Stereotactic body radiotherapy with or without selective dismutase mimetic in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an adaptive, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has the potential to ablate localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Selective dismutase mimetics sensitise tumours while reducing normal tissue toxicity. This trial was designed to establish the efficacy and toxicity afforded by the selective dismutase mimetic avasopasem manganese when combined with ablative SBRT for localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: In this adaptive, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer who had received at least 3 months of chemotherapy and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at six academic sites in the USA. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), with block randomisation (block sizes of 6-12) with a maximum of 24 patients per group, to receive daily avasopasem (90 mg) or placebo intravenously directly before (ie, within 180 min) SBRT (50, 55, or 60 Gy in five fractions, adaptively assigned in real time by Bayesian estimates of 90-day safety and efficacy). Patients and physicians were masked to treatment group allocation, but not to SBRT dose. The primary objective was to find the optimal dose of SBRT with avasopasem or placebo as determined by the late onset EffTox method. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03340974, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 25, 2018, and April 29, 2020, 47 patients were screened, of whom 42 were enrolled (median age was 71 years [IQR 63-75], 23 [55%] were male, 19 [45%] were female, 37 [88%] were White, three [7%] were Black, and one [2%] each were unknown or other races) and randomly assigned to avasopasem (n=24) or placebo (n=18); the placebo group was terminated early after failing to meet prespecified efficacy parameters. At data cutoff (June 28, 2021), the avasopasem group satisfied boundaries for both efficacy and toxicity. Late onset EffTox efficacy response was observed in 16 (89%) of 18 patients at 50 Gy and six (100%) of six patients at 55 Gy in the avasopasem group, and was observed in three (50%) of six patients at 50 Gy and nine (75%) of 12 patients at 55 Gy in the placebo group, and the Bayesian model recommended 50 Gy or 55 Gy in five fractions with avasopasem for further study. Serious adverse events of any cause were reported in three (17%) of 18 patients in the placebo group and six (25%) of 24 in the avasopasem group. In the placebo group, grade 3 adverse events within 90 days of SBRT were abdominal pain, acute cholangitis, pyrexia, increased blood lactic acid, and increased lipase (one [6%] each); no grade 4 events occurred. In the avasopasem group, grade 3-4 adverse events within 90 days of SBRT were acute kidney injury, increased blood alkaline phosphatase, haematoma, colitis, gastric obstruction, lung infection, abdominal abscess, post-surgical atrial fibrillation, and pneumonia leading to respiratory failure (one [4%] each).There were no treatment-related deaths but one late death in the avasopasem group due to sepsis in the setting of duodenal obstruction after off-study treatment was reported as potentially related to SBRT. INTERPRETATION: SBRT that uses 50 or 55 Gy in five fractions can be considered for patients with localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The addition of avasopasem might further enhance disease outcomes. A larger phase 2 trial (GRECO-2, NCT04698915) is underway to validate these results. FUNDING: Galera Therapeutics.

Ampullary Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Ampullary cancers refer to tumors originating from the ampulla of Vater (the ampulla, the intraduodenal portion of the bile duct, and the intraduodenal portion of the pancreatic duct), while periampullary cancers may arise from locations encompassing the head of the pancreas, distal bile duct, duodenum, or ampulla of Vater. Ampullary cancers are rare gastrointestinal malignancies, and prognosis varies greatly based on factors such as patient age, TNM classification, differentiation grade, and treatment modality received. Systemic therapy is used in all stages of ampullary cancer, including neoadjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy, and first-line or subsequent-line therapy for locally advanced, metastatic, and recurrent disease. Radiation therapy may be used in localized ampullary cancer, sometimes in combination with chemotherapy, but there is no high-level evidence to support its utility. Select tumors may be treated surgically. This article describes NCCN recommendations regarding management of ampullary adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death among men and women in the United States. A major challenge in treatment remains patients' advanced disease at diagnosis. The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma provides recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with pancreatic cancer. Although survival rates remain relatively unchanged, newer modalities of treatment, including targeted therapies, provide hope for improving patient outcomes. Sections of the manuscript have been updated to be concordant with the most recent update to the guidelines. This manuscript focuses on the available systemic therapy approaches, specifically the treatment options for locally advanced and metastatic disease.

Role of pelvic chemoradiation therapy in patients with initially metastatic anal canal cancer: A National Cancer Database review.

