International variation in oesophageal and gastric cancer survival 2012-2014: differences by histological subtype and stage at diagnosis (an ICBP SURVMARK-2 population-based study).

OBJECTIVE: To provide the first international comparison of oesophageal and gastric cancer survival by stage at diagnosis and histological subtype across high-income countries with similar access to healthcare. METHODS: As part of the ICBP SURVMARK-2 project, data from 28 923 patients with oesophageal cancer and 25 946 patients with gastric cancer diagnosed during 2012-2014 from 14 cancer registries in seven countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK) were included. 1-year and 3-year age-standardised net survival were estimated by stage at diagnosis, histological subtype (oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) and oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)) and country. RESULTS: Oesophageal cancer survival was highest in Ireland and lowest in Canada at 1 (50.3% vs 41.3%, respectively) and 3 years (27.0% vs 19.2%) postdiagnosis. Survival from gastric cancer was highest in Australia and lowest in the UK, for both 1-year (55.2% vs 44.8%, respectively) and 3-year survival (33.7% vs 22.3%). Most patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer had regional or distant disease, with proportions ranging between 56% and 90% across countries. Stage-specific analyses showed that variation between countries was greatest for localised disease, where survival ranged between 66.6% in Australia and 83.2% in the UK for oesophageal cancer and between 75.5% in Australia and 94.3% in New Zealand for gastric cancer at 1-year postdiagnosis. While survival for OAC was generally higher than that for OSCC, disparities across countries were similar for both histological subtypes. CONCLUSION: Survival from oesophageal and gastric cancer varies across high-income countries including within stage groups, particularly for localised disease. Disparities can partly be explained by earlier diagnosis resulting in more favourable stage distributions, and distributions of histological subtypes of oesophageal cancer across countries. Yet, differences in treatment, and also in cancer registration practice and the use of different staging methods and systems, across countries may have impacted the comparisons. While primary prevention remains key, advancements in early detection research are promising and will likely allow for additional risk stratification and survival improvements in the future.

Pancreatic cancer survival by stage and age in seven high-income countries (ICBP SURVMARK-2): a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The global burden of pancreatic cancer has steadily increased, while the prognosis after pancreatic cancer diagnosis remains poor. This study aims to compare the stage- and age-specific pancreatic cancer net survival (NS) for seven high-income countries: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and United Kingdom. METHODS: The study included over 35,000 pancreatic cancer cases diagnosed during 2012-2014, followed through 31 December 2015. The stage- and age-specific NS were calculated using the Pohar-Perme estimator. RESULTS: Pancreatic cancer survival estimates were low across all 7 countries, with 1-year NS ranging from 21.1% in New Zealand to 30.9% in Australia, and 3-year NS from 6.6% in the UK to 10.9% in Australia. Most pancreatic cancers were diagnosed with distant stage, ranging from 53.9% in Ireland to 83.3% in New Zealand. While survival differences were evident between countries across all stage categories at one year after diagnosis, this survival advantage diminished, particularly in cases with distant stage. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the importance of stage and age at diagnosis in pancreatic cancer survival. Although progress has been made in improving pancreatic cancer prognosis, the disease is highly fatal and will remain so without major breakthroughs in the early diagnosis and management.

Prognostic models to predict survival in patients with pancreatic cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has poor survival. Current treatments offer little likelihood of cure or long-term survival. This systematic review evaluates prognostic models predicting overall survival in patients diagnosed with PDAC. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of eight electronic databases from their date of inception through to December 2019. Studies that published models predicting survival in patients with PDAC were identified. RESULTS: 3297 studies were identified; 187 full-text articles were retrieved and 54 studies of 49 unique prognostic models were included. Of these, 28 (57.1%) were conducted in patients with advanced disease, 17 (34.7%) with resectable disease, and four (8.2%) in all patients. 34 (69.4%) models were validated, and 35 (71.4%) reported model discrimination, with only five models reporting values >0.70 in both derivation and validation cohorts. Many (n = 27) had a moderate to high risk of bias and most (n = 33) were developed using retrospective data. No variables were unanimously found to be predictive of survival when included in more than one study. CONCLUSION: Most prognostic models were developed using retrospective data and performed poorly. Future research should validate instruments performing well locally in international cohorts and investigate other potential predictors of survival.

