Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines consider pancreatic cancer with celiac axis (CA), proper hepatic artery (PHA), and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) involvement unresectable. Thus, technical reports and video illustrations of these operations are rare. We report the stepwise management of multivascular reconstruction for Mayo Clinic class IIIb CA resections at New York University Langone Health, a dedicated center of excellence in pancreatic surgery. METHODS:We illustrated the management of a 56-year-old patient with biopsy-confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma arising from the pancreatic body and involving the CA, PHA, SMA, and mesentericoportal venous axis. PERIOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT/UNASSIGNED:The preoperative stepwise considerations include: 1) mandatory patient selection; 2) planning vascular reconstructability; 3) tailoring risk assessment while carefully considering the need for total pancreatectomy, total gastrectomy, and mesenteric/hepatic revascularization; and 4) 3D-reconstruction for arterial evaluation. The key intraoperative considerations include: 1) selective and sequential clamping for vascular reconstruction in a "domino" fashion, to minimize warm ischemic time 2) a combined multi-surgeon approach to comprehensively tackle vascular reconstructions; 3) a low threshold for total pancreatectomy to avoid pancreatic leak; and 4) two-stage surgery to reassess the blood supply to the liver and stomach for on-demand gastric preservation instead of a theoretically advised total gastrectomy. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Liver, stomach, and bowel vascularization present life-threatening risks that require an extensive preoperative evaluation and a multidisciplinary approach. Our stepwise management for these extensive operations includes total pancreatectomy, "domino" vascular reconstruction, and two-stage surgery.

OBJECTIVE:To determine the interobserver variability for complications of pancreatoduodenectomy as defined by the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) and others. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Good interobserver variability for the definitions of surgical complications is of major importance in comparing surgical outcomes between and within centers. However, data on interobserver variability for pancreatoduodenectomy-specific complications are lacking. METHODS:International cross-sectional multicenter study including 52 raters from 13 high-volume pancreatic centers in 8 countries on 3 continents. Per center, 4 experienced raters scored 30 randomly selected patients after pancreatoduodenectomy. In addition, all raters scored six standardized case vignettes. This variability and the 'within centers' variability were calculated for twofold scoring (no complication/grade A vs grade B/C) and threefold scoring (no complication/grade A vs grade B vs grade C) of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), post-pancreatoduodenectomy hemorrhage (PPH), chyle leak (CL), bile leak (BL), and delayed gastric emptying (DGE). Interobserver variability is presented with Gwet's AC-1 measure for agreement. RESULTS:Overall, 390 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy were included. The overall agreement rate for the standardized cases vignettes for twofold scoring was 68% (95%-CI: 55%-81%, AC1 score: moderate agreement) and for threefold scoring 55% (49%-62%, AC1 score: fair agreement). The mean 'within centers' agreement for twofold scoring was 84% (80%-87%, AC1 score; substantial agreement). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The interobserver variability for the ISGPS defined complications of pancreatoduodenectomy was too high even though the 'within centers' agreement was acceptable. Since these findings will decrease the quality and validity of clinical studies, ISGPS has started efforts aimed at reducing the interobserver variability.

BACKGROUND AND AIM/OBJECTIVE:Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN)-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) management is generally extrapolated from pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN)-derived PDAC guidelines. However, these are biologically divergent, and heterogeneity further exists between tubular and colloid subtypes. METHODS:Consecutive upfront surgery patients with PanIN-derived and IPMN-derived PDAC were retrospectively identified from international centers (2000-2019). One-to-one propensity score matching for clinicopathologic factors generated three cohorts: IPMN-derived versus PanIN-derived PDAC, tubular IPMN-derived versus PanIN-derived PDAC, and tubular versus colloid IPMN-derived PDAC. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox regression determined corresponding hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS:The median OS (mOS) in 2350 PanIN-derived and 700 IPMN-derived PDAC patients was 23.0 and 43.1 months (P < 0.001), respectively. PanIN-derived PDAC had worse T-stage, CA19-9, grade, and nodal status. Tubular subtype had worse T-stage, CA19-9, grade, nodal status, and R1 margins, with a mOS of 33.7 versus 94.1 months (P < 0.001) in colloid. Matched (n = 495), PanIN-derived and IPMN-derived PDAC had mOSs of 30.6 and 42.8 months (P < 0.001), respectively. In matched (n = 341) PanIN-derived and tubular IPMN-derived PDAC, mOS remained poorer (27.7 vs 37.4, P < 0.001). Matched tubular and colloid cancers (n = 112) had similar OS (P = 0.55). On multivariable Cox regression, PanIN-derived PDAC was associated with worse OS than IPMN-derived (HR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.44-1.90) and tubular IPMN-derived (HR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.32-1.77) PDAC. Colloid and tubular subtype was not associated with OS (P = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS:PanIN-derived PDAC has worse survival than IPMN-derived PDAC supporting distinct outcomes. Although more indolent, colloid IPMN-derived PDAC has similar survival to tubular after risk adjustment.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Dynamics of carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) often inform treatment decisions during and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAT) of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, considerable dispute persists regarding the clinical relevance of specific CA19-9 thresholds and dynamics. Therefore, we aimed to define optimal thresholds for CA19-9 values and create a biochemically driven composite score to predict survival in CA19-9-producing patients with PDAC after NAT. METHODS:Patients with PDAC who underwent NAT and surgical resection from 2012 to 2022 were retrospectively identified from three high-volume centers. CA19-9 nonproducers and patients with 90-day mortality, and macroscopically incomplete resections were excluded. A composite score was created on the basis of relative CA19-9 change and newly defined optimal thresholds of pre- and postneoadjuvant values for overall survival (OS) using patients from two centers and validated using data from the third center. RESULTS:< .001). Major serological response (90% decrease of CA19-9) had a positive and negative predictive value of 32% and 88%, respectively. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The composite score consisting of CA19-9 levels at diagnosis, after neoadjuvant treatment, and its dynamics demonstrates prognostic discrimination between low and high scores. However, better predictive biomarkers are needed to facilitate treatment decisions during neoadjuvant treatment.