BACKGROUND: Although the management of localized anal canal squamous cell carcinomas is well established, the role of pelvic chemoradiation (CRT) in the treatment of patients presenting with synchronous metastatic (stage IV) disease is poorly defined. This study used a national cancer database to compare the overall survival (OS) rates of patients with synchronous metastatic disease receiving CRT to the pelvis and patients treated with chemotherapy (CT) alone. METHODS: This study included adult patients with anal canal squamous cell carcinomas presenting with synchronous metastases diagnosed from 2004 to 2012. Multiple imputation and 2:1 propensity score matching were used to create a matched data set for testing. The proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for the effect of the treatment group on OS. With only patients in the matched data set, the OS of the treatment groups was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method by treatment group. RESULTS: This study started with an unmatched data set of 978 patients, and 582 patients were selected for the matched data set: 388 in the CRT group and 194 in the CT-alone group. The HR for the group effect was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.92; P = .006). The median OS was 21.1 months in the CRT group (95% CI, 17.4-24.0 months) and 14.6 months in the CT group (95% CI, 12.2-18.4 months). The corresponding 5-year OS rates were 23% (95% CI, 18%-28%) and 14% (95% CI, 7%-21%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this large series analyzing OS in patients with stage IV anal cancer, CRT was associated with improved OS in comparison with CT alone. Because of the lack of prospective data in this setting, this evidence will help to guide treatment approaches in this group of patients.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2019.

The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma discuss the diagnosis and management of adenocarcinomas of the exocrine pancreas and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss important updates to the 2019 version of the guidelines, focusing on postoperative adjuvant treatment of patients with pancreatic cancers.

Comparison of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Aim: To compare the clinical efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) for esophageal cancer. Methods: Randomized controlled trials reporting on the comparison of nCRT and nCT for esophageal cancer were identified. Results: Three eligible randomized controlled trials were identified and included with a total of 375 patients (189 nCRT, 186 nCT). Outcomes showed that compared with nCT group, R0 resection and pathologic complete response (pCR) rates were significantly increased in nCRT group. However, no significant difference was seen in 3- and 5-year progression-free survival or 3- and 5-year overall survival. Conclusion: The addition of radiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy results in higher R0 resection rate and pCR rate, without significantly impacting survival.

The role of external beam radiotherapy in the treatment of hepatocellular cancer.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in incidence and mortality. Although the prognosis remains poor, long-term survival has improved from 3% in 1970 to an 18% 5-year survival rate today. This is likely because of the introduction of well tolerated, oral antiviral therapies for hepatitis C. Curative options for patients with HCC are often limited by underlying liver dysfunction/cirrhosis and medical comorbidities. Less than one-third of patients are candidates for surgery, which is the current gold standard for cure. Nonsurgical treatments include embolotherapies, percutaneous ablation, and ablative radiation. Technological advances in radiation delivery in the past several decades now allow for safe and effective ablative doses to the liver. Conformal techniques allow for both dose escalation to target volumes and normal tissue sparing. Multiple retrospective and prospective studies have demonstrated that hypofractionated image-guided radiation therapy, used as monotherapy or in combination with other liver-directed therapies, can provide excellent local control that is cost effective. Therefore, as the HCC treatment paradigm continues to evolve, ablative radiation treatment has moved from a palliative treatment to both a "bridge to transplant" and a definitive treatment.

The Selective Use of Radiation Therapy in Rectal Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Colorectal cancer has a high global incidence, and standard treatment employs a multimodality approach. In addition to cure, minimizing treatment-related toxicity and improving the therapeutic ratio is a common goal. The following article addresses the potential of omitting radiotherapy in select rectal cancer patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Omission of radiotherapy in rectal cancer is analyzed in the context of historical findings, as well as more recent data describing risk stratification of stage II-III disease, surgical optimization, imaging limitations, improvement in systemic chemotherapeutic agents, and contemporary studies evaluating selective omission of radiotherapy. A subset of rectal cancer patients exists that may be considered low to intermediate risk for locoregional recurrence. With appropriate staging, surgical technique, and possibly improved systemic therapy, it may be feasible to selectively omit radiotherapy in these patients. Current imaging limitations as well as evidence of increased locoregional recurrence following radiotherapy omission lend us to continue supporting the standard treatment of approach of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy followed by surgical resection until additional improvements and prospective evidence can support otherwise.

Total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: An emerging option.