The association between quality care and outcomes for a real-world population of Australian patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study: (i) assessed compliance with a consensus set of quality indicators (QIs) in pancreatic cancer (PC); and (ii) evaluated the association between compliance with these QIs and survival. METHODS: Four years of data were collected for patients diagnosed with PC. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A multivariable analysis tested the relationship between significant patient and hospital characteristics, patient cluster effects within hospitals and survival. RESULTS: 1061 patients were eligible for this study. Significant association with improved survival were: (i) in the potentially resectable group having adjuvant chemotherapy administered following surgery or a reason documented (HR, 0.29; 95 CI, 0.19-0.46); (ii) in the locally advanced group included having chemotherapy ± chemoradiation, or a reason documented for not undergoing treatment (HR, 0.38; 95 CI, 0.25-0.58); and (iii) in the metastatic disease group included having documented performance status at presentation (HR, 0.65; 95 CI, 0.47-0.89), being seen by an oncologist in the absence of treatment (HR, 0.48; 95 CI, 0.31-0.77), and disease management discussed at a multidisciplinary team meeting (HR, 0.79; 95 CI, 0.64-0.96). CONCLUSION: Capture of a concise data set has enabled quality of care to be assessed.

International trends in oesophageal cancer survival by histological subtype between 1995 and 2014.

INTRODUCTION: Survival from oesophageal cancer remains poor, even across high-income countries. Ongoing changes in the epidemiology of the disease highlight the need for survival assessments by its two main histological subtypes, adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). METHODS: The ICBP SURVMARK-2 project, a platform for international comparisons of cancer survival, collected cases of oesophageal cancer diagnosed 1995 to 2014, followed until 31st December 2015, from cancer registries covering seven participating countries with similar access to healthcare (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK). 1-year and 3-year age-standardised net survival alongside incidence rates were calculated by country, subtype, sex, age group and period of diagnosis. RESULTS: 111 894 cases of AC and 73 408 cases of SCC were included in the analysis. Marked improvements in survival were observed over the 20-year period in each country, particularly for AC, younger age groups and 1 year after diagnosis. Survival was consistently higher for both subtypes in Australia and Ireland followed by Norway, Denmark, New Zealand, the UK and Canada. During 2010 to 2014, survival was higher for AC compared with SCC, with 1-year survival ranging from 46.9% (Canada) to 54.4% (Ireland) for AC and 39.6% (Denmark) to 53.1% (Australia) for SCC. CONCLUSION: Marked improvements in both oesophageal AC and SCC survival suggest advances in treatment. Less marked improvements 3 years after diagnosis, among older age groups and patients with SCC, highlight the need for further advances in early detection and treatment of oesophageal cancer alongside primary prevention to reduce the overall burden from the disease.

Comparison of liver cancer incidence and survival by subtypes across seven high-income countries.

International comparison of liver cancer survival has been hampered due to varying standards and degrees for morphological verification and differences in coding practices. This article aims to compare liver cancer survival across the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership's (ICBP) jurisdictions whilst trying to ensure that the estimates are comparable through a range of sensitivity analyses. Liver cancer incidence data from 21 jurisdictions in 7 countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom) were obtained from population-based registries for 1995-2014. Cases were categorised based on histological classification, age-groups, basis of diagnosis and calendar period. Age-standardised incidence rate (ASR) per 100 000 and net survival at 1 and 3 years after diagnosis were estimated. Liver cancer incidence rates increased over time across all ICBP jurisdictions, particularly for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with the largest relative increase in the United Kingdom, increasing from 1.3 to 4.4 per 100 000 person-years between 1995 and 2014. Australia had the highest age-standardised 1-year and 3-year net survival for all liver cancers combined (48.7% and 28.1%, respectively) in the most recent calendar period, which was still true for morphologically verified tumours when making restrictions to ensure consistent coding and classification. Survival from liver cancers is poor in all countries. The incidence of HCC is increasing alongside the proportion of nonmicroscopically verified cases over time. Survival estimates for all liver tumours combined should be interpreted in this context. Care is needed to ensure that international comparisons are performed on appropriately comparable patients, with careful consideration of coding practice variations.

