Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Neoadjuvant therapy is increasingly being used before surgery for localized pancreatic cancer. Given the importance of completing multimodal therapy, the aim of this study was to characterize surgical resection rates after neoadjuvant therapy as well as the reasons for, and long-term prognostic impact of, not undergoing resection. METHODS:A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective trials and high-quality retrospective studies since 2010 was performed to calculate pooled resection rates using a generalized random-effects model for potentially resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Median survival times were calculated using random-effects models for patients who did and did not undergo resection. RESULTS:In 125 studies that met the inclusion criteria, neoadjuvant therapy consisted of chemotherapy (36.8 per cent), chemoradiation (15.2 per cent), or chemotherapy and radiation (48.0 per cent). Among 11 713 patients, the pooled resection rates were 77.4 (95 per cent c.i. 71.3 to 82.5), 60.6 (54.8 to 66.1), and 22.2 (16.7 to 29.0) per cent for potentially resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer respectively. The most common reasons for not undergoing resection were distant progression for resectable and borderline resectable cancers, and local unresectability for locally advanced disease. Among 42 studies with survival data available, achieving surgical resection after neoadjuvant therapy was associated with improved survival for patients with potentially resectable (median 38.5 versus 13.3 months), borderline resectable (32.3 versus 13.9 months), and locally advanced (30.0 versus 14.6 months) pancreatic cancer (P < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSION:Although rates of surgical resection after neoadjuvant therapy vary based on anatomical stage, surgery is associated with improved survival for all patients with localized pancreatic cancer. These pooled resection and survival rates may inform patient-provider decision-making and serve as important benchmarks for future prospective trials.

Surgical management combined with improved systemic therapies have extended 5-year overall survival beyond 50% among patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Furthermore, a multitude of liver-directed therapies has improved local disease control for patients with unresectable CRLM. Unfortunately, a significant portion of patients treated with curative-intent hepatectomy develops disease recurrence. Traditional markers fail to risk-stratify and prognosticate patients with CRLM appropriately. Over the last few decades, advances in molecular sequencing technology have greatly expanded our knowledge of the pathophysiology and tumor microenvironment characteristics of CRLM. These investigations have revealed biomarkers with the potential to better inform management decisions in patients with CRLM. Actionable biomarkers such as RAS and BRAF mutations, microsatellite instability/mismatch repair status, and tumor mutational burden have been incorporated into national and societal guidelines. Other biomarkers, including circulating tumor DNA and radiomic features, are under active investigation to evaluate their clinical utility. Given the plethora of therapeutic modalities and lack of evidence on timing and sequence, reliable biomarkers are needed to assist clinicians with the development of patient-tailored management plans. In this review, we discuss the current evidence regarding biomarkers for patients with CRLM.

Regardless of anatomic origin, cholangiocarcinoma is generally an aggressive malignancy with a relatively high case fatality. Surgical resection with curative intent remains the best opportunity to achieve meaningful long-term survival. Most patients present, however, with advanced disease and less than 20% of patients are candidates for surgical resection. Unfortunately, even patients who undergo resection have a 5-year survival that ranges from 20 to 40%. Biomarkers are indicators of normal, pathologic, or biologic responses to an intervention and can range from a characteristic (i.e., blood pressure reading which can detect hypertension) to specific genetic mutations or proteins (i.e., carcinoembryonic antigen level). Novel biomarkers and improved molecular diagnostics represent an attractive opportunity to improve detection as well as to identify novel therapeutic targets for patients with cholangiocarcinoma. We herein review the latest advances in molecular diagnostics and biomarkers related to the early detection and treatment of patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

Hepatic, pancreatic, and biliary (HPB) cancers, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) cause a disproportionate amount of the global cancer-related mortality. Despite advances in surgical technique and improved systemic therapies, overall 5-year survival remains dismal, especially for patients with pancreatic and biliary cancer. Historically, systemic therapies for patients with HPB cancers were administered in a "one-size-fits-all" approach due to limited reliable data on efficacy for specific patient populations. However, recent advances in genetic testing techniques have greatly improved our understanding of HPB oncogenesis, shedding light on specific genetic mutations responsible for progression from physiologic cellular regulation to uninhibited cellular replication and invasive cancer. Investigations into the oncogenesis of HPB cancers have revealed multiple actionable genetic variants, as well as increased susceptibilities to currently available systemic therapies. For example, patients with PDAC and a known BRCA mutation are more likely to benefit from FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus cisplatin. While patients with CCA and a IDH1 mutation may benefit from ivosidenib. As a result, many national and societal guidelines now recommend some form of genetic testing in the workup of patients with HPB cancers. We herein review the role of genetic testing in these aggressive cancers including DNA sequencing techniques, clinically relevant mutations, therapeutic implications, and current clinical recommendations.

