Complexity and Experience Grading to Guide Patient Selection for Minimally-invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: An ISGPS Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: The ISGPS aims to develop a universally accepted complexity and experience grading system to guide the safe implementation of robotic and laparoscopic minimally-invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). BACKGROUND: Despite the perceived advantages of MIPD, its global adoption has been slow due to the inherent complexity of the procedure and challenges to acquiring surgical experience. Its wider adoption must be undertaken with an emphasis towards appropriate patient selection according to adequate surgeon and center experience. METHODS: The ISGPS developed a complexity and experience grading system to guide patient selection for MIPD based on an evidence-based review and a series of discussions. RESULTS: The ISGPS complexity and experience grading system for MIPD is subclassified into patient-related risk factors and provider experience-related variables. The patient-related risk factors include anatomical (main pancreatic and common bile duct diameters), tumor-specific (vascular contact), and conditional (obesity and previous complicated upper abdominal surgery/disease) factors, all incorporated in an A-B-C classification, graded as no, a single, and multiple risk factors. The surgeon and center experience-related variables include surgeon total MIPD experience (cut-offs 40 and 80) and center annual MIPD volume (cut-offs 10 and 30), all also incorporated in an A-B-C classification. CONCLUSION: This ISGPS complexity and experience grading system for robotic and laparoscopic MIPD may enable surgeons to optimally select patients after duly considering specific risk factors known to influence the complexity of the procedure. This grading system will likely allow for a thoughtful and stepwise implementation of MIPD and facilitate a fair comparison of outcome between centers and countries.

Clinical and Financial Validation of the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) Definition of Post-Pancreatectomy Acute Pancreatitis (PPAP): International Multicenter Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: To validate the ISGPS definition and grading system of PPAP after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: In 2022, the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) defined post-pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (PPAP) and recommended a prospective validation of its diagnostic criteria and grading system. METHODS: This was a prospective, international, multicenter study including patients undergoing PD at 17 referral pancreatic centers across Europe, Asia, Oceania, and the United States. PPAP diagnosis required the following three parameters: (1) postoperative serum hyperamylasemia /hyperlipasemia (POH) persisting on postoperative days 1 and 2, (2) radiologic alterations consistent with PPAP, and (3) a clinically relevant deterioration in the patient's condition. To validate the grading system, clinical and economic parameters were analyzed across all grades. RESULTS: Among 2902 patients undergoing PD, 7.5% (n=218) developed PPAP (6.3% grade B and 1.2% grade C). POH occurred in 24.1% of patients. Hospital stay was associated with PPAP grades (No POH/PPAP 10 days (IQR 7-17) days, grade B 22 days (IQR 15-34) days, and grade C 43 days (IQR 27-54) days; P<0.001), as well as intensive care unit admission (No POH/PPAP 5.4%, grade B 12.6%, grade C 82.9%; P<0.010), and hospital readmission rates (No POH/PPAP 7.3%, grade B 16.1%, grade C 18.5%; P<0.05). Costs of grade B and C PPAP were 2 and 11 times greater than uncomplicated clinical course, resp. (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This first prospective, international validation study of the ISGPS definition and grading system for PPAP highlighted the relevant clinical and financial implications of this condition. These results stress the importance of routine screening for PPAP in patients undergoing PD.

Chemotherapy-induced infiltration of neutrophils promotes pancreatic cancer metastasis via Gas6/AXL signalling axis.