Precision Oncology in Surgery: Patient Selection for Operable Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to define preoperative clinical and molecular characteristics that would allow better patient selection for operative resection. BACKGROUND: Although we use molecular selection methods for systemic targeted therapies, these principles are not applied to surgical oncology. Improving patient selection is of vital importance for the operative treatment of pancreatic cancer (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma). Although surgery is the only chance of long-term survival, 80% still succumb to the disease and approximately 30% die within 1 year, often sooner than those that have unresected local disease. METHOD: In 3 independent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cohorts (total participants = 1184) the relationship between aberrant expression of prometastatic proteins S100A2 and S100A4 and survival was assessed. A preoperative nomogram based on clinical variables available before surgery and expression of these proteins was constructed and compared to traditional measures, and a postoperative nomogram. RESULTS: High expression of either S100A2 or S100A4 was independent poor prognostic factors in a training cohort of 518 participants. These results were validated in 2 independent patient cohorts (Glasgow, n = 198; Germany, n = 468). Aberrant biomarker expression stratified the cohorts into 3 distinct prognostic groups. A preoperative nomogram incorporating S100A2 and S100A4 expression predicted survival and nomograms derived using postoperative clinicopathological variables. CONCLUSIONS: Of those patients with a poor preoperative nomogram score, approximately 50% of patients died within a year of resection. Nomograms have the potential to improve selection for surgery and neoadjuvant therapy, avoiding surgery in aggressive disease, and justifying more extensive resections in biologically favorable disease.

Determining the CA19-9 concentration that best predicts the presence of CT-occult unresectable features in patients with pancreatic cancer: A population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Serum CA19-9 concentration may be useful in triaging patients with pancreatic cancer for more intensive staging investigations. Our aim was to identify the CA19-9 cut-point with the greatest accuracy for detecting unresectable features not identified by CT scan, and to examine the performance of this and other cut-points in predicting the outcome of staging laparoscopy (SL). METHODS: Patients with pancreatic cancer were drawn from two state-wide cancer registries between 2009 and 2011. We used classification and regression tree (CART) analysis to identify the CA19-9 cut-point which best predicted the presence of imaging-occult unresectable features, and compared its performance with that of a number of alternative cut-points. We then used logistic regression to test the association between CA19-9 concentration and detection of unresectable features in patients who underwent SL. RESULTS: From the CART analysis, the optimal CA19-9 cut-point was 440 U/mL. CA19-9 ≥ 150 U/mL had a similar Youden Index, but greater sensitivity (69% versus 47%). This remained true for those who had obstructive jaundice at the time of CA19-9 sampling. CA19-9 concentration greater than or equal to 110 U/mL, 150 U/mL and 200 U/mL was associated with significantly greater odds of unresectable features being detected during SL. CONCLUSION: Elevated serum CA19-9 concentration is a valid marker for CT-occult unresectable features; the most clinically appropriate cut-point appears to be ≥ 150 U/mL irrespective of the presence of jaundice. Clinical trials which evaluate the value of CA19-9 in the staging algorithm for pancreatic cancer are needed before it is routinely used in clinical practice.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review is to examine patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), their attributes and application in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC). METHOD: A systematic literature search was undertaken of articles published to June 2018 to identify PROMs applied in primary studies in PC. Characteristics of the included studies and PROMs were described with identified scales grouped into five domains. The psychometric properties of the identified PROMs were further assessed for reliability and validity among patients with PC. RESULTS: From 1688 studies screened, 170 were included. Almost half (48%) were conducted in patients with unresectable PC; the majority of these (68%) were evaluated in randomized controlled trials. Median questionnaire completion rates fell below 10% of the original cohort within 12 months in patients with unresectable PC compared to 75% in patients with resectable PC. Seventy PROMs were identified, 32 measuring unidimensional parameters (e.g. pain) and 35 measuring multidimensional (e.g. quality of life) constructs. Only five (7%) PROMs were disease-specific and 13 (19%) were validated in patients with PC. Fifty scales were grouped into 19 physical, 9 psychological, 6 psychiatric, 9 social and 7 other domains. CONCLUSION: Three multidimensional PROMs, the: (i) FACT-HEP in unresectable PC; (ii) QLQ-PAN26 (in conjunction with its core QLQ-C30 PROM) in resectable PC; and (iii) MDASI-GI are recommended as instruments to capture quality of life in patients with PC. Summarised scales and psychometric evaluation provide a framework to choose PROMs for scales not captured by the recommended PROMs.