BACKGROUND:Neoadjuvant therapy (NT) has increasingly been utilized for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). It is the recommended approach for borderline resectable (BR) and locally advanced (LA) cancers and an increasingly utilized option for potentially resectable (PR) disease. Despite its increased use, little research has focused on patient-centered metrics among patients undergoing NT, including patient experiences, preferences, and recommendations. A better understanding of all aspects of the patient experience during NT may identify opportunities to design interventions aimed at improving quality of life; it may also facilitate the completion of NT and receipt of surgery, ultimately optimizing long-term outcomes. AIM/OBJECTIVE:To understand the experience of patients initiating and receiving NT to identify opportunities to improve neoadjuvant cancer care delivery. METHODS:Semi-structured interviews of patients with localized PDAC during NT were conducted to explore their experience initiating and receiving NT. Interviews took place between August 2020 and October 2021. Due to the descriptive nature of the research, questions were open ended. Interviews were conducted over the phone, audio recorded and then transcribed. All interviews were coded by two independent researchers using NVivo 12, iteratively identifying themes until thematic saturation was achieved. An integrative approach to qualitative analysis was used, utilizing both inductive and deductive methods. RESULTS:= 5). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study provides a framework to allow for a better understanding of the PDAC patient experience during NT and highlights opportunities to improve quality and quantity of life outcomes.

The seventh leading cause of cancer-related death globally, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) involves the exocrine pancreas and constitutes greater than 90% of all pancreatic cancers. Surgical resection in combination with systemic chemotherapy with or without radiation remains the mainstay of treatment and the only potentially curative treatment option. While there has been improvement in systemic chemotherapy, long-term survival among patients with PDAC remains poor. Improvement in the understanding of tumorigenesis, genetic mutations, the tumor microenvironment (TME), immunotherapies, as well as targeted therapies continued to drive advances in PDAC treatment. We herein review the TME, genetic landscape, as well as various metabolic pathways associated with PDAC tumorigenesis relative to emerging therapies.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Prior studies attempting to identify disparities in the care of patients with appendiceal (AC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) with peritoneal metastasis (PM) are limited to single-institution, highly selected patient populations. This observational cohort study sought to identify factors associated with specialty care for Medicare beneficiaries with AC/CRC-PM. MATERIALS AND METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Patients >65 years old in the United States diagnosed with AC/CRC and isolated PM were identified within the Medicare Standard Analytic File (2013-2017). Mixed-effects analyses assessed patient factors associated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) and outpatient consultation with a peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM) surgeon, and Cox proportional-hazards analysis compared 3-year overall survival (OS) between patients receiving CRS/HIPEC versus systemic therapy alone. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Among 7,653 patients, only 250 (3.3%) underwent CRS/HIPEC. Among those individuals who did not undergo CRS/HIPEC (N=7,403), only 475 (6.4%) had outpatient consultation with a PSM surgeon. Patient factors independently associated with lower odds of CRS/HIPEC and PSM surgery consultation included older age, greater comorbidity burden, higher social vulnerability index, and further distance from a PSM center (p<0.05). CRS/HIPEC was independently associated with better 3-year OS compared with systemic therapy alone (HR=0.29, 95%CI=0.21-0.38). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:An exceedingly small proportion of Medicare beneficiaries with AC/CRC-PM undergo CRS/HIPEC or even have an outpatient consultation with a PSM surgeon. Significant disparities in treatment and access to care exist for patients with higher levels of social vulnerability and those that live further away from a PSM center. Future research and interventions should focus on improving access to care for these at-risk patient populations.

BACKGROUND:Hepatic hemangiomas (HHs) are benign liver lesions often discovered incidentally on imaging for various unrelated pathologies. We herein review the etiology, classification, diagnostic imaging, and management of HHs. METHODS:A comprehensive systematic review was performed utilizing MEDLINE/PubMed and Web of Science databases, with the end of search date being March 1, 2022, regarding HH diagnosis, imaging, and management. RESULTS:HHs can be broadly classified as capillary hemangiomas or cavernous hemangiomas. While the exact pathophysiology related to the development of HHs remains largely unknown, hormone exposure has been postulated to cause HH growth. HHs appear homogenously hyperechoic on US with distinct margins and posterior acoustic enhancement. While cavernous hemangiomas appear as well-defined hypodense lesions on pre-contrast CT images with the same density as the vasculature, one of the most reliable imaging features for diagnosing cavernous hemangiomas is high signal intensity on T2 weighted images. While most HHs are asymptomatic, some patients can present with pain or compressive symptoms with bleeding/rupture being very rare. Kasabach-Merritt syndrome is a rare but life-threatening condition associated with thrombocytopenia and microangiopathic hemolytic anemia. When HHs are symptomatic or in the setting of Kasabach Merritt syndrome, surgery is indicated. Enucleation is an attractive surgical option for HH as it spares normal liver tissue. Most patients experience symptom relief following surgical resection. CONCLUSION:HHs are very common benign liver lesions. High-quality imaging is imperative to distinguish HHs from other liver lesions. Surgery is generally reserved for patients who present with symptoms such as pain, obstruction, or rarely Kasabach-Merritt syndrome. Surgery can involve either formal resection or, in most instances, simple enucleation. Patients generally have good outcomes following surgery with resolution of their symptoms.