The majority of patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer already have metastatic disease at the time of presentation, which results in a 5-year survival rate of only 13%. However, multiagent chemotherapy regimens can stabilize the disease in select patients with limited metastatic disease. For such patients, a combination of curative-intent therapy and systemic therapy may potentially enhance outcomes compared to using systemic therapy alone. Of note, the evidence supporting this approach is primarily derived from retrospective studies and may carry a significant selection bias. Looking ahead, ongoing prospective trials are exploring the efficacy of curative-intent therapy in managing oligometastatic pancreatic cancer and the implementation of treatment strategies based on specific biomarkers. The emergence of these trials, coupled with the development of less invasive therapeutic modalities, provides hope for patients with oligometastatic pancreatic cancer.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) are pancreatic premalignant lesions frequently detected incidentally. Choosing between surgery and surveillance for IPMNs is rooted in uncertainty. We characterized patient preferences in IPMN management, and examined associations with patients' uncertainty profiles (risk perception, risk attitude, and uncertainty tolerance). METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional survey drawn from a national opt-in panel. We simulated an encounter following an incidental computed tomography scan finding of an IPMN with a 5% cancer risk. We elicited participants' preferred treatment (surgery versus surveillance). Participant cancer risk perception, risk attitude (risk seeking versus risk averse), and uncertainty tolerance (comfort with the unknown) were determined using validated measures. Multivariate regression models assessed for independent predictors of treatment preference and risk perception. RESULTS:The sample included 520 participants, ages 40-70, racially representative of the US population. Participants preferred surveillance (n = 331, 64%) over surgery (n = 189, 36%). Patients were significantly more likely to prefer surgery as their cancer risk perception increased (absolute difference = 12% from 1.0 standard deviation below to 1.0 standard deviation above the mean, 95% CI 3.5-20.2). Treatment preference was not significantly associated with risk attitude (P = 0.068) or uncertainty tolerance (P = 0.755). However, initial cancer risk perception was significantly associated with both uncertainty tolerance (P = 0.013) and baseline cancer anxiety (risk perception 16.4% versus 65%, not worried at all versus extremely worried, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Patient preference varies widely for IPMN and is significantly associated with cancer risk perception, which is, in turn, significantly associated with uncertainty tolerance and cancer anxiety. These findings argue for the preference-sensitive nature of IPMN treatment decisions.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) are pancreatic premalignant lesions frequently detected incidentally. Choosing between surgery and surveillance for IPMNs is rooted in uncertainty. We characterized patient preferences in IPMN management, and examined associations with patients' uncertainty profiles (risk perception, risk attitude, and uncertainty tolerance). METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional survey drawn from a national opt-in panel. We simulated an encounter following an incidental computed tomography scan finding of an IPMN with a 5% cancer risk. We elicited participants' preferred treatment (surgery versus surveillance). Participant cancer risk perception, risk attitude (risk seeking versus risk averse), and uncertainty tolerance (comfort with the unknown) were determined using validated measures. Multivariate regression models assessed for independent predictors of treatment preference and risk perception. RESULTS:The sample included 520 participants, ages 40-70, racially representative of the US population. Participants preferred surveillance (n = 331, 64%) over surgery (n = 189, 36%). Patients were significantly more likely to prefer surgery as their cancer risk perception increased (absolute difference = 12% from 1.0 standard deviation below to 1.0 standard deviation above the mean, 95% CI 3.5-20.2). Treatment preference was not significantly associated with risk attitude (P = 0.068) or uncertainty tolerance (P = 0.755). However, initial cancer risk perception was significantly associated with both uncertainty tolerance (P = 0.013) and baseline cancer anxiety (risk perception 16.4% versus 65%, not worried at all versus extremely worried, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Patient preference varies widely for IPMN and is significantly associated with cancer risk perception, which is, in turn, significantly associated with uncertainty tolerance and cancer anxiety. These findings argue for the preference-sensitive nature of IPMN treatment decisions.

