of less than 4 weeks. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of the early drainage (< 4 weeks) of PAFCs via EUS guidance. METHODS: The data of patients who had undergone EUS-guided PAFC drainage between July 2008 and January 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Data of EUS-guided PAFC drainage were obtained from prospectively collected EUS database of our institute and reviewed of patients' clinical parameters based on electrical medical record. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients who had undergone EUS-guided PAFC drainage within 4 weeks of pancreatobiliary surgery were enrolled. The indications of procedure included abdominal pain (n = 27), fever (n = 18), leukocytosis (n = 2), and increased size of PAFC during external tube drainage (n = 1). Technical success was achieved in all cases, and the clinical success rate was 95.8% (46/48). Four patients underwent secondary procedures. The median period from surgery to EUS-guide drainage was 14 days (Interquartile range [IQR] 10-16), and median time to resolution was 23.5 days (IQR 8.5-33.8). Adverse events occurred in two cases that were developed intracystic bleeding and were successfully resolved by arterial coil embolization. CONCLUSIONS: Early EUS-guided drainage is a technically feasible, effective, and safe method in patients who have developing PAFCs within 4 weeks of pancreatobiliary surgery.

The impact of preoperative EUS-FNA for distal resectable pancreatic cancer: Is it really effective enough to take risks?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is frequently used for the preoperative histologic diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. However, debate continues regarding the clinical merits of preoperative EUS-FNA for the management of resectable pancreatic cancer. We aimed to evaluate the benefits and safety of preoperative EUS-FNA for resectable distal pancreatic cancer. METHODS: The medical records of 304 consecutive patients with suspected distal pancreatic cancer who underwent EUS-FNA were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate the clinical benefits of preoperative EUS-FNA. We also reviewed the medical records of 528 patients diagnosed with distal pancreatic cancer who underwent distal pancreatectomy with or without EUS-FNA. The recurrence rates and cancer-free survival periods of patients who did or did not undergo preoperative EUS-FNA were compared. RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy of preoperative EUS-FNA was high (sensitivity, 87.5%; specificity, 100%; positive predictive value 100%; accuracy, 90.7%; negative predictive value, 73.8%). Among patients, 26.7% (79/304) avoided surgery based on the preoperative EUS-FNA findings. Of the 528 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy, 193 patients received EUS-FNA and 335 did not. During follow-up (median 21.7 months), the recurrence rate was similar in the two groups (EUS-FNA, 72.7%; non-EUS-FNA, 75%; P = 0.58). The median cancer-free survival was also similar (P = 0.58); however, gastric wall recurrence was only encountered in the patients with EUS-FNA (n = 2). CONCLUSION: Preoperative EUS-FNA is not associated with increased risks of cancer-specific or overall survival. However, clinicians must consider the potential risks of needle tract seeding, and care should be taken when selecting patients.

Controversial benefit of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for ampullary cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although surgery is the primary treatment for ampullary cancer (AC), the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (CTx) has not yet been confirmed. METHODS: AC patients who were administered 5-fluorouracil(FU)/leucovorin(LV)-based CTx after curative intent surgery between 2011 and 2019 were included. Prognosis was compared between the observation (OB) and CTx groups after propensity score matching (PSM) using perioperative variables to control differences in patient characteristics. RESULTS: Before PSM, of 475 patients, those in the CTx group (n = 281) had worse 5-year overall survival (OS) (82.1% vs. 78.5%, p = 0.017) and worse 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) (54.9% vs. 75.7%, p < 0.001) than those in the OB group (n = 194). In addition, the CTx group had a higher rate of poor prognostic factors such as a high T stage (p < 0.001), node metastasis (p < 0.001), and poor differentiation (p < 0.001). After PSM, perioperative outcomes were comparable. In addition, there were no significant differences in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.085; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.688-1.710; p = 0.726) or RFS (HR, 0.883; 95% CI, 0.613 1.272; p = 0.505) between the CTx (n = 123) and OB (n = 123) groups even after stratification by TNM stage. Intestinal subtype showed better 5-year OS (83.7% vs 33.2%, p = 0.015) and RFS (46.5% vs 24.9%, p = 0.035) rate compared with pancreatobiliary/mixed subtype. CONCLUSION: Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy based on 5-FU/LV showed comparable oncologic outcomes to patients in the OB group even after stratification by tumor stage. The patients with intestinal subtype showed oncologic benefit for adjuvant 5-FU/LV CTx compared with pancreatobiliary or mixed subtypes.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreatectomy for Right-Sided and Left-Sided G1/G2 Nonfunctioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Multicenter Matched Analysis with an Inverse Probability of Treatment-Weighting Method.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists for the safety and oncologic efficacy of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NF-PNETs) according to tumor location. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of MIS and open surgery (OS) for right- or left-sided NF-PNETs. METHODS: The study collected data on patients who underwent surgical resection (pancreatoduodenectomy, distal/total/central pancreatectomy, duodenum-preserving pancreas head resection, or enucleation) of a localized NF-PNET between January 2000 and July 2017 at 14 institutions. The inverse probability of treatment-weighting method with propensity scores was used for analysis. RESULTS: The study enrolled 859 patients: 478 OS and 381 MIS patients. A matched analysis by tumor location showed no differences in resection margin, intraoperative blood loss, or complications between MIS and OS. However, MIS was associated with a longer operation time for right-sided tumors (393.3 vs 316.7 min; P < 0.001) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay for left-sided tumors (8.9 vs 12.9 days; P < 0.01). The MIS group was associated with significantly higher survival rates than the OS group for right- and left-sided tumors, but survival did not differ for the patients divided by tumor grade and location. Multivariable analysis showed that MIS did not affect survival for any tumor location. CONCLUSION: The short-term outcomes offered by MIS were comparable with those of OS except for a longer operation time for right-sided NF-PNETs. The oncologic outcomes were not compromised by MIS regardless of tumor location or grade. These findings suggest that MIS can be performed safely for selected patients with localized NF-PNETs.