Monitoring quality of care for patients with pancreatic cancer: a modified Delphi consensus.

BACKGROUND: Best practise care optimises survival and quality of life in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC), but there is evidence of variability in management and suboptimal care for some patients. Monitoring practise is necessary to underpin improvement initiatives. We aimed to develop a core set of quality indicators that measure quality of care across the disease trajectory. METHODS: A modified, three-round Delphi survey was performed among experts with wide experience in PC care across three states in Australia. A total of 107 potential quality indicators were identified from the literature and divided into five areas: diagnosis and staging, surgery, other treatment, patient management and outcomes. A further six indicators were added by the panel, increasing potential quality indicators to 113. Rated on a scale of 1-9, indicators with high median importance and feasibility (score 7-9) and low disagreement (<1) were considered in the candidate set. RESULTS: From 113 potential quality indicators, 34 indicators met the inclusion criteria and 27 (7 diagnosis and staging, 5 surgical, 4 other treatment, 5 patient management, 6 outcome) were included in the final set. CONCLUSIONS: The developed indicator set can be applied as a tool for internal quality improvement, comparative quality reporting, public reporting and research in PC care.

Hypermutation In Pancreatic Cancer.

Pancreatic cancer is molecularly diverse, with few effective therapies. Increased mutation burden and defective DNA repair are associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in several other cancer types. We interrogated 385 pancreatic cancer genomes to define hypermutation and its causes. Mutational signatures inferring defects in DNA repair were enriched in those with the highest mutation burdens. Mismatch repair deficiency was identified in 1% of tumors harboring different mechanisms of somatic inactivation of MLH1 and MSH2. Defining mutation load in individual pancreatic cancers and the optimal assay for patient selection may inform clinical trial design for immunotherapy in pancreatic cancer.

Association between pancreatic cancer patients' perception of their care coordination and patient-reported and survival outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: People with pancreatic cancer have poor survival, and management is challenging. Pancreatic cancer patients' perceptions of their care coordination and its association with their outcomes have not been well-studied. Our objective was to determine if perception of care coordination is associated with patient-reported outcomes or survival. METHODS: People with pancreatic cancer who were 1-8 months postdiagnosis (52 with completed resection and 58 with no resection) completed a patient-reported questionnaire that assessed their perceptions of care coordination, quality of life, anxiety, and depression using validated instruments. Mean scores for 15 care-coordination items were calculated and then ranked from highest (best experience) to lowest (worst experience). Associations between care-coordination scores (including communication and navigation domains) and patient-reported outcomes and survival were investigated using general linear regression and Cox regression, respectively. All analyses were stratified by whether or not the tumor had been resected. RESULTS: In both groups, the highest-ranked care-coordination items were: knowing who was responsible for coordinating care, health professionals being informed about their history, and waiting times. The worst-ranked items related to: how often patients were asked about visits with other health professionals and how well they and their family were coping, knowing the symptoms they should monitor, having sufficient emotional help from staff, and access to additional specialist services. For people who had a resection, better communication and navigation scores were significantly associated with higher quality of life and less anxiety and depression. However, these associations were not statistically significant for those with no resection. Perception of cancer care coordination was not associated with survival in either group. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Our results suggest that, while many core clinical aspects of care are perceived to be done well for pancreatic cancer patients, improvements in emotional support, referral to specialist services, and self-management education may improve patient-reported outcomes.

Anxiety, depression and quality of life in people with pancreatic cancer and their carers.