The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has benefited from improved surgical techniques and from the implementation of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), which have markedly decreased the rates of local recurrence. However, distant metastatic disease remains the most significant cause of death for these patients. Although adjuvant chemotherapy (ChT) after neoadjuvant CRT and definitive surgery is commonly recommended, the value of adjuvant systemic therapy remains less clear. Trials evaluating adjuvant ChT for rectal cancer have been handicapped by poor compliance rates and inconsistent survival results. Shifting systemic therapy delivery to the neoadjuvant setting has the promise to improve compliance rates, reduce toxicity, and decrease distant relapse rates. Recently, multiple prospective trials have reported on the use of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) for patients with LARC, incorporating both ChT and CRT in the neoadjuvant setting. Here, the authors review the promising results from those trials. Because the studies have largely focused on pathologic outcomes (primarily pathologic complete response rates), ongoing phase 2 and 3 trials are now underway assessing the long-term disease-related outcomes with TNT. In addition to improving survival, TNT has the potential to increase the pool of patients with LARC who are eligible for organ preservation, which is also being evaluated. Cancer 2017;123:1497-1506. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiation remains strongly favored over short-course radiotherapy by radiation oncologists in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Short-course radiotherapy (SC-RT) and long-course chemoradiotherapy (LC-CRT) are accepted neoadjuvant treatments of rectal cancer. In the current study, the authors surveyed US radiation oncologists to assess practice patterns and attitudes regarding SC-RT and LC-CRT for patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: The authors distributed a survey to 1701 radiation oncologists regarding treatment of neoadjuvant rectal cancer. Respondents were asked questions regarding the number of patients with rectal cancer treated, preference for SC-RT versus LC-CRT, and factors influencing regimen choice. RESULTS: Of 1659 contactable physicians, 182 responses (11%) were received. Approximately 83% treated at least 5 patients with rectal cancer annually. The majority of responding radiation oncologists (96%) preferred neoadjuvant LC-CRT for the treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and 44% never used SC-RT. Among radiation oncologists using SC-RT, respondents indicated they would not recommend this regimen for patients with low (74%) or bulky tumors (70%) and/or concern for a positive circumferential surgical resection margin (69%). The most frequent reasons for not offering SC-RT were insufficient downstaging for sphincter preservation (53%) and a desire for longer follow-up (45%). Many radiation oncologists indicated they would prescribe SC-RT for patients not receiving chemotherapy (62%) or patients with a geographic barrier to receiving LC-CRT (82%). Patient comorbidities appeared to influence regimen preferences for 79% of respondents. Approximately 20% of respondents indicated that altered oncology care reimbursement using capitated payment by diagnosis would impact their consideration of SC-RT. CONCLUSIONS: US radiation oncologists rarely use neoadjuvant SC-RT despite 3 randomized controlled trials demonstrating no significant differences in outcome compared with LC-CRT. Further research is necessary to determine whether longer follow-up coupled with the benefits of lower cost, increased patient convenience, and lower acute toxicity will increase the adoption of SC-RT by radiation oncologists in the United States. Cancer 2017;123:1434-1441. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Ductal adenocarcinoma and its variants account for most pancreatic malignancies. High-quality multiphase imaging can help to preoperatively distinguish between patients eligible for resection with curative intent and those with unresectable disease. Systemic therapy is used in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant pancreatic cancer setting, as well as in the management of locally advanced unresectable and metastatic disease. Clinical trials are critical for making progress in treatment of pancreatic cancer. The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma focus on diagnosis and treatment with systemic therapy, radiation therapy, and surgical resection.

Nonoperative management of rectal cancer.

Surgery has long been the primary curative modality for localized rectal cancer. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation has significantly improved local control rates and, in a significant minority, eradicated all disease. Patients who achieve a pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant therapy have an excellent prognosis, although the combination treatment is associated with long-term morbidity. Because of this, a nonoperative management (NOM) strategy has been pursued to preserve sphincter function in select patients. Clinical and radiographic findings are used to identify patients achieving a clinical complete response to chemoradiation, and they are then followed with intensive surveillance. Incomplete, nonresponding and those demonstrating local progression are referred for salvage with standard surgery. Habr-Gama and colleagues have published extensively on this treatment strategy and have laid the groundwork for this approach. This watch-and-wait strategy has evolved over time, and several groups have now reported their results, including recent prospective experiences. Although initial results appear promising, several significant challenges remain for NOM of rectal cancer. Further study is warranted before routine implementation in the clinic.

Role of Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Colonic Carcinoma in the Modern Chemotherapy Era.