OBJECTIVE: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly metastatic disease and cytotoxic chemotherapy is the standard of care treatment for patients with advanced disease. Here, we investigate how the microenvironment in PDAC liver metastases reacts to chemotherapy and its role in metastatic disease progression post-treatment, an area which is poorly understood. DESIGN: The impact of chemotherapy on metastatic disease progression and immune cell infiltrates was characterised using flow and mass cytometry combined with transcriptional and histopathological analysis in experimental PDAC liver metastases mouse models. Findings were validated in patient derived liver metastases and in an autochthonous PDAC mouse model. Human and murine primary cell cocultures and ex vivo patient-derived liver explants were deployed to gain mechanistical insights on whether and how chemotherapy affects the metastatic tumour microenvironment. RESULTS: We show that in vivo, chemotherapy induces an initial infiltration of proinflammatory macrophages into the liver and activates cytotoxic T cells, leading only to a temporary restraining of metastatic disease progression. However, after stopping treatment, neutrophils are recruited to the metastatic liver via CXCL1 and 2 secretion by metastatic tumour cells. These neutrophils express growth arrest specific 6 (Gas6) which leads to AXL receptor activation on tumour cells enabling their regrowth. Disruption of neutrophil infiltration or inhibition of the Gas6/AXL signalling axis in combination with chemotherapy inhibits metastatic growth. Chemotherapy increases Gas6 expression in circulating neutrophils from patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and recombinant Gas6 is sufficient to promote tumour cell proliferation ex vivo, in patient-derived metastatic liver explants. CONCLUSION: Combining chemotherapy with Gas6/AXL or neutrophil targeted therapy could provide a therapeutic benefit for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Postpancreatectomy Acute Pancreatitis (PPAP): Definition and Grading From the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

OBJECTIVE: The ISGPS aimed to develop a universally accepted definition for PPAP for standardized reporting and outcome comparison. BACKGROUND: PPAP is an increasingly recognized complication after partial pancreatic resections, but its incidence and clinical impact, and even its existence are variable because an internationally accepted consensus definition and grading system are lacking. METHODS: The ISGPS developed a consensus definition and grading of PPAP with its members after an evidence review and after a series of discussions and multiple revisions from April 2020 to May 2021. RESULTS: We defined PPAP as an acute inflammatory condition of the pancreatic remnant beginning within the first 3 postoperative days after a partial pancreatic resection. The diagnosis requires (1) a sustained postoperative serum hyperamylasemia (POH) greater than the institutional upper limit of normal for at least the first 48 hours postoperatively, (2) associated with clinically relevant features, and (3) radiologic alterations consistent with PPAP. Three different PPAP grades were defined based on the clinical impact: (1) grade postoperative hyperamylasemia, biochemical changes only; (2) grade B, mild or moderate complications; and (3) grade C, severe life-threatening complications. DISCUSSIONS: The present definition and grading scale of PPAP, based on biochemical, radiologic, and clinical criteria, are instrumental for a better understanding of PPAP and the spectrum of postoperative complications related to this emerging entity. The current terminology will serve as a reference point for standard assessment and lend itself to developing specific treatments and prevention strategies.

The in situ near-total pancreatectomy (LIVOCADO procedure) for end-staged chronic pancreatitis.

PURPOSE: Total pancreatectomy for severe pain in end-stage chronic pancreatitis may be the only option, but with vascular involvement, this is usually too high risk and/or technically not feasible. The purpose of the study was to present the clinical outcomes of a novel procedure in severe chronic pancreatitis complicated by uncontrollable pain and vascular involvement. METHODS: We describe an in situ near-total pancreatectomy that avoids peripancreatic vascular dissection (Livocado procedure) and report on surgical and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The Livocado procedure was carried out on 18 (3.9%) of 465 patients undergoing surgery for chronic pancreatitis. There were 13 men and 5 women with a median (IQR) age of 48.5 (42.4-57) years and weight of 60.7 (58.0-75.0) kg. All had severe pain and vascular involvement; 17 had pancreatic parenchymal calcification; the median (IQR) oral morphine equivalent dose requirement was 86 (33-195) mg/day. The median (IQR) maximal pain scores were 9 (9-10); the average pain score was 6 (IQR 4-7). There was no peri-operative or 90-day mortality. At a median (IQR) follow-up of 32.5 (21-45.75) months, both maximal and average pain scores were significantly improved post-operatively, and at 12 months, two-thirds of patients were completely pain free. Six (33%) patients had employment pre-operatively versus 13 (72%) post-operatively (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The Livocado procedure was safe and carried out successfully in patients with chronic pancreatitis with vascular involvement where other procedures would be contraindicated. Perioperative outcomes, post-operative pain scores, and employment rehabilitation were comparable with other procedures carried out in patients without vascular involvement.