Metabolic activity by FDG-PET/CT after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer and association with survival.

BACKGROUND: The optimal prognostic markers for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer are not yet established. METHOD: Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to surgery and underwent FDG-PET/CT between July 2012 and December 2017 were included. Metabolic parameters including standardized uptake value (SUV), metabolic tumour volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) on PET/CT, and response evaluations using PERCIST criteria, were investigated for its impact on survival and recurrence. Cox proportional hazards model was performed. Differences in risk were expressed as hazard ratio (HR) with 95 per cent confidence interval. RESULTS: The patients with borderline resectable (N = 106) or locally advanced pancreatic cancer (N = 82) were identified. The median survival was 33.6 months. Decreased metabolic parameters of PET/CT after neoadjuvant chemotherapy were associated with positive impacts on survival and recurrence such as SUVmax (HR 1.16, 95 per cent c.i. 1.01 to 1.32, P = 0.025), SUVpeak (HR 1.26, 95 per cent c.i. 1.05 to 1.51, P = 0.011), and MTV (HR 1.15, 95 per cent c.i. 1.04 to 1.26, P = 0.005). Large delta values were related to a positive impact on recurrence such as SUVmax (HR 1.21, 95 per cent c.i. 1.06 to 1.38, P = 0.005). Post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy SUVmax ≥3 (HR 3.46, 95 per cent c.i. 1.21 to 9.91; P = 0.036) was an independent prognostic factor for negative impact on survival. Patients with post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy SUVmax <3 showed more chemotherapy cycles (8.7 versus 6.2, P = 0.001), more frequent complete metabolic response (25 versus 2.2 per cent, P = 0.002), smaller tumour size (2.1 versus 3.1 cm, P = 0.002), and less frequent lymphovascular invasion (23.7 versus 51.1 per cent, P = 0.020) than patients with SUVmax ≥3. CONCLUSION: Reduction in metabolic tumour parameters of FDG- PET/CT after neoadjuvant chemotherapy indicates improved overall survival and recurrence-free survival.

Risk Factors for Recurrence in Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor and Size as a Surrogate in Determining the Treatment Strategy: A Korean Nationwide Study.

INTRODUCTION: The prognostic factors of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET) are unclear, and the treatment guidelines are insufficient. This study aimed to suggest a treatment algorithm for PNET based on risk factors for recurrence in a large cohort. METHODS: Data of 918 patients who underwent curative intent surgery for PNET were collected from 14 tertiary centers. Risk factors for recurrence and survival analyses were performed. RESULTS: The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 86.5%. Risk factors for recurrence included margin status (R1, hazard ratio [HR] 2.438; R2, HR 3.721), 2010 WHO grade (G2, HR 3.864; G3, HR 7.352), and N category (N1, HR 2.273). A size of 2 cm was significant in the univariate analysis (HR 8.511) but not in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.407). Tumor size was not a risk factor for recurrence, but strongly reflected 2010 WHO grade and lymph node (LN) status. Tumors ≤2 cm had lower 2010 WHO grade, less LN metastasis (p < 0.001), and significantly longer 5-year DFS (77.9 vs. 98.2%, p < 0.001) than tumors >2 cm. The clinicopathologic features of tumors <1 and 1-2 cm were similar. However, the LN metastasis rate was 10.3% in 1-2-cm sized tumors and recurrence occurred in 3.0%. Tumors <1 cm in size did not have any LN metastasis or recurrence. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Radical surgery is needed in suspected LN metastasis or G3 PNET or tumors >2 cm. Surveillance for <1-cm PNETs should be sufficient. Tumors sized 1-2 cm require limited surgery with LN resection, but should be converted to radical surgery in cases of doubtful margins or LN metastasis.