BACKGROUND: People with pancreatic cancer have high levels of anxiety and depression and reduced quality of life (QoL), but few studies have assessed these outcomes for patient-carer dyads. We therefore investigated these issues in an Australian population-based study. METHODS: Patients with pancreatic cancer (n = 136) and many of their carers (n = 84) completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy QoL questionnaire at a median of three months after diagnosis. Overall QoL and well-being subscales (physical, social, emotional, functional) were compared with general population norms. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to compare anxiety, depression and QoL scores of patients and their respective carers. RESULTS: Fifteen percent of patients and 39% of carers had HADS scores indicative of anxiety and 15% of patients and 14% of carers of depression, respectively. Overall, 70% of patients and 58% of carers had QoL scores below the Queensland population average. Patients' anxiety, depression, overall QoL, social, emotional and functional wellbeing scores were significantly related to those scores in their carers. Among patients and carers, accessing psychological help was associated with elevated anxiety. Not receiving chemotherapy was associated with elevated depression among patients and younger age was associated with poorer outcomes in carers. CONCLUSIONS: More carers had symptoms of anxiety than patients with pancreatic cancer, but symptoms of depression were similarly common in patients and carers. Further research is needed to assess whether interventions to reduce patients' distress could also improve QoL among carers, or whether carer-focussed interventions are required.

Pancreatectomy is underused in NSW regions with low institutional surgical volumes: a population data linkage study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in the proportions of people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer who underwent pancreatectomy, post-operative outcomes and 5-year survival in different New South Wales administrative health regions of residence. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective analysis of NSW data on pancreatic cancer incidence and surgery, 2005-2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of newly diagnosed patients with pancreatic cancer who were resected in each region; 90-day post-operative mortality; one-year post-operative survival; 5-year post-diagnosis survival. RESULTS: 14% of people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer during 2010-2013 (431 of 3064) underwent pancreatectomy, an average of 108 resections per year. After adjusting for age, sex and comorbidities, the proportion that underwent resection varied significantly between regions, ranging between 8% and 21% (P<0.001). Higher resection rates were not associated with higher post-operative 90-day mortality or lower one-year survival (unadjusted and risk-adjusted analyses). Higher resection rates were associated with higher 5-year post-diagnosis survival: the mean survival in regions with resection rates below 10% was 3.4%, compared with 7.2% in regions with rates greater than 15% (unadjusted and adjusted survival analyses; P<0.001). There was a positive association between regional resection rate and the pancreatectomy volume of hospitals during 2005-2009. An additional 32 people would be resected annually if resection rates in low rate regions were increased to the 80th percentile regional resection rate (18%). CONCLUSION: There is significant geographic variation in the proportion of people with pancreatic cancer undergoing pancreatectomy, and the 5-year survival rate is higher in regions where this proportion is higher.

Genomic analysis of HPV-positive versus HPV-negative oesophageal adenocarcinoma identifies a differential mutational landscape.

BACKGROUND: High-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) has been implicated in a subset of patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC). We therefore hypothesised that HPV associated OAC may have distinct genomic aberrations compared with viral negative oesophageal cancer. METHODS: Whole exome sequencing was performed to explore the mutational landscape and potential molecular signature of HPV-positive versus HPV-negative OAC. Four hr-HPV-positive and 8 HPV-negative treatment-naive fresh-frozen OAC tissue specimens and matched normal tissue were analysed to identify somatic genomic mutations. Data were subjected to cancer driver gene identification and pathway analysis. RESULTS: The HPV-positive cohort harboured approximately 50% less non-silent somatic mutations than the virus-negative patients with oesophageal cancer (1.31 mutations/Mb vs 2.56 mutations/Mb, p=0.048). TP53 aberrations were absent in the HPV-positive OAC group whereas 50% of the HPV-negative patients with OAC exhibited TP53 mutations. HPV-negative cancers were enriched with non-silent mutations in cancer driver genes, but not HPV-positive tumours. Enriched A>C transversions at adenine-adenine (AA) dinucleotide was observed in 5/7 Siewert class I OAC samples but none (0/5) in Siewert class II tumours (p=0.027). CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate distinct genomic differences between HPV-positive and HPV-negative OACs indicating different biological mechanisms of tumour formation.

A tsunami of unmet needs: pancreatic and ampullary cancer patients' supportive care needs and use of community and allied health services.

