Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The management of patients with liver metastasis from a gynecologic carcinoma remains controversial, as there is currently little data available. We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of liver-directed surgery for hepatic metastasis from gynecologic primaries. METHODS:Between 1990 and 2010, 87 patients with biopsy-proven liver metastasis from a gynecologic carcinoma were identified from an institutional hepatobiliary database. Fifty-two (60%) patients who underwent hepatic surgery for their liver disease and 35 (40%) patients who underwent biopsy only were matched for age, primary tumor characteristics, and hepatic tumor burden. Clinicopathologic, operative, and outcome data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS:Of the 87 patients, 30 (34%) presented with synchronous metastasis. The majority of patients had multiple hepatic tumors (63%), with a median size of the largest lesion being 2.5 cm. Of those patients who underwent liver surgery (n=52), most underwent a minor hepatic resection (n=44; 85%), while 29 (56%) patients underwent concurrent lymphadenectomy and 45 (87%) patients underwent simultaneous peritoneal debulking. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were 37% and 0%, respectively. Median survival from time of diagnosis was 53 months for patients who underwent liver-directed surgery compared with 21 months for patients who underwent biopsy alone (n=35) (p=0.01). Among those patients who underwent liver-directed surgery, 5-year survival following hepatic resection was 41%. CONCLUSIONS:Hepatic surgery for liver metastasis from gynecologic cancer can be performed safely. Liver surgery may be associated with prolonged survival in a subset of patients with hepatic metastasis from gynecologic primaries and therefore should be considered in carefully selected patients.

BACKGROUND:The role of EUS for detection of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) is not clearly defined in institutions that use multidetector CT for pancreatic imaging. OBJECTIVE:The aims of this study were to (1) compare the detection rates of EUS and CT by type and size of PNET and calculate the incremental benefit of EUS over CT, (2) evaluate the CT detection rate for PNETs adjusted for improved CT technology over time, and (3) determine the factors associated with CT-negative PNETs. DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective single-center cohort study. SETTING/METHODS:Johns Hopkins Hospital. PATIENTS/METHODS:Patients with pathologically proven PNETs with preoperative CT. Incidentally found PNETs (resection specimens) and those without Johns Hopkins Hospital CT imaging were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT/METHODS:Detection rates of CT and EUS were compared by using pathology as the reference standard. RESULTS:In 217 patients (with 231 PNETs) studied, CT detected 84% of tumors (54.3% of insulinomas). The sensitivity of CT for the detection of PNETs significantly increased with improvement in CT technology (P = .02; χ(2) for trend). CT was more likely to miss lesions <2 cm (P = .005) and insulinomas (P < .0001). In 56 patients who had both CT and EUS, the sensitivity of EUS was greater than CT (91.7% vs 63.3%; P = .0002), particularly for insulinomas (84.2% vs 31.6%; P = .001). EUS detected 20 of 22 CT-negative tumors (91%). LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Retrospective nonrandomized design and referral bias. CONCLUSIONS:The detection rate of CT has significantly improved over time. CT-negative tumors are small and more likely to be insulinomas. A sequential approach of CT followed by EUS can detect most PNETs. EUS is a more sensitive initial test for the detection of suspected insulinomas.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) are a rare but clinically important form of pancreatic neoplasia. To explore the genetic basis of PanNETs, we determined the exomic sequences of 10 nonfamilial PanNETs and then screened the most commonly mutated genes in 58 additional PanNETs. The most frequently mutated genes specify proteins implicated in chromatin remodeling: 44% of the tumors had somatic inactivating mutations in MEN1, which encodes menin, a component of a histone methyltransferase complex, and 43% had mutations in genes encoding either of the two subunits of a transcription/chromatin remodeling complex consisting of DAXX (death-domain-associated protein) and ATRX (α thalassemia/mental retardation syndrome X-linked). Clinically, mutations in the MEN1 and DAXX/ATRX genes were associated with better prognosis. We also found mutations in genes in the mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) pathway in 14% of the tumors, a finding that could potentially be used to stratify patients for treatment with mTOR inhibitors.