Large tumor size, lymphovascular invasion, and synchronous metastasis are associated with the recurrence of solid pseudopapillary neoplasms of the pancreas.

BACKGROUND: Solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs) of the pancreas have low malignant potential. However, malignant SPNs are not fully understood. METHODS: To evaluate risk factors affecting malignant potential, the clinicopathologic features of 375 surgically resected SPNs were compared. RESULTS: Fifty (13.3%) had malignant histologic features. Twenty-seven and 22 had perineural and lymphovascular invasions, respectively. Adjacent organ invasion was noted in 9 cases. Recurrence occurred in 8 cases. The median recurrence time after surgical resection was 67 months and was associated with a higher pT category (P = 0.001), lymphovascular invasion (P < 0.001), and synchronous metastasis (P < 0.001). SPN patients with malignant histologic features had worse recurrence-free survival (RFS; 10-year survival rate, 73.2%) than those without malignant histologic features (96.3%; P = 0.01). Patients with a higher pT category (P = 0.04), synchronous metastasis (P < 0.01), and lymphovascular invasion (P < 0.01) had worse RFS. Lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.042) and a higher T category (P = 0.002) were poor prognostic factors for recurrence. CONCLUSION: Lymphovascular invasion and a higher T category were worse prognostic factors for recurrence in SPN patients with malignant histologic features. For SPN patients with malignant histologic features, a longer follow-up may be required.

Neoadjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX followed by postoperative gemcitabine in borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a Phase 2 study for clinical and biomarker analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) have poor prognosis with upfront surgery. METHODS: This was a single-arm Phase 2 trial for clinical and biomarker analysis. The primary endpoint is 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate. Patients received 8 cycles of neoadjuvant modified (m) FOLFIRINOX. Up to 6 cycles of gemcitabine were given for patients who underwent surgery. Plasma immune cell subsets were measured for analysing correlations with overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Between May 2016 and March 2018, 44 chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-naïve patients with BRPC were included. With neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX, the objective response rate was 34.1%, and curative-intent surgery was done in 27 (61.4%) patients. With a median follow-up duration of 20.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.7-21.6 months), the median PFS and OS were 12.2 months (95% CI, 8.9-15.5 months) and 24.7 months (95% CI, 12.6-36.9), respectively. The 1-year PFS rate was 52.3% (95% CI, 37.6-67.0%). Higher CD14+ monocyte (quartile 4 vs 1-3) and lower CD69+ γδ T cell (γδ TCR+/CD69+) levels (quartiles 1-3 vs 4) were significantly associated with poor OS (p = 0.045 and p = 0.043, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by postoperative gemcitabine were feasible and effective in BRPC patients. Monocyte and γδ T cells may have prognostic implications for patients with pancreatic cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02749136.

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary tumors: lessons learned from 500 consecutive patients in a single center.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a feasible option in selected patients. However, its use has not yet been generalized since it is time-consuming, physically demanding, and technically challenging. It might be essential to share the experience of high-volume centers to understand its use. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 500 consecutive patients who underwent LPD at a single institution between January 2007 and December 2017. RESULTS: The patients included 272 women and 228 men (mean age, 57.1 years). The most common indication for LPD was intraductal papillary neoplasm (n = 104, 20.8%). Overall and major (Clavien-Dindo grades III-V) complication rates were 37.2% and 4.8%, respectively. Fifty-four patients (10.8%) had clinically relevant (grade B/C) pancreatic fistulas. There were 3 (0.6%) 90-day mortalities. The most common late complication was bilioenteric stricture (25, 5%). Two hundred thirty patients were diagnosed with periampullary cancer. The 5-year overall survival rates of pancreatic cancer, common bile duct cancer, ampulla of Vater cancer, and duodenal cancer were 37.4, 63.2, 78, and 88.9%, respectively. We analyzed learning curves of first-generation and second-generation surgeons. A risk-adjusted cumulative sum analysis demonstrated a learning curve of 55 cases for LPD with the first-generation surgeon and earlier competency with the second-generation surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: LPD has the potential to become an alternative surgery to open pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary tumors with acceptable outcomes. We could reduce the steep learning curve with structured training, close supervision, and well-trained operation teams. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of LPD will be optimized after overcoming the learning curve.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic tumors: a single surgeon's experience of 228 consecutive cases.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has gained popularity for the treatment of left-sided pancreatic tumors. Robotic systems represent the most recent advancement in minimally invasive surgical treatment for such tumors. Theoretically, robotic systems are considered to have several advantages over laparoscopic systems. However, there have been few studies comparing both systems in the treatment of distal pancreatectomy. We compared perioperative and oncological outcomes between the two treatment modalities. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of all consecutive minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy cases performed by a single surgeon at a high-volume center between January 2015 and December 2017. RESULTS: The analysis included 228 consecutive patients (LDP, n = 182; Robotic-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy [R-LDP], n = 46). Operative time was significantly longer in the R-LDP group than in the LDP group (166.4 vs. 140.7 min; p = 0.001). In a subgroup analysis of patients who underwent the spleen-preserving approach, the spleen preservation rate associated with R-LDP was significantly higher than that associated with LDP (96.8% vs. 82.5%; p = 0.02). In another subgroup analysis of patients with pancreatic cancer, there were no significant differences in median overall and disease-free survival between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: R-LDP is a safe and feasible approach with perioperative and oncological outcomes comparable to those of LDP. R-LDP offers an added technical advantage that enables the surgeon to perform a complex procedure with good ergonomic comfort.

