Temporal Trends in Body Composition and Metabolic Markers Prior to Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Changes in body composition and metabolic factors may serve as biomarkers for the early detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The aim of this study was to capture the longitudinal changes in body composition and metabolic factors prior to diagnosis of PDAC. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study in which all patients (≥18 years) diagnosed with PDAC from 2002 to 2021 were identified. We collected all abdominal CT scans and 10 different blood-based biomarkers up to 36 months prior to diagnosis. We applied a fully automated abdominal segmentation algorithm previously developed by our group for three-dimensional quantification of body composition on CT scans. Longitudinal trends of body composition and blood-based biomarkers prior to PDAC diagnosis were estimated using linear mixed models, compared across different time windows, and visualized using spline regression. RESULTS: We included 1,690 patients in body composition analysis, of whom 516 (30.5%) had ≥ 2 prediagnostic CT scans. For analysis of longitudinal trends of blood-based biomarkers, 3,332 individuals were included. As an early manifestation of PDAC, we observed a significant decrease in visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue (ß =-1.94 (95% CI, -2.39, -1.48) and ß = -2.59 (95% CI, -3.17, -2.02 in area (cm2)/height (m2) per 6 months closer to diagnosis, accompanied by a decrease in serum lipids (e.g., LDL; ß = -2.83; 95% CI, -3.31, -2.34, total cholesterol; ß = -2.69; 95% CI, -3.18, -2.20, and triglycerides; ß = -1.86; 95% CI, -2.61, -1.11), and an increase in blood glucose levels. Loss of muscle tissue and bone volume was predominantly observed in the last 6 months prior to diagnosis. CONCLUSION: This study identified significant alterations in a variety of soft tissue and metabolic markers that occur in the development of PDAC. Early recognition of these metabolic changes may provide an opportunity for early detection.

Aspects and outcomes of surveillance for individuals at high-risk of pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths and is associated with a poor prognosis. The majority of these cancers are detected at a late stage, contributing to the bad prognosis. This underscores the need for novel, enhanced early detection strategies to improve the outcomes. While population-based screening is not recommended due to the relatively low incidence of PDAC, surveillance is recommended for individuals at high risk for PDAC due to their increased incidence of the disease. However, the outcomes of pancreatic cancer surveillance in high-risk individuals are not sorted out yet. In this review, we will address the identification of individuals at high risk for PDAC, discuss the objectives and targets of surveillance, outline how surveillance programs are organized, summarize the outcomes of high-risk individuals undergoing pancreatic cancer surveillance, and conclude with a future perspective on pancreatic cancer surveillance and novel developments.

Utilization and Outcomes of Multigene Panel Testing in Patients With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend germline genetic testing (GT) for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aims to evaluate the utilization and outcomes of multigene panel GT in patients with PDAC. METHODS: This retrospective, multisite study included patients with PDAC diagnosed between May 2018 and August 2020 at Mayo Clinic Arizona, Florida, and Minnesota. Discussion, uptake, and outcomes of GT were compared before (May 1, 2018-May 1, 2019) and after (August 1, 2019-August 1, 2020) the guideline update, accounting for a transition period. RESULTS: The study identified 533 patients with PDAC, with 321 (60.2%) preguideline and 212 (39.8%) postguideline. Patient characteristics did not differ between the preguideline and postguideline periods. GT was discussed in 34.3% (110 of 321) of preguideline and 39.6% (84 of 212) of postguideline patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.26 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.80]) and subsequently performed in 80.9% (89 of 110) of preguideline and 75.0% (63 of 84) of postguideline patients (OR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.61]). Of 152 tested patients, 26 (17.1%) had a pathogenic variant (PV), of whom 17 (11.2%; 17 of 152) were PDAC-associated. Over the entire study period, GT was more likely in younger patients (65 v 70 years; P < .001), those seen by a medical oncologist (82.9% v 69.0%; P < .001), and those surviving more than 12 months from diagnosis (70.4% v 43.4%; P < .001). Demographics and personal/family cancer history were comparable between patients with and without a PDAC PV. CONCLUSION: GT remains underutilized despite National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline recommendations. Given the poor prognosis of PDAC and potential implications of GT, efforts to increase utilization are needed to provide surveillance and support to both patients with PDAC and at-risk family members.

