Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To evaluate patient preferences for decision-making role in the management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) of the pancreas and to identify individual characteristics associated with those preferences. BACKGROUND:Management of IPMNs is rooted in uncertainty with current guidelines failing to incorporate patients' preferences and values. METHODS:A representative sample of participants aged 40-70 were recruited to evaluate a clinical vignette where they were given the option to undergo surveillance or surgical resection of their IPMN. Their preferred role in the decision-making process for the vignette was evaluated using the Control Preference Scale. The relationship between control preference and variables including cancer anxiety, health literacy, and education level was analyzed. RESULTS:Of the 520 participants in the study, most preferred an active role (65%), followed by shared (29%), and passive roles (6%) in the decision-making process. Lower health literacy was significantly associated with a more passive control preference (p = 0.003). Non-active preference was significantly associated with Latino race compared to White race (odds ratio = 0.52, p = 0.009) in multivariate analysis. We found no significant association between control preference and education level or cancer anxiety. CONCLUSIONS:Most patients preferred an active role in IPMN treatment decisions. Lower health literacy and Latino race were associated with a preference for non-active decision roles. Clinicians should strive to align patient involvement in IPMN treatment decisions with their patient's preferred role.

BACKGROUND:Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN)-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is resected at smaller sizes compared to its biologically distinct counterpart, pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN)-derived PDAC. Thus, experts proposed T1 sub-staging for IPMN-derived PDAC. However, this has never been validated. METHODS:Consecutive upfront surgery patients with IPMN-derived PDAC from five international high-volume centers were classified by the proposed T1 sub-staging classification (T1a ≤ 0.5, T1b > 0.5 and ≤1.0, and T1c >1.0 and ≤2.0 cm) using the invasive component size. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were utilized to compare overall survival (OS). A multivariable Cox-regression was used to determine hazard ratios (HR) with confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS:Among 747 patients, 69 (9.2%), 50 (6.7%), 99 (13.0%), and 531 patients (71.1%), comprised the T1a, T1b, T1c, and T2-4 subgroups, respectively. Increasing T-stage was associated with elevated CA19-9, poorer grade, nodal positivity, R1-margin, and tubular subtype. Median OS for T1a, T1b, T1c, and T2-4 were 159.0 (95%CI:126.0-NR), 128.8 (98.3-NR), 77.6 (48.3-108.2), and 31.4 (27.5-37.7) months, respectively (p < .001). OS decreased with increasing T-stage for all pairwise comparisons (all p < .05). After risk-adjustment, age > 65, elevated CA19-9, T1b [HR : 2.55 (1.22-5.32)], T1c [HR : 3.04 (1.60-5.76)], and T2-4 [HR : 3.41 (1.89-6.17)] compared to T1a, nodal positivity, R1-margin, and no adjuvant chemotherapy were associated with worse OS. Disease recurrence was more common in T2-4 tumors (56.4%) compared to T1a (18.2%), T1b (23.9%), and T1c (36.1%, p < .001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:T1 sub-staging of IPMN-derived PDAC is valid and has significant prognostic value. Advancing T1 sub-stage is associated with worse histopathology, survival, and recurrence. T1 sub-staging is recommended for future guidelines.

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.

OBJECTIVE:To assess the prognostic impact of margin status in patients with resected intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN)-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and to inform future intraoperative decision-making on handling differing degrees of dysplasia on frozen section. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:The ideal oncologic surgical outcome is a negative transection margin with normal pancreatic epithelium left behind. However, the prognostic significance of reresecting certain degrees of dysplasia or invasive cancer at the pancreatic neck margin during pancreatectomy for IPMN-derived PDAC is debatable. METHODS:Consecutive patients with resected and histologically confirmed IPMN-derived PDAC (2002-2022) from six international high-volume centers were included. The prognostic relevance of a positive resection margin (R1) and degrees of dysplasia at the pancreatic neck margin were assessed by log-rank test and multivariable Cox-regression for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS:Overall, 832 patients with IPMN-derived PDAC were included with 322 patients (39%) having an R1-resection on final pathology. Median OS (mOS) was significantly longer in patients with an R0 status compared to those with an R1 status (65.8 vs. 26.3 mo P<0.001). Patients without dysplasia at the pancreatic neck margin had similar OS compared to those with low-grade dysplasia (mOS: 78.8 vs. 66.8 months, P=0.344). However, high-grade dysplasia (mOS: 26.1 mo, P=0.001) and invasive cancer (mOS: 25.0 mo, P<0.001) were associated with significantly worse OS compared to no or low-grade dysplasia. Patients who underwent conversion of high-risk margins (high-grade or invasive cancer) to a low-risk margin (low-grade or no dysplasia) after intraoperative frozen section had significantly superior OS compared to those with a high-risk neck margin on final pathology (mOS: 76.9 vs. 26.1 mo P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:In IPMN-derived PDAC, normal epithelium or low-grade dysplasia at the neck have similar outcomes while pancreatic neck margins with high-grade dysplasia or invasive cancer are associated with poorer outcomes. Conversion of a high-risk to low-risk margin after intraoperative frozen section is associated with survival benefit and should be performed when feasible.

