Faculty Bibliography

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.

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.

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.

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.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the United States and the second most common cause of cancer-related death. Approximately 20-30% of patients will develop hepatic metastasis in the form of synchronous or metachronous disease. The treatment of colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) has evolved into a multidisciplinary approach, with chemotherapy and a variety of locoregional treatments, such as ablation and portal vein embolization, playing a crucial role. However, resection remains a core tenet of management, serving as the gold standard for a curative-intent therapy. As such, the input of a dedicated hepatobiliary surgeon is paramount for appropriate patient selection and choice of surgical approach, as significant advances in the field have made management decisions extremely nuanced and complex. We herein aim to review the contemporary surgical management of colorectal liver metastasis with respect to both perioperative and operative considerations.

OBJECTIVES:We aimed to determine whether surgeon variation in management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) is driven by differences in risk perception and quantify surgeons' risk threshold for changing their recommendations. BACKGROUND:Surgeons vary widely in management of IPMN. METHODS:We conducted a survey of members of the Americas HepatoPancreatoBiliary Association, presented participants with 2 detailed clinical vignettes and asked them to choose between surgical resection and surveillance. We also asked them to judge the likelihood that the IPMN harbors cancer and that the patient would have a serious complication if surgery was performed. Finally, we asked surgeons to rate the level of cancer risk at which they would change their treatment recommendation. We examined the association between surgeons' treatment recommendations and their risk perception and risk threshold. RESULTS:One hundred fifty surgeons participated in the study. Surgeons varied in their recommendations for surgery [19% for vignette 1 (V1) and 12% for V2] and in their perception of the cancer risk (interquartile range: 2%-10% for V1 and V2) and risk of surgical complications (V1 interquartile range: 10%-20%, V2 20-30%). After adjusting for surgeon characteristics, surgeons who were above the median in cancer risk perception were 22 percentage points (27% vs 5%) more likely to recommend resection than those who were below the median (95% CI: 11%-4%; P <0.001). The median risk threshold at which surgeons would change their recommendation was 15% (V1 and V2). Surgeons who recommended surgery had a lower risk threshold for changing their recommendation than those who recommended surveillance (V1: 10.0 vs 15.0, P =0.06; V2: 7.0 vs 15.0, P =0.05). CONCLUSIONS:The treatment that patients receive for IPMNs depends greatly on how their surgeons perceive the risk of cancer in the lesion. Efforts to improve cancer risk prediction for IPMNs may lead to decreased variations in care.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:There is no consensus regarding the role of primary tumor resection for patients with metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (panNET). We assessed surgical treatment patterns and evaluated the survival impact of primary tumor resection in patients with metastatic panNET. METHODS:Patients with synchronous metastatic nonfunctional panNET in the National Cancer Database (2004-2016) were categorized based on whether they underwent primary tumor resection. We used logistic regressions to assess associations with primary tumor resection. We performed survival analyses with Kaplan-Meier survival functions, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazard regression within a propensity score matched cohort. RESULTS:In the overall cohort of 2613 patients, 68% (n = 839) underwent primary tumor resection. The proportion of patients who underwent primary tumor resection decreased over time from 36% (2004) to 16% (2016, p < 0.001). After propensity score matching on age at diagnosis, median income quartile, tumor grade, size, liver metastasis, and hospital type, primary tumor resection was associated with longer median overall survival (OS) (65 vs. 24 months; p < 0.001) and was associated with lower hazard of mortality (HR: 0.39, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Primary tumor resection was significantly associated with improved OS, suggesting that, if feasible, surgical resection can be considered for well-selected patients with panNET and synchronous metastasis.