THE ADDED VALUE OF BLOOD GLUCOSE MONITORING IN HIGH-RISK INDIVIDUALS UNDERGOING PANCREATIC CANCER SURVEILLANCE.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to investigate the added value of blood glucose monitoring in high-risk individuals (HRIs) participating in pancreatic cancer surveillance. METHODS: HRIs with a CDKN2A/p16 germline pathogenic variant (PV) participating in pancreatic cancer surveillance were included in this study. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the relationship between new-onset diabetes (NOD) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). To quantify the diagnostic performance of NOD as a marker for PDAC, receiver operating characteristic curve with area under the curve (AUC) was computed. RESULTS: In total, 220 HRIs were included between 2000-2019. Median age was 61 (IQR 53-71) years and 62.7% of participants were female. During the study period, 26 (11.8%) HRIs developed NOD, of whom 5 (19.2%) later developed PDAC. The other 23 (82.1%) PDAC cases remained NOD-free. Multivariable analysis showed no statistically significant relationship between NOD and PDAC (OR 1.21; 95% CI, 0.39-3.78) and four out of five PDAC cases appeared to have NOD within three months before diagnosis. Furthermore, NOD did not differentiate between HRIs with- and without PDAC (AUC 0.54; 95% CI, 0.46-0.61). CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found no added value for longitudinal glucose monitoring in CDKN2A PV carriers participating in an imaging-based pancreatic cancer surveillance program.

Psychosocial issues of individuals undergoing surveillance for increased risk of melanoma and pancreatic cancer due to a germline CDKN2A variant: A focus group study.

Individuals with a germline CDKN2A pathogenic variant (PV) are at high risk of developing melanoma and pancreatic cancer and are therefore offered surveillance. The potential advantages and disadvantages associated with genetic testing and surveillance are discussed during medical counseling, although little is known about the associated psychosocial factors that are relevant to this population. This study sought to provide a qualitative exploration of psychosocial factors related to genetic testing and participation in skin and pancreatic surveillance in (potential) carriers of a CDKN2A PV. Fifteen individuals-both at-risk individuals and confirmed variant carriers-participated in one of the three online focus groups. Pre-defined discussion topics, including genetic testing, cancer surveillance, influence on lifestyle and family planning, were discussed. Patients reported that important reasons to engage in genetic testing included the possibility to participate in surveillance to gain control over their cancer risk and to get clarification on the potential carrier status of their children. We observed considerable differences in risk perception and experienced burden of surveillance. Knowledge of the PV has had a positive influence on lifestyle factors and altered attitudes toward life in some. Most participants were not aware of preimplantation genetic testing. This focus group study provided insight into a variety of psychosocial themes related to (potential) carriership of a CDKN2A PV. Future efforts should focus on identifying those who may benefit from additional psychosocial support, development of a centralized source of information, and assessing the knowledge, needs, and timing of counseling for family planning.

Surveillance for Pancreatic Cancer in High-Risk Individuals Leads to Improved Outcomes: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Recent pancreatic cancer surveillance programs of high-risk individuals have reported improved outcomes. This study assessed to what extent outcomes of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in patients with a CDKN2A/p16 pathogenic variant diagnosed under surveillance are better as compared with patients with PDAC diagnosed outside surveillance. METHODS: In a propensity score matched cohort using data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, we compared resectability, stage, and survival between patients diagnosed under surveillance with non-surveillance patients with PDAC. Survival analyses were adjusted for potential effects of lead time. RESULTS: Between January 2000 and December 2020, 43,762 patients with PDAC were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Thirty-one patients with PDAC under surveillance were matched in a 1:5 ratio with 155 non-surveillance patients based on age at diagnosis, sex, year of diagnosis, and tumor location. Outside surveillance, 5.8% of the patients had stage I cancer, as compared with 38.7% of surveillance patients with PDAC (odds ratio [OR], 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04-0.19). In total, 18.7% of non-surveillance patients vs 71.0% of surveillance patients underwent a surgical resection (OR, 10.62; 95% CI, 4.56-26.63). Patients in surveillance had a better prognosis, reflected by a 5-year survival of 32.4% and a median overall survival of 26.8 months vs 4.3% 5-year survival and 5.2 months median overall survival in non-surveillance patients (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI 0.19-0.50). For all adjusted lead times, survival remained significantly longer in surveillance patients than in non-surveillance patients. CONCLUSION: Surveillance for PDAC in carriers of a CDKN2A/p16 pathogenic variant results in earlier detection, increased resectability, and improved survival as compared with non-surveillance patients with PDAC.

Identification of individuals at high-risk for pancreatic cancer using a digital patient-input tool combining family cancer history screening and new-onset diabetes.