OBJECTIVE: People diagnosed with pancreatic cancer have the worst survival prognosis of any cancer. No previous research has documented the supportive care needs of this population. Our objective was to describe people's needs and use of support services and to examine whether these differed according to whether or not patients had undergone surgical resection. METHODS: Queensland pancreatic or ampullary cancer patients (n = 136, 54% of those eligible) completed a survey, which assessed 34 needs across five domains (Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form) and use of health services. Differences by resection were compared with Chi-squared tests. RESULTS: Overall, 96% of participants reported having some needs. More than half reported moderate-to-high unmet physical (54%) or psychological (52%) needs, whereas health system/information (32%), patient care (21%) and sexuality needs (16%) were described less frequently. The three most frequently reported moderate-to-high needs included 'not being able to do things they used to do' (41%), 'concerns about the worries of those close' (37%) and 'uncertainty about the future' (30%). Patients with non-resectable disease reported greater individual information needs, but their needs were otherwise similar to patients with resectable disease. Self-reported use of support was low; only 35% accessed information, 28%, 18% and 15% consulted a dietician, complementary medicine practitioner or mental health practitioner, respectively. Palliative care access was greater (59% vs 27%) among those with non-resectable disease. CONCLUSION: Very high levels of needs were reported by people with pancreatic or ampullary cancer. Future work needs to elucidate why uptake of appropriate supportive care is low and which services are required.

Factors associated with quality of care for patients with pancreatic cancer in Australia.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a composite score for the quality of care for patients with pancreatic cancer in Australia; to determine whether it was affected by patient and health service-related factors; to assess whether the score and survival were correlated. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: We reviewed medical records of patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer during July 2009 - June 2011 and notified to the Queensland and New South Wales cancer registries. DESIGN AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were allocated proportional quality of care scores based on indicators derived from a Delphi process, ranging from 0 (lowest) to 1 (highest quality care). Associations between patient and health service-related factors and the score were tested by linear regression, and associations between the score and survival with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: Proportional quality of care scores were assigned to 1571 patients. Scores for patients living in rural areas were significantly lower than for those in major cities (adjusted difference, 11%; 95% CI, 8-13%); they were higher for patients in the least socio-economically disadvantaged areas (v most disadvantaged areas: 8% higher; 95% CI, 6-11%), who were younger, had better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, or who first presented to a hospital with a high pancreatic case volume. Higher scores were associated with improved survival; after adjusting for patient-related factors, each 10 percentage point increase in the score reduced the risk of dying by 6% (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.97). CONCLUSION: Geographic category of residence may influence the quality of care received by patients with pancreatic cancer, and survival could be improved if they received optimal care.

Risk factors for current and future unmet supportive care needs of people with pancreatic cancer. A longitudinal study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to determine if the supportive care needs of people with pancreatic cancer change over time and identify the factors associated with current and future unmet needs. METHODS: Australian pancreatic cancer patients completed a self-administered survey at 0-6 months post-diagnosis (n = 116) then follow-up surveys 2 (n = 82) and 4 months (n = 50) later. The validated survey measured 34 needs across five domains. Weighted generalised estimating equations were used to identify factors associated with having ≥1 current or future moderate-to-high unmet need. RESULTS: The overall proportion of patients reporting ≥1 moderate-or-high-level need did not significantly change over time (baseline = 70 % to 4 months = 75 %), although there was a non-significant reduction in needs for patients who had a complete resection (71 to 63 %) and an increase in patients with locally advanced (73 to 85 %) or metastatic (66 to 88 %) disease. Higher levels of pain (OR 6.1, CI 2.4-15.3), anxiety (OR 3.3, CI 1.5-7.3) and depression (OR 3.2, CI 1.7-6.0) were significantly associated with current needs. People with pain (OR 4.9, CI 1.5-15.4), metastatic disease (OR 2.7, CI 0.7-10.0) or anxiety (OR 2.5, CI 0.7-8.6) had substantially higher odds of reporting needs at their next survey. The prevalence of needs was highest in the physical/daily living and psychological domains (both 53 % at baseline). Pain and anxiety had respectively the strongest associations with these domains. CONCLUSIONS: Careful and continued attention to pain control and psychological morbidity is paramount in addressing significant unmet needs, particularly for people with metastatic disease. Research on how best to coordinate this is crucial.