International consensus guidelines on surveillance for pancreatic cancer in chronic pancreatitis. Recommendations from the working group for the international consensus guidelines for chronic pancreatitis in collaboration with the International Association of Pancreatology, the American Pancreatic Association, the Japan Pancreas Society, and European Pancreatic Club.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP) have an increased risk of pancreatic cancer. We present the international consensus guidelines for surveillance of pancreatic cancer in CP. METHODS: The international group evaluated 10 statements generated from evidence on 5 questions relating to pancreatic cancer in CP. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the level of evidence available per statement. The working group voted on each statement for strength of agreement, using a nine-point Likert scale in order to calculate Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient. RESULTS: In the following domains there was strong consensus: (1) the risk of pancreatic cancer in affected individuals with hereditary pancreatitis due to inherited PRSS1 mutations is high enough to justify surveillance; (2) the risk of pancreatic cancer in patients with CP associated with SPINK1 p. N34S is not high enough to justify surveillance; (3) surveillance should be undertaken in pancreatic specialist centers; (4) surveillance should only be introduced after the age of 40 years and stopped when the patient would no longer be suitable for surgical intervention. All patients with CP should be advised to lead a healthy lifestyle aimed at avoiding risk factors for progression of CP and pancreatic cancer. There was only moderate or weak agreement on the best methods of screening and surveillance in other types of environmental, familial and genetic forms of CP. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with inherited PRSS1 mutations should undergo surveillance for pancreatic cancer, but the best methods for cancer detection need further investigation.

The Impact of Positive Resection Margins on Survival and Recurrence Following Resection and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND: Local and distant disease recurrence are frequently observed following pancreatic cancer resection, but an improved understanding of resection margin assessment is required to aid tailored therapies. METHODS: Analyses were carried out to assess the association between clinical characteristics and margin involvement as well as the effects of individual margin involvement on site of recurrence and overall and recurrence-free survival using individual patient data from the European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: There were 1151 patients, of whom 505 (43.9%) had an R1 resection. The median and 95% confidence interval (CI) overall survival was 24.9 (22.9-27.2) months for 646 (56.1%) patients with resection margin negative (R0 >1 mm) tumors, 25.4 (21.6-30.4) months for 146 (12.7%) patients with R1<1 mm positive resection margins, and 18.7 (17.2-21.1) months for 359 (31.2%) patients with R1-direct positive margins (P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, overall R1-direct tumor margins, poor tumor differentiation, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status ≥1, maximum tumor size, and R1-direct posterior resection margin were all independently significantly associated with reduced overall and recurrence-free survival. Competing risks analysis showed that overall R1-direct positive resection margin status, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status 1, and R1-direct positive superior mesenteric/medial margin resection status were all significantly associated with local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: R1-direct resections were associated with significantly reduced overall and recurrence-free survival following pancreatic cancer resection. Resection margin involvement was also associated with an increased risk for local recurrence.

Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434. FINDINGS: Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Partial pancreatoduodenectomy versus duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection in chronic pancreatitis: the multicentre, randomised, controlled, double-blind ChroPac trial.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial uncertainty regarding the optimal surgical treatment for chronic pancreatitis. Short-term outcomes have been found to be better after duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR) than after partial pancreatoduodenectomy. Therefore, we designed the multicentre ChroPac trial to investigate the long-term outcomes of patients with chronic pancreatitis within 24 months after surgery. METHODS: This randomised, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, superiority trial was done in 18 hospitals across Europe. Patients with chronic pancreatitis who were planned for elective surgical treatment were randomly assigned to DPPHR or partial pancreatoduodenectomy with a central web-based randomisation tool. The primary endpoint was mean quality of life within 24 months after surgery, measured with the physical functioning scale of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Primary analysis included all patients who underwent one of the assigned procedures; safety analysis included all patients who underwent surgical intervention (categorised into groups as treated). Patients and outcome assessors were masked to group assignment. The trial was registered, ISRCTN38973832. Recruitment was completed on Sept 3, 2013. FINDINGS: Between Sept 10, 2009, and Sept 3, 2013, 250 patients were randomly assigned to DPPHR (n=125) or partial pancreatoduodenectomy (n=125), of whom 226 patients (115 in the DPPHR group and 111 in the partial pancreatoduodenectomy group) were analysed. No difference in quality of life was seen between the groups within 24 months after surgery (75·3 [SD 16·4] for partial pancreatoduodenectomy vs 73·0 [16·4] for DPPHR; mean difference -2·3, 95% CI -6·6 to 2·0; p=0·284). The incidence and severity of serious adverse events did not differ between the groups. 70 (64%) of 109 patients in the DPPHR group and 61 (52%) of 117 patients in the partial pancreatoduodenectomy group had at least one serious adverse event, with the most common being reoperations (for reasons other than chronic pancreatitis), gastrointestinal problems, and other surgical morbidity. INTERPRETATION: No differences in quality of life after surgery for chronic pancreatitis were seen between the interventions. Results from single-centre trials showing superiority for DPPHR were not confirmed in the multicentre setting. FUNDING: German Research Foundation (DFG).