BACKGROUND:Little is known about the prognostic significance of pancreatic duct (PD) dilation following pancreatoduodenectomy for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN). Although PD dilation is typically the hallmark radiographic feature of IPMN, other causes of PD dilation exist, including anastomotic stricture, pancreatitis, senescence, and postsurgical passive dilation. Therefore, PD dilation after pancreatoduodenectomy for IPMN represents a diagnostic and management dilemma. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the significance of PD dilation after pancreatoduodenectomy for noninvasive IPMN. METHODS:All patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for noninvasive IPMN at nine pancreatic academic centers between 2013 and 2018 were included. Variables were entered prospectively into institutional databases and retrospectively reviewed for the purpose of this study. Dilation of the PD remnant was defined as a duct diameter of ≥5 mm, according to international guidelines. RESULTS:Four-hundred and eighty-one patients were included in this study. The mean age of the patients was 66 years (range 30-90). Patients were surveilled for a median of 4.5 (+/-2.3; max 10.6) years. During follow-up, 132 patients (27.4%) developed PD dilation in the remnant tissue after a median of 3.3 years. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that older age at the time of pancreatoduodenectomy (P=0.01) and longer surveillance duration (P=0.002) were predictors of PD dilation. Interestingly, neither the pathological IPMN subtype (branch-duct vs. main duct/mixed, P=0.96) nor the preoperative PD diameter (P=0.14) was associated with an increased risk of PD dilation in the remnant. During follow-up, IPMN recurrence was suspected in the remaining 72 patients (18.4%), solely because of ductal dilation on cross-sectional imaging in 97% (70/72). Completion pancreatectomy was performed in only 16 patients (3.3%), of whom only four (0.8%) had invasive carcinoma. Three of these four patients had high-grade dysplasia in the original pancreatoduodenectomy specimen, whereas only one had a low-grade dysplastic lesion initially. On multivariable analysis, no variable was predictive of IPMN recurrence in the remnant. CONCLUSIONS:New main duct dilation in the pancreatic remnant after pancreatoduodenectomy for IPMN is common, occurring in 27% of the patients. The duration of surveillance is the main factor associated with remnant PD dilation, suggesting that this is likely a physiologic phenomenon. Although recurrence of IPMN in the remnant is often suspected, only 0.8% of patients develop an invasive carcinoma in the pancreatic remnant requiring completion pancreatectomy.

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.

OBJECTIVE:We aimed to better understand patients' treatment preferences and quantify the level of cancer risk at which treatment preferences change (risk threshold) to inform better counseling of patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:The complexity of IPMN management provides an opportunity to align treatment with individual preference. METHODS:We surveyed a sample of healthy volunteers simulating a common scenario: undergoing an imaging study that incidentally identifies an IPMN. In the scenario, the estimated risk of cancer in the IPMN was 5%. Patients were asked their treatment preference (surgery or surveillance), to quantify the level of cancer risk in the IPMN at which their treatment preference would change (i.e. risk threshold), and their level of cancer anxiety as measured on a 5-point Likert scale. We examined associations between participant characteristics, treatment preferences, and risk threshold using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS:The median risk threshold among the 520 participants was 25% (IQR 2.3-50%). The risk threshold had a bimodal distribution: 40% of participants had a risk threshold between 0-10% and 47% had a risk threshold above 30%. When informed that the risk of cancer was 5%, 62% of participants (n=323) preferred surveillance, and the remaining 38% (n=197) preferred surgery. After adjusting for potential confounders, participants who expressed "worry" or "extreme worry" about the malignancy risk of IPMN had significantly lower risk thresholds than participants who were "not at all worried" (Coefficient -12, 95%CI -21 to -2, P=0.015 and Coefficient -18, 95%CI -29 to -8, P<0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Participants varied in treatment preference and risk threshold of incidentally identified IPMNs. Given the uncertainty in estimating the true malignant potential of IPMNs, a better understanding of a patient's risk threshold, as influenced by patient concern about malignancy, will help inform the shared decision-making process.