Calcium channel blockers are associated with improved survival in pancreatic cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection.

BACKGROUND: Repurposing existing drugs for use in oncology is more efficient, cost-effective and safe than novel drug discovery. Calcium signalling is increasingly recognised to have a key role in chemoresistance. This study assessed the impact of calcium channel blockers (CCB) in pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Retrospective population study of patients undergoing resection (curative intent) of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (SEER-Medicare, 2007-2017). Cox models were built to assess the impact on overall survival. As laboratory studies suggest a chemosensitising effect, the impact of CCB was assessed separately in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: 6,223 patients were included, of whom 660 were prescribed CCB. In total, 591 received neoadjuvant chemotherapy; in this cohort CCB prescription was associated with improved overall survival when adjusting for multiple prognostic factors (aHR = 0.715, 0.514-0.996, P = 0.047). This effect was not observed in patients not receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (aHR = 1.082, 0.982-1.191, P = 0.112). CONCLUSION: CCB prescription was associated with improved overall survival in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to pancreatic cancer resection. The association was specific to the group of patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mirroring the chemosensitising effect in laboratory studies. This defines patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a target population for prospective clinical trials of CCB in pancreatic cancer.

Does preoperative pharmacologic prophylaxis reduce the rate of venous thromboembolism in pancreatectomy patients?

BACKGROUND: Whether the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) may be reduced by preoperative administration of prophylactic heparin is unknown. We hypothesized that timing of heparin administration does not significantly alter the incidence of VTE in pancreatic surgery. METHODS: An analysis was conducted using data from Massachusetts General Hospital's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2012 to 2017. All patients admitted for elective pancreatic resection were included. The primary outcome was development of VTE. Multivariable regression was performed, adjusting for patient demographics and various clinical factors. RESULTS: In total, 1448 patients were analyzed, of whom 1062 received preoperative heparin (73.3%). Overall, 36 (2.5%) patients developed VTE. On unadjusted analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between patients who received preoperative heparin compared with those who did not (2.6% vs. 1.3%, respectively; p = 0.079). On adjusted analysis, there was an association with increased VTE rates among patients who received preoperative heparin (OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.10-7.81; p = 0.031). CONCLUSION: There was an association between preoperative heparin administration and increased incidence of VTE on adjusted analysis, possibly reflecting appropriate surgical judgment in patient selection for prophylaxis. These data question the inclusion of preoperative VTE pharmacologic prophylaxis as a reliable quality indicator.

Management of asymptomatic, well-differentiated PNETs: results of the Delphi consensus process of the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.

BACKGROUND: Variation in the management of PNETs exist due to the limited high-level evidence to guide clinical practice. The aim of this work is to generate consensus guidelines with a Delphi process for managing PNETs. METHODS: A panel of experts reviewed the surgical literature and scored a set of clinical case statements using a web-based survey to identify areas of agreement and disagreement. Results of the survey were discussed after each round of review. This cycle was repeated until no further likelihood of reaching consensus existed. RESULTS: Twenty-two case statements related to surgical indications, preoperative biopsy, extent of resection, type of surgery, and tumor location were scored. Using a pre-defined definition of consensus, the panel achieved consensus on the following: i) resection is not recommended for <1 cm lesions; ii) resection is recommended for lesions greater than 2 cm; iii) lymph node dissection is recommended for radiographically-suspicious nodes with splenectomy for distal lesions; iv) tumor enucleation and central pancreatectomy are acceptable when technically feasible. No consensus was reached regarding issues of preoperative biopsy or 1-2 cm tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Using a structured, validated system for identifying consensus, an expert panel identified areas of agreement regarding critical management decisions for patients with PNET. Issues without consensus warrant additional clinical investigation.

Does attending a Delphi consensus conference impact surgeon attitudes? Survey results from the Americas HepatoPancreatoBiliary Association consensus conference on small asymptomatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

BACKGROUND: Management of asymptomatic small well-differentiated (panNET) <2 cm remains controversial. A consensus conference was held on this topic. The impact of attending the conference and participating in the audience response survey on surgeon's clinical approach to pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors was assessed. METHODS: Audience members were surveyed using a smartphone real-time response system at the beginning and end of the conference. RESULTS: The majority of 75 attendees underwent fellowship training, and 30% had >10 years experience as attending surgeons. Previously published consensus statements on the topic were considered insufficient to guide surgical practice by 82% of attendees, and over 96% desired additional data. After review of the data, consensus statements, and decision-making process, a significant number of participants changed their opinions regarding indications for tissue biopsy (p = 0.001), size thresholds for excision (p = 0.002), and regional lymph node dissection (p = 0.002) independent of whether a consensus was reached by the content-expert panel. CONCLUSIONS: This represented the first Delphi process consensus on the topic, and the survey confirmed the topic as well-chosen and timely. Attendees changed opinions on management of panNET regardless of whether formal consensus was reached. Therefore, statements of consensus combined with presentation of literature and live discussion served to impact attendees' approach to this disease.