BACKGROUND:Margin status is one of the strongest prognosticators after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The clinical significance of pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) at a surgical margin has not been established. METHODS:A total of 208 patients who underwent R0 resection for PDAC between 2004 and 2008 were selected. Intraoperative frozen section slides containing the final pancreatic parenchymal transection margin were evaluated for presence or absence, number, and grade of PanINs. Data were compared to clinicopathologic factors, including patient survival. RESULTS:PanIN lesions were present in margins in 107 of 208 patients (51.4%). Median number of PanINs per pancreatic resection margin was 1 (range, 1-11). A total of 72 patients had PanIN-1 (34.6%), 44 had PanIN-2 (21.1%), and 16 had PanIN-3 (7.2%) at their margin. Overall median survival was 17.9 (95% confidence interval, 14-21.9) months. Neither the presence nor absence of PanIN nor histological grade had any significant correlation with important clinicopathologic characteristics. There were no significant survival differences between patients with or without PanIN lesions at the resection margin or among patients with PanIN-3 (carcinoma in situ) versus lower PanIN grades. However, patients with R1 resection had a significantly worse outcome compared with patients without invasive cancer at a margin irrespective of the presence of PanIN (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS:The presence of PanINs at a resection margin does not affect survival in patients who undergo R0 resection for PDAC. These results have significant clinical implications for surgeons, because no additional resection seems to be indicated when intraoperative frozen sections reveal even high-grade PanIN lesions.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The choice between liver transplantation (LT), liver resection (LR), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as initial therapy for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial, yet little is known about how surgeons choose therapy for individual patients. We sought to quantify the impact of both clinical factors and surgeon specialty on surgical decision making in early HCC by using conjoint analysis. METHODS:Surgeons with an interest in liver surgery were invited to complete a Web-based survey including 10 case scenarios. Choice of therapy was then analyzed by using regression models that included both clinical factors and surgeon specialty (non-LT v LT). RESULTS:When assessing early HCC occurrences, non-LT surgeons (50% LR; 41% LT; 9% RFA) made significantly different recommendations compared with LT surgeons (63% LT; 31% LR; 6% RFA; P < .001). Clinical factors, including tumor number and size, type of resection required, and platelet count, had significant effects on the choice between LR, LT, and RFA. After adjusting for clinical factors, non-LT surgeons remained more likely than LT surgeons to choose LR compared with LT (relative risk ratio [RRR], 2.67). When the weight of each clinical factor was allowed to vary by surgeon specialty, the residual independent effect of surgeon specialty on the decision between LR and LT was negligible (RRR, 0.93). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The impact of surgeon specialty on choice of therapy for early HCC is stronger than that of some clinical factors. However, the influence of surgeon specialty does not merely reflect an across-the-board preference for one therapy over another. Rather, certain clinical factors are weighed differently by surgeons in different specialties.

Solid-pseudopapillary neoplasms of the pancreas are uncommon and usually occur in young women. They are generally large, encapsulated masses with mixture of solid, cystic, and hemorrhagic components. Some cases have atypical features; for example, they can form a small predominantly solid mass and produce dilatation of the main pancreatic duct. In this article we discuss and illustrate the spectrum of the appearances of this distinctive neoplasm on multidetector CT.

BACKGROUND:Biomarkers for the diagnostic classification of pancreatic cysts are urgently needed. Deregulated microRNA (miRNAs) expression is widespread in pancreatic cancer. We assessed whether aberrant miRNAs in pancreatic cyst fluid could be used as potential biomarkers for cystic precursor lesions of pancreatic cancer. METHODS:Cyst fluid specimens were prospectively collected from 40 surgically resected pancreatic cysts, and small RNAs were extracted. The 'mucinous' cohort included 14 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (including 3 with an associated adenocarcinoma) and 10 mucinous cystic neoplasms; the 'nonmucinous' cohort included 11 serous cystadenomas and 5 other benign cysts. Quantitative reverse transcription PCR was performed for five miRNAs (miR-21, miR-155, miR-221, miR-17-3p, miR-191), which were previously reported as overexpressed in pancreatic adenocarcinomas. RESULTS:Significantly higher expression of miR-21, miR-221, and miR-17-3p was observed in the mucinous versus nonmucinous cysts (p < 0.01), with the mean relative fold differences being 7.0-, 7.9-, and 5.4-fold, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic curves demonstrated the highest median area under the curve for miR-21, with a median specificity of 76%, at a sensitivity of 80%. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This pilot study demonstrates that profiling miRNAs in pancreatic cyst fluid samples is feasible and can yield potential biomarkers for the classification of cystic lesions of the pancreas. and IAP.