Capturing family history might be a valuable tool for identification of individuals at increased risk of pancreatic cancer, which would allow enrollment into pancreatic surveillance programs. In addition, weight loss and concurrent new-onset diabetes may be utilized as an early marker for pancreatic cancer. This study evaluates the yield of combining family history and the Enriching New-Onset Diabetes for Pancreatic Cancer (ENDPAC) model to identify individuals who could benefit from pancreatic surveillance. A novel questionnaire and digital input tool was created that combined questions on family cancer history and criteria of the ENDPAC model. Individuals meeting ENDPAC criteria were enrolled directly in the high-risk pancreatic clinic. Individuals who met the criteria for a significant family history of cancer were offered referral to a genetic counselor. The questionnaire was completed by 453 patients. Of those, 25.8% (117/453) had significant familial risk factors. Eighteen individuals (15.4%) completed genetic testing previously, of whom five had a pathogenic variant. Thirty-four (29.9%) out of 117 individuals with a strong family history - flagged by the questionnaire - underwent genetic testing. Four (11.8%) of these patients harbored a pathogenic variant. Additionally, through cascade family testing, two siblings were found to carry pathogenic variants. Four (0.9%) of the 453 patients matched ENDPAC criteria. Two were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and the others were enrolled in the surveillance program. In conclusion, identification of high-risk individuals for pancreatic cancer can be achieved by combining family history screening and the ENDPAC model to facilitate referral to genetic counseling and high-risk clinics.

Hereditary pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest malignancies. Therefore, there is an urgent need to detect pancreatic cancer in an earlier stage to improve outcomes. A variety of hereditary cancer syndromes have been associated with an increased risk of developing pancreatic cancer, and these individuals may benefit from surveillance programs. Surveillance programs have shown potential to improve outcomes, but have important risks such as overtreatment. In this review we will discuss the definitions and epidemiology of hereditary pancreatic cancer, recommendations for genetic testing and participation in surveillance. Important aspects are differences in surveillance strategies, target lesions, and potential benefits and harms of surveillance. Lastly we will highlight future directions for research and improvement of care for individuals at high-risk of pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic Cancer Surveillance in Carriers of a Germline CDKN2A Pathogenic Variant: Yield and Outcomes of a 20-Year Prospective Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: Pancreatic cancer surveillance in high-risk individuals may lead to detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at an earlier stage and with improved survival. This study evaluated the yield and outcomes of 20 years of prospective surveillance in a large cohort of individuals with germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in CDKN2A. METHODS: Prospectively collected data were analyzed from individuals participating in pancreatic cancer surveillance. Surveillance consisted of annual magnetic resonance imaging with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and optional endoscopic ultrasound. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-seven germline PV carriers participated in surveillance and were followed for a median of 5.6 (interquartile range 2.3-9.9) years. A total of 36 cases of PDAC were diagnosed in 31 (8.9%) patients at a median age of 60.4 (interquartile range 51.3-64.1) years. The cumulative incidence of primary PDAC was 20.7% by age 70 years. Five carriers (5 of 31; 16.1%) were diagnosed with a second primary PDAC. Thirty (83.3%) of 36 PDACs were considered resectable at the time of imaging. Twelve cases (12 of 36; 33.3%) presented with stage I disease. The median survival after diagnosis of primary PDAC was 26.8 months, and the 5-year survival rate was 32.4% (95% CI, 19.1 to 54.8). Individuals with primary PDAC who underwent resection (22 of 31; 71.0%) had an overall 5-year survival rate of 44.1% (95% CI, 27.2 to 71.3). Nine (2.6%; 9 of 347) individuals underwent surgery for a suspected malignant lesion, which proved to not be PDAC, and this included five lesions with low-grade dysplasia. CONCLUSION: This long-term surveillance study demonstrates a high incidence of PDAC in carriers of a PV in CDKN2A. This provides evidence that surveillance in such a high-risk population leads to detection of early-stage PDAC with improved resectability and survival.

Association Between Proton Pump Inhibitor Use and Risk of Progression of Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) have been associated with acute kidney injury and recent studies suggest that they may be associated with the risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis using the Stockholm creatinine measurements database, which contains information on diagnoses, dispensation claims, and laboratory test results for all citizens in the Stockholm region from 2007 through 2010. We identified new users of PPIs (n = 105,305) and new users of H2 blockers (H2B; n = 9578); data on renal outcomes were collected for a median 2.7 years. The primary outcome was progression CKD, defined as doubling of creatinine or decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30% or more. Secondary outcomes were end-stage renal disease and acute kidney injury. Complete collection of repeated PPI and H2B dispensations at pharmacies in Sweden allowed modeling the time-dependent risk associated with cumulative PPI exposure. RESULTS: Users of PPIs, compared with users of H2Bs, had an increased risk for doubled levels of creatinine (1985 events; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.05-1.51) and decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30% or more (11,045 events; 1.26; 95% CI, 1.16-1.36). PPI use also associated with development of end-stage renal disease (HR, 2.40; 95% CI, 0.76-7.58) and acute kidney injury (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.00-1.69). There was a graded association between cumulative exposure to PPIs and risk of CKD progression. This was not the case for cumulative H2B use. CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of PPI therapy and cumulative PPI exposure is associate with increased risk of CKD progression in a large, North European healthcare system. Although consistent, the association was modest in magnitude, and cannot exclude residual confounding.