The diagnostic value of Rosemont and Japanese diagnostic criteria for 'indeterminate', 'suggestive', 'possible' and 'early' chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal data are lacking to support consensus criteria for diagnosing early chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: Retrospective single centre study of the initial evidence for chronic pancreatitis (CP), with reassessment after follow-up (January 2003-November 2016). RESULTS: 807 patients were previously diagnosed with chronic pancreatitis. This diagnosis was rejected in 118 patients: 52 had another pathology altogether, the remaining 66 patients formed the study population. 38 patients with 'normal' imaging were reclassified as chronic abdominal pain syndrome (CAPS), and 28 patients had minimal change features of CP on EUS (MCEUS) but never progressed. Strict application of the Japanese diagnostic criteria would diagnose only two patients with early CP and eleven as possible CP. Patients were more likely to have MCEUS if the EUS was performed within 12 months of an attack of acute pancreatitis. 40 patients with MCEUS were identified, including an additional 12 who progressed to definite CP after a median of 30 (18.75-36.5) months. Those continuing to consume excess alcohol and/or continued smoking were significantly more likely to progress. Those who progressed were more likely to develop pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, require pancreatic surgery and had higher mortality. CONCLUSION: There needs to be more stringent application of the systems used for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis with revision of the current terminology 'indeterminate', 'suggestive', 'possible', and 'early' chronic pancreatitis. All patients with MCEUS features of CP require ongoing clinical follow up of at least 30 months and all patients with these features should be strongly counselled regarding smoking cessation and abstinence from alcohol.

Outcomes From Minimal Access Retroperitoneal and Open Pancreatic Necrosectomy in 394 Patients With Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the outcomes from minimal access retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy (MARPN) and open pancreatic necrosectomy (OPN) for severe necrotizing pancreatitis in a single center. BACKGROUND: The optimal management of severe pancreatic necrosis is evolving with a few large center single series. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2013, patients with necrotizing pancreatitis at the Liverpool Pancreas Center were reviewed. Outcome measures were retrospectively analyzed by intention to treat. RESULTS: There were 394 patients who had either MARPN (274, 69.5%) or OPN (120, 30.5%). Complications occurred in 174 MARPN patients (63.5%) and 98 (81.7%) OPN patients (P < 0.001). OPN was associated with increased postoperative multiorgan failure [42 (35%) vs 56 (20.4%), P = 0.001] and median (inter-quartile range) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 9 (6-11.5) vs 8 (5-11), P < 0.001] with intensive care required less frequently in MARPN patients [40.9% (112) vs 75% (90), P < 0.001]. The mortality rate was 42 (15.3%) in MARPNs and 28 (23.3%) in OPNs (P = 0.064). Both the mortality and the overall complication rates decreased between 1997-2008 and 2008-2013 [49 (23.8%) vs 21 (11.2%) P = 0.001, respectively; and 151 (73.3%) vs 121 (64.4%), P = 0.080, respectively). Increased mortality was independently associated with age (P < 0.001), preoperative intensive care stay (P = 0.014), and multiple organ failure (P < 0.001); operation before 2008 (P < 0.001) and conversion to OPN (P = 0.035). MARPN independently reduced mortality odds risk (odds ratio = 0.27; 95% confidence interval = 0.12-0.57; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing experience and advances in perioperative care have led to improvement in outcomes. The role of MARPN in reducing complications and deaths within a multimodality approach remains substantial and should be used initially if feasible.

