Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To establish minimal and optimal lymphadenectomy thresholds for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN)-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and evaluate their prognostic value. BACKGROUND:Current guidelines recommend a minimum of 12-15 lymph nodes (LNs) in PDAC. This is largely based on pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN)-derived PDAC, a biologically distinct entity from IPMN-derived PDAC. METHODS:Multicenter retrospective study including consecutive patients undergoing upfront surgery for IPMN-derived PDAC was conducted. The minimum cut-off for lymphadenectomy was defined as the maximum number of LNs where a significant node positivity difference was observed. Maximally selected log-rank statistic was used to derive the optimal lymphadenectomy cut-off (maximize survival). Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were used to analyze overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Multivariable Cox-regression was used to determine hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS:In 341 patients with resected IPMN-derived PDAC, the minimum number of LNs needed to ensure accurate nodal staging was 10 (P=0.040), whereas ≥20 LNs was the optimal number associated with improved OS (80.3 vs. 37.2 mo, P<0.001). Optimal lymphadenectomy was associated with improved OS [HR:0.57 (95%CI 0.39-0.83)] and RFS [HR:0.70 (95%CI 0.51-0.97)] on multivariable Cox-regression. On sub-analysis the optimal lymphadenectomy cut-offs for pancreatoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy, and total pancreatectomy were 20 (P<0.001), 23 (P=0.160), and 25 (P=0.008). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In IPMN-derived PDAC, lymphadenectomy with at least 10 lymph nodes mitigates under-staging, and at least 20 lymph nodes is associated with the improved survival. Specifically, for pancreatoduodenectomy and total pancreatectomy, 20 and 25 lymph nodes were the optimal cut-offs.

OBJECTIVE:To measure the rate of LTS in resected PDAC and determine the association between predictors of OS and LTS. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Long-term survival (>5 y, LTS) remains rare in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Multiple predictors of overall survival (OS) are known but their association with LTS remains unclear. METHODS:An international, multicenter retrospective study was conducted. Included were patients from 2012-2019 with resected PDAC. Excluded were those with metastases at diagnosis or resection, R2 resections, and 90-day mortality. Predictors of OS were identified using multivariable Cox regression and their prevalence in patients with LTS assessed. LTS was calculated by excluding patients with shorter follow-up and predictors of LTS were identified using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS:3,003 patients were included (27.4% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy). Elevated baseline CA19-9, high tumor grade, nodal disease, and perineural and lymphovascular invasion were negative independent predictors of OS, while receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy predicted improved OS (all P<0.05). LTS was observed in 220/2,436 patients (9.0%), of whom 198 (90%) harbored poor prognostic factors: elevated baseline CA19-9 (58.1%), poor tumor differentiation (51.0%), nodal disease (46.8%), and perineural invasion (76.0%). Of those without any of these four features, 50.0% achieved LTS as compared to 21.3%, 13.3%, 5.2%, and 3.5% in those with 1, 2, 3, or 4 features. CONCLUSIONS:This bi-national cohort demonstrates a true LTS rate of 9.0% in resected PDAC. Clinicians should remain aware that presence of poor prognostic factors does not preclude LTS.

AIM/OBJECTIVE:To investigate the impact of total pancreatectomy (TP) on oncological outcomes for patients at high-risk of local recurrence or secondary progression in the remnant gland after partial pancreatectomy (PP) for IPMN-associated cancer. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Major risk factors for invasive progression in the remnant gland include multifocality, diffuse main duct dilation, and the presence of invasive cancer. In these high-risk patients, a TP may be oncologically beneficial. However, current guidelines discourage TP, especially in elderly patients. METHODS:This international multicenter study compares TP versus PP in patients with adenocarcinoma arising from