BACKGROUND: The role of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment of resected, locally advanced colon cancer is unclear. One randomized controlled trial (Intergroup-0130) addressed this question but failed to meet its accrual goals. Since this trial, few attempts have been made to reassess the role of RT in this clinical setting. METHODS: Sixty-two patients with non-metastatic, American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition stage T4 colonic adenocarcinoma were treated at our institution between 2000 and 2013. All underwent curative-intent surgery. Sixteen patients underwent resection only, 33 patients received adjuvant chemotherapy (ChT), and 13 patients received adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT). RESULTS: Patients receiving adjuvant CRT were more likely to have T4b (vs. T4a) disease and were more likely to undergo R1 or R2 resection compared with those receiving adjuvant ChT alone. Despite this, multivariate analysis demonstrated that treatment with adjuvant CRT (vs. adjuvant ChT) enhanced locoregional control and disease-free survival (hazard ratio 0.044 and 0.145, respectively; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant RT for T4 colon cancers may be appropriate in select patients, specifically those with T4b lesions and/or residual disease following resection.

The Use of Re-irradiation in Locally Recurrent, Non-metastatic Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The optimal approach to patients with locally recurrent, non-metastatic rectal cancer is unclear. This study evaluates the outcomes and toxicity associated with pelvic re-irradiation. METHODS: Patients undergoing re-irradiation for locally recurrent, non-metastatic, rectal cancer between 2000 and 2014 were identified. Acute and late toxicities were assessed using common terminology criteria for adverse events version 4.0. Disease-related endpoints included palliation of local symptoms, surgical outcomes, and local progression-free survival (PFS), distant PFS and overall survival (OS) using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients met the criteria for inclusion in this study. Two (6 %) experienced early grade 3+ toxicity and seven (21 %) experienced late grade 3+ toxicity. Twenty-three patients presented with symptomatic local recurrence and 18 (78 %) reported symptomatic relief. Median local PFS was 8.7 (95 % CI 3.8-15.2) months, with a 2-year rate of 15.7 % (4.1-34.2), and median time to distant progression was 4.4 (2.2-33.3) months, with a 2-year distant PFS rate of 38.9 % (20.1-57.3). Median OS time for patients was 23.1 (11.1-33.0) months. Of the 14 patients who underwent surgery, median survival was 32.3 (13.8-48.0) months compared with 13.3 (2.2-33.0) months in patients not undergoing surgery (p = 0.10). A margin-negative (R0) resection was achieved in 10 (71 %) of the surgeries. Radiation treatment modality (intensity-modulated radiation therapy, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intraoperative radiation therapy) did not influence local or distant PFS or OS. CONCLUSION: Re-irradiation is a beneficial treatment modality for the management of locally recurrent, non-metastatic rectal cancer. It is associated with symptom improvement, low rates of toxicity, and similar benefits among radiation modalities.

Evaluation of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Resected Gallbladder Carcinoma: A Multi-institutional Experience.

PURPOSE: The role of adjuvant radiation for gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) is uncertain. We combine the experience of six National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers to explore the impact of adjuvant radiation following oncologic resection of GBC. METHODS: Patients who underwent extended surgery for GBC at Johns Hopkins, Mayo Clinic, Duke University, Oregon Health & Science University, University of Michigan, and University of Texas MD Anderson between 1985 and 2008 were reviewed. Patients with metastatic disease at surgery, gross residual disease, or missing pathologic information were excluded. RESULTS: Of the 112 patients identified, 61 % received adjuvant radiation, 93 % of whom received concurrent chemotherapy. Median follow-up of surviving patients was 47.3 (range 2.2-167.7) months. Patients who received adjuvant radiation had a higher rate of advanced T-stage (57 vs. 16 %, p < 0.01), lymph node involvement (63 vs. 18 %, p < 0.01), and positive microscopic margins (37 vs. 9 %, p < 0.01) compared with patients managed with surgery alone, but overall survival (OS) was comparable between the two cohorts (5-year OS: 49.7 vs. 52.5 %, p = 0.20). Lymph node involvement had the strongest association with poor OS (p < 0.01). Adjuvant radiation was associated with decreased isolated local failure (hazard ratio 0.17, 95 % confidence interval 0.05-0.63, p = 0.01). However, 71 % of recurrences included distant failure. CONCLUSIONS: Following oncologic resection for GBC, adjuvant radiation may offer improved local control compared with observation. The benefit of adjuvant radiation beyond chemotherapy alone should therefore be explored. Certainly, the high rate of distant failure highlights the need for more effective systemic therapy.