BACKGROUND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to determine the role of site-specific metastatic patterns over time and assess factors associated with extended survival in metastatic PDAC. Half of all patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) present with metastatic disease. The site of metastasis plays a crucial role in clinical decision making due to its prognostic value. METHODS:We examined 56,757 stage-IV PDAC patients from the National Cancer Database (2016-2019), categorizing them by metastatic site: multiple, liver, lung, brain, bone, carcinomatosis, or other. The site-specific prognostic value was assessed using log-rank tests while time-varying effects were assessed by Aalen's linear hazards model. Factors associated with extended survival (>3years) were assessed with logistic regression. RESULTS:Median overall survival (mOS) in patients with distant lymph node-only metastases (9.0 months) and lung-only metastases (8.1 months) was significantly longer than in patients with liver-only metastases (4.6 months, p < 0.001). However, after six months, the metastatic site lost prognostic value. Logistic regression identified extended survivors (3.6 %) as more likely to be younger, Hispanic, privately insured, Charlson-index <2, having received chemotherapy, or having undergone primary or distant site surgery (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:While synchronous liver metastases are associated with worse outcomes than lung-only and lymph node-only metastases, this predictive value is diminished after six months. Therefore, treatment decisions beyond this time should not primarily depend on the metastatic site. Extended survival is possible in a small subset of patients with favorable tumor biology and good conditional status, who are more likely to undergo aggressive therapies.

OBJECTIVE:To analyze postrecurrence progression in the context of recurrence sites and assess implications for postrecurrence treatment. BACKGROUND:Most patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) recur within 2 years. Different survival outcomes for location-specific patterns of recurrence are reported, highlighting their prognostic value. However, a lack of understanding of postrecurrence progression and survival remains. METHODS:This retrospective analysis included surgically treated patients with PDAC at NYU Langone Health (2010-2021). Sites of recurrence were identified at the time of diagnosis and further follow-up. Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank test, and Cox regression analyses were applied to assess survival outcomes. RESULTS:Recurrence occurred in 57.3% (196/342) patients with a median time to recurrence of 11.3 months (95% CI: 12.6-16.5). The first site of recurrence was local in 43.9% of patients, liver in 23.5%, peritoneal in 8.7%, lung in 3.6%, whereas 20.4% had multiple sites of recurrence. Progression to secondary sites was observed in 11.7%. Only lung involvement was associated with significantly longer survival after recurrence compared with other sites (16.9 vs 8.49 months, P = 0.003). In local recurrence, 21 (33.3%) patients were alive after 1 year without progression to secondary sites. This was associated with a CA19-9 of <100 U/mL at the time of primary diagnosis ( P = 0.039), nodal negative disease ( P = 0.023), and well-moderate differentiation ( P = 0.042) compared with patients with progression. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Except for lung recurrence, postrecurrence survival after PDAC resection is associated with poor survival. A subset of patients with local-only recurrence do not quickly succumb to systemic spread. This is associated with markers for favorable tumor biology, making them candidates for potential curative re-resections when feasible.

BACKGROUND:The appropriate surgical approach for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is determined by the tumor's relation to the porto-mesenteric axis. Although the extent and location of lymphadenectomy is dependent on the type of resection, a pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), distal pancreatectomy (DP), or total pancreatectomy (TP) are considered equivalent oncologic operations for pancreatic neck tumors. Therefore, we aimed to assess differences in histopathological and oncological outcomes for surgical approaches in the treatment of pancreatic neck tumors. METHODS:Patients with resected PDAC located in the pancreatic neck were identified from the National Cancer Database (2004-2020). Patients with metastatic disease were excluded. Furthermore, patients with 90-day mortality and R2-resections were excluded from the multivariable Cox-regression analysis. RESULTS:Among 846 patients, 58% underwent PD, 25% DP, and 17% TP with similar R0-resection rates (p = 0.722). Significant differences were observed in nodal positivity (PD:44%, DP:34%, TP:57%, p < 0.001) and mean-number of examined lymph nodes (PD:17.2 ± 10.4, DP:14.7 ± 10.5, TP:21.2 ± 11.0, p < 0.001). Furthermore, inadequate lymphadenectomy (< 12 nodes) was observed in 30%, 44%, and 19% of patients undergoing PD, DP, and TP, respectively (p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis yielded similar overall survival after DP (HR:0.83, 95%CI:0.63-1.11), while TP was associated with worse survival (HR:1.43, 95%CI:1.08-1.89) compared to PD. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:While R0-rates are similar amongst all approaches, DP is associated with inadequate lymphadenectomy which may result in understaging disease. However, this had no negative influence on survival. In the premise that an oncological resection of the pancreatic neck tumor is feasible with a partial pancreatectomy, no benefit is observed by performing a TP.