Multiple KRAS mutations in the non-mucinous epithelial lining in the majority of mucinous cystic neoplasms of the pancreas.

AIMS: Mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs) of the pancreas are cystic neoplasms lined by mucinous lining epithelium (MLE) with associated ovarian-type stroma. Although a non-MLE (NMLE) can be observed in some MCNs, whether cystic neoplasms with ovarian-type stroma and NMLE should be classified as MCNs or separately designated is debated. METHODS AND RESULTS: To test this, NMLEs were defined as flat or cuboidal epithelial cells without intracytoplasmic mucin. A total of 112 MCNs were reviewed, and the epithelium was classified as NMLE or MLE. A total of 110 females and two males with a mean age of 46.5 ± 12.3 years were included in this study. At least focal NMLE was noted in 76.8% (86/112) of MCNs. The mean percentage of the neoplastic epithelium that was NMLE in these 86 cases was 46%. NMLE was predominant (>50%) in 38.4% (43/112) of cases. MCNs with NMLE were smaller (42 ± 21 mm) than those with MLE (60 ± 36 mm, P < 0.001), and all NMLEs had low-grade dysplasia. Twelve MCNs with NMLE or MLE were selected for KRAS mutation analysis with droplet digital polymerase chain reaction after laser capture microdissection. All 12 MCNs showed multiple types of KRAS mutation, which were detected in 92% (11/12) of NMLE foci and 89% (8/9) of MLE foci. Predominant NMLE was common in small MCNs with low-grade dysplasia. CONCLUSIONS: Clonal KRAS mutations were observed in both NMLE and MLE, supporting the hypothesis that MCNs with NMLE should be classified as MCNs.

Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and outcomes of laparoscopic resection for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are well established; however, specific data regarding the outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (L-PD) are limited. The purpose of the present study was to compare the clinical and oncological outcomes following L-PD versus open PD (O-PD) in patients with PNETs. METHODS: This retrospective study included 149 patients with PNETs who underwent PD at the Asan Medical Center between January 2006 and December 2017. In 58 patients, a laparoscopic approach was used (L-PD group), and in 91, an open technique was used (O-PD group). RESULTS: The mean operative time was longer in the L-PD group than in the O-PD group (417.4 min vs. 362.2 min; p = 0.002), and the mean duration of postoperative stay was shorter in the L-PD group (12.6 days vs. 17.8 days; p < 0.001). The estimated blood loss (433.2 ml vs. 415.0 ml; p = 0.824) and the overall complication rate (34.5% vs. 38.5%; p = 0.624) did not significantly differ between the two groups. Regarding the oncological outcomes, there were no significant differences in the resection margins, tumor size, tumor grading, or T/N stage. The number of harvested lymph nodes in the L-PD group was lower than that in the O-PD group (7.1 vs. 10.8; p = 0.002). The 3-year overall survival rate was 91.9% in the L-PD group and 93.6% in the O-PD group (p = 0.974). The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 94.8% in the L-PD group and 86.7% in the O-PD group (p = 0.225). CONCLUSIONS: L-PD is feasible for the treatment of PNETs in selected patients and has the advantages of short recovery time and reduced hospital stay. The survival rate was similar in both groups; however, due to the difference in the harvested lymph nodes, a randomized trial should confirm the oncological safety of L-PD for PNETs.