Neoadjuvant radiation therapy does not increase perioperative morbidity among patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) as a component of the multimodality treatment of gastric cancer has demonstrated promising results. Data regarding its effect on perioperative safety are limited. METHODS: Adults undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer in the 2005-2011 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program were included. Groups were defined by neoadjuvant RT use, and then propensity-matched based on preoperative variables. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess neoadjuvant RT as an independent predictor of outcomes. RESULTS: Among 2,764 patients identified, 55 (2.0%) were treated with neoadjuvant RT. Patients who received neoadjuvant RT were more likely to have received preoperative chemotherapy and steroids, and experienced weight loss (all P < 0.01). After matching, however, there were no preoperative differences. At time of surgery, total (vs. partial) gastrectomy was more common among patients who underwent neoadjuvant RT (70.9 vs. 46.7%, P < 0.01), and operative time was longer (290 vs. 236 min, P < 0.01). There were no differences in overall complications (23.6 vs. 29.7%, P = 0.49) or 30-day mortality (3.6 vs. 3.6%, P = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant RT was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality following resection for gastric cancer. These findings support the ongoing investigation of neoadjuvant RT as part of the multidisciplinary management of resectable gastric cancer.

Analysis of perioperative radiation therapy in the surgical treatment of primary and recurrent retroperitoneal sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy (RT) is increasingly utilized in conjunction with surgery for the treatment of retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcomas (RPS). Despite multiple theoretical advantages of RT, its role in the surgical management of this disease remains ill defined. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgery for RPS from 1990 to 2011 were identified. Patients were classified as having primary or recurrent disease, and then further stratified by the use of perioperative RT. Primary outcomes, including overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS), were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method with comparisons based on the log rank test. Cox-proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate the independent effect of RT on survival. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients met final inclusion criteria. After adjusting for confounding variables, perioperative RT remained independently associated with a reduced risk of recurrence (HR 0.34, P < 0.01) and death (HR 0.30, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective series, perioperative RT is an independent predictor of improved OS and RFS. These results provide additional support for the use of RT in the multimodality treatment of retroperitoneal sarcoma.

Intraoperative radiotherapy for gastrointestinal malignancies: contemporary outcomes with multimodality therapy.

The integration of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) into the multimodal treatment of gastrointestinal cancer is feasible and leads to high rates of local control. In-field tumoral control using IORT-containing strategies can be achieved in over 90 % of most cases, regardless of the site or status of the tumor (primary or recurrent). Electron beam IORT, or intraoperative electron radiation therapy, is the dominant technology used in institutions reporting data in publications the 21st century. Neither surgery nor systemic therapy is compromised by the integration of IORT-containing radiotherapy.

Patterns of recurrence after trimodality therapy for esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of failure after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for esophageal cancer are poorly defined. METHODS: All patients in the current study were treated with trimodality therapy for nonmetastatic esophageal cancer from 1995 to 2009. Locoregional failure included lymph node failure (NF), anastomotic failure, or both. Abdominal paraaortic failure (PAF) was defined as disease recurrence at or below the superior mesenteric artery. RESULTS: Among 155 patients, the primary tumor location was the upper/middle esophagus in 18%, the lower esophagus in 32%, and the gastroesophageal junction in 50% (adenocarcinoma in 79% and squamous cell carcinoma in 21%) of patients. Staging methods included endoscopic ultrasound (73%), computed tomography (46%), and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (54%). Approximately 40% of patients had American Joint Committee on Cancer stage II disease and 60% had stage III disease. The median follow-up was 1.3 years. The 2-year locoregional control, event-free survival, and overall survival rates were 86%, 36%, and 48%, respectively. The 2-year NF rate was 14%, the isolated NF rate was 3%, and the anastomotic failure rate was 6%. The 2-year PAF rate was 9% and the isolated PAF rate was 5%. PAF was found to be increased among patients with gastroesophageal junction tumors (12% vs 6%), especially for the subset with ≥ 2 clinically involved lymph nodes at the time of diagnosis (19% vs 4%). CONCLUSIONS: Few patients experience isolated NF or PAF as their first disease recurrence. Therefore, it is unlikely that targeting additional regional lymph node basins with radiotherapy would significantly improve clinical outcomes.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma, version 2.2014: featured updates to the NCCN guidelines.

The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma discuss the diagnosis and management of adenocarcinomas of the exocrine pancreas and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize major discussion points from the 2014 NCCN Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Panel meeting. The panel discussion focused mainly on the management of borderline resectable and locally advanced disease. In particular, the panel discussed the definition of borderline resectable disease, role of neoadjuvant therapy in borderline disease, role of chemoradiation in locally advanced disease, and potential role of newer, more active chemotherapy regimens in both settings.