BACKGROUND:Erlotinib is approved for the treatment of advanced pancreas cancer. We conducted a prospective trial to determine the safety profile and recommended phase 2 dose of erlotinib and capecitabine given concurrently with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in resected pancreatic cancer patients. The pharmacokinetic profile of this combination was also evaluated. METHODS:Patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma received erlotinib and capecitabine concurrently with IMRT delivered at 1.8 Gy daily in 28 fractions (total = 50.4 Gy). The starting dose level (DL 1) was erlotinib 150mgdaily and capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) twice daily without interruption. The next lower dose level (DL -1) was erlotinib 100 mg daily and capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) twice daily (Monday to Friday). Plasma samples were obtained for pharmacokinetic analysis. RESULTS:Thirteen patients were enrolled in total. At DL 1, six of the seven treated patients were evaluable for toxicities. Four completed planned treatment, but all required treatment interruption or dose reduction. The dose-limiting toxicities were neutropenia, diarrhea, and rash. Six patients were subsequently enrolled to and completed planned treatment in DL-1. Themost common toxicities were fatigue, elevated liver enzymes, and anorexia. The pharmacokinetic parameters of erlotinib and OSI-420 were not significantly different in the presence or absence of capecitabine and were consistent with historical controls. CONCLUSIONS:When administered concurrently with IMRT, erlotinib 100 mg daily and capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) twice daily (Monday to Friday) can be administered safely in resected pancreas cancer patients, and is the recommended regimen for efficacy studies using this regimen.

BACKGROUND:This study was designed to examine the effect of adjuvant 5-FU-based chemoradiation therapy (CRT) after distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma of the distal pancreas. METHODS:All patients underwent curative resection for adenocarcinoma of the distal pancreas between December 1985 and June 2006. Patients who received adjuvant CRT were compared with those who underwent surgery alone. A Kaplan-Meier estimate of the survival curve was used to determine estimates of the median survival and proportion alive at 1 and 2 years; log-rank tests were used to make comparisons between groups. RESULTS:A total of 123 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy; 29 patients were excluded for distant metastases at the time of surgery (n = 12, 10%) or before adjuvant therapy (n = 11, 9%), death within 2 months of surgery (n = 2, 2%), or if CRT treatment status was unknown (n = 4, 3%). Of the remaining 94 patients, 72% received adjuvant 5-FU-based CRT and 28% underwent surgery alone. Overall median survival was 16.2 (95% confidence interval (CI), 13.1-18.9) months. The groups were similar with respect to tumor size, nodal status, and margin status. There was no significant difference in overall survival between patients treated with adjuvant CRT versus surgery alone (p = 0.23). An exploratory subgroup analysis suggested a potential survival benefit of adjuvant CRT in patients with lymph node metastases (16.7 vs. 12.1 months, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Adjuvant CRT did not increase survival compared with surgery alone; however, patients with node-positive disease appear to benefit from adjuvant CRT.

BACKGROUND:Precise localization of small pancreatic tumors during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) can be difficult because of decreased tactile ability of laparoscopy and the homogeneous appearance of the pancreas and surrounding retroperitoneal fat. Precise localization of the lesion is critical to achieving adequate margins of resection and preserving healthy pancreatic tissue. EUS-guided fine-needle tattooing (EUS-FNT) of a pancreatic lesion before LDP has been described in single case reports, but no large series have reported its effectiveness in patients undergoing LDP. OBJECTIVE:To assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of EUS-FNT in consecutive patients undergoing LDP. DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective cohort study. SETTING/METHODS:Tertiary-care referral hospital. PATIENTS/METHODS:This study involved 30 consecutive patients who underwent LDP from 2008 to 2010. Thirteen had EUS-FNT followed by LDP, and 17 had LDP alone. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:LDP or EUS-FNT with a sterile carbon-particle tattoo followed by LDP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:The following features were examined: the technical success and complication rates of EUS-FNT, visibility of the tattoo at the time of laparoscopy, durability of the tattoo, and pathologic absence of tumor at the resection margin. RESULTS:The final pathology of pancreatic lesions of patients who had EUS-FNT was similar to those who had LDP alone. The median resected tumor size was significantly larger for the LDP-alone patients (median 4.0 cm vs 1.3 cm; P = .03). Thirty-one percent (4/13) of lesions in the EUS-FNT group were not visualized by prior preoperative pancreatic protocol CT. EUS-FNT was feasible in all 13 patients at laparoscopy, with R0 resection and negative final pathology margins in all cases. The tattoo was visible in all 13 EUS-FNT cases, with mean time from EUS-FNT to surgery of 20.3 days (range, 3-69 days). There were no significant complications associated with EUS-FNT. LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Small, retrospective, single-center study. CONCLUSIONS:Preoperative EUS-FNT of lesions was technically feasible and safe, and it assisted in the localization of lesions in patients before LDP. The carbon particle tattoo was durable and visible in all cases.