Serum cytokine biomarker panels for discriminating pancreatic cancer from benign pancreatic disease.

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether combinations of serum cytokines, used with logistic disease predictor models, could facilitate the detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: The serum levels of 27 cytokines were measured in 241 subjects, 127 with PDAC, 49 with chronic pancreatitis, 20 with benign biliary obstruction and 45 healthy controls. Samples were split randomly into independent training and test sets. Cytokine biomarker panels were selected by identifying the top performing cytokines in best fit logistic regression models during multiple rounds of resampling from the training dataset. Disease prediction by logistic models, built using the resulting cytokine panels, was evaluated with training and test sets and further examined using resampled performance evaluation. RESULTS: For the discrimination of PDAC patients from patients with benign disease, a panel of IP-10, IL-6, PDGF plus CA19-9 offered improved diagnostic performance over CA19-9 alone in the training (AUC 0.838 vs. 0.678) and independent test set (AUC 0.884 vs. 0.798). For the discrimination of PDAC from CP, a panel of IL-8, CA19-9, IL-6 and IP-10 offered improved diagnostic performance over CA19-9 alone with the training (AUC 0.880 vs. 0.758) and test set (AUC 0.912 vs. 0.848). Finally, for the discrimination of PDAC in the presence of jaundice from benign controls with jaundice, a panel of IP-10, IL-8, IL-1b and PDGF demonstrated improvement over CA19-9 in the training (AUC 0.810 vs. 0.614) and test set (AUC 0.857 vs. 0.659). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the potential role for cytokine panels in the discrimination of PDAC from patients with benign pancreatic diseases and warrant additional study.

Prediction of invasive candidal infection in critically ill patients with severe acute pancreatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with severe acute pancreatitis are at risk of candidal infections carrying the potential risk of an increase in mortality. Since early diagnosis is problematic, several clinical risk scores have been developed to identify patients at risk. Such patients may benefit from prophylactic antifungal therapy while those patients who have a low risk of infection may not benefit and may be harmed. The aim of this study was to assess the validity and discrimination of existing risk scores for invasive candidal infections in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. METHODS: Patients admitted with severe acute pancreatitis to the intensive care unit were analysed. Outcomes and risk factors of admissions with and without candidal infection were compared. Accuracy and discrimination of three existing risk scores for the development of invasive candidal infection (Candida score, Candida Colonisation Index Score and the Invasive Candidiasis Score) were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients were identified from 2003 to 2011 and 18 (17.8%) of these developed candidal infection. Thirty patients died, giving an overall hospital mortality of 29.7%. Hospital mortality was significantly higher in patients with candidal infection (55.6% compared to 24.1%, P=0.02). Candida colonisation was associated with subsequent candidal infection on multivariate analysis. The Candida Colonisation Index Score was the most accurate test, with specificity of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 0.88), sensitivity of 0.67 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.87), negative predictive value of 0.91 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.97) and a positive likelihood ratio of 3.2 (95% CI 1.9 to 5.5). The Candida Colonisation Index Score showed the best discrimination with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.79 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.87). CONCLUSIONS: In this study the Candida Colonisation Index Score was the most accurate and discriminative test at identifying which patients with severe acute pancreatitis are at risk of developing candidal infection. However its low sensitivity may limit its clinical usefulness.

Effect of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus folinic acid or gemcitabine vs observation on survival in patients with resected periampullary adenocarcinoma: the ESPAC-3 periampullary cancer randomized trial.

CONTEXT: Patients with periampullary adenocarcinomas undergo the same resectional surgery as that of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Although adjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to have a survival benefit for pancreatic cancer, there have been no randomized trials for periampullary adenocarcinomas. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether adjuvant chemotherapy (fluorouracil or gemcitabine) provides improved overall survival following resection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: The European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 periampullary trial, an open-label, phase 3, randomized controlled trial (July 2000-May 2008) in 100 centers in Europe, Australia, Japan, and Canada. Of the 428 patients included in the primary analysis, 297 had ampullary, 96 had bile duct, and 35 had other cancers. INTERVENTIONS: One hundred forty-four patients were assigned to the observation group, 143 patients to receive 20 mg/m2 of folinic acid via intravenous bolus injection followed by 425 mg/m2 of fluorouracil via intravenous bolus injection administered 1 to 5 days every 28 days, and 141 patients to receive 1000 mg/m2 of intravenous infusion of gemcitabine once a week for 3 of every 4 weeks for 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was overall survival with chemotherapy vs no chemotherapy; secondary measures were chemotherapy type, toxic effects, progression-free survival, and quality of life. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients (61%) in the observation group, 83 (58%) in the fluorouracil plus folinic acid group, and 73 (52%) in the gemcitabine group died. In the observation group, the median survival was 35.2 months (95%% CI, 27.2-43.0 months) and was 43.1 (95%, CI, 34.0-56.0) in the 2 chemotherapy groups (hazard ratio, 0.86; (95% CI, 0.66-1.11; χ2 = 1.33; P = .25). After adjusting for independent prognostic variables of age, bile duct cancer, poor tumor differentiation, and positive lymph nodes and after conducting multiple regression analysis, the hazard ratio for chemotherapy compared with observation was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.57-0.98; Wald χ2 = 4.53, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resected periampullary adenocarcinoma, adjuvant chemotherapy, compared with observation, was not associated with a significant survival benefit in the primary analysis; however, multivariable analysis adjusting for prognostic variables demonstrated a statistically significant survival benefit associated with adjuvant chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00058201.

Recent advances in understanding pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an intractable cancer and a leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. Over 90% of patients die within 1 year of diagnosis. Deaths from PDAC are increasing and it remains a cancer of substantial unmet need. A number of factors contribute to its poor prognosis: namely, late presentation, early metastases and limited systemic therapy options because of chemoresistance. A variety of research approaches underway are aimed at improving patient survival. Here, we review high-risk groups and efforts for early detection. We examine recent developments in the understanding of complex molecular and metabolic alterations which accompany PDAC. We explore artificial intelligence and biological targets for therapy and examine the role of tumour stroma and the immune microenvironment. We also review recent developments with respect to the PDAC microbiome. It is hoped that current research efforts will translate into earlier diagnosis, improvements in treatment and better outcomes for patients.

A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Clinical Trial Comparing Cattell-Warren and Blumgart Anastomoses Following Partial Pancreatoduodenectomy: PANasta Trial.

Whether a Blumgart anastomosis (BA) is superior to Cattell-Warren anastomosis (CWA) in terms of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) following pancreatoduodenectomy. Importance: Complications driven by POPF following pancreatic cancer resection may hinder adjuvant therapy, shortening survival. BA may reduce complications compared to CWA, improving the use of adjuvant therapy and prolonging survival. Methods: A multicenter double-blind, controlled trial of patients undergoing resection for suspected pancreatic head cancer, randomized during surgery to a BA or CWA, stratified by pancreatic consistency and duct diameter. The primary end point was POPF, and secondary outcome measures were adjuvant therapy use, specified surgical complications, quality of life, and survival from the date of randomization. For a 10% POPF reduction, 416 patients were required, 208 per arm (two-sided α = 0·05; power = 80%). Results: Z-score at planned interim analysis was 0.474 so recruitment was held to 238 patients; 236 patients were analyzed (112 BA and 124 CWA). No significant differences in POPF were observed between BA and CWA, odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) 1·04 (0.58-1.88), P = 0.887, nor in serious adverse events. Adjuvant therapy was delivered to 98 (62%) of 159 eligible patients with any malignancy; statistically unrelated to arm or postoperative complications. Twelve-month overall survival, hazard ratio (95% CI), did not differ between anastomoses; BA 0.787 (0.713-0.868) and CWA 0.854 (0.792-0.921), P = 0.266, nor for the 58 patients with complications, median (IQR), 0.83 (0.74-0.91) compared to 101 patients without complications 0.82 (0.76-0.89) (P = 0.977). Conclusions: PANasta represents the most robust analysis of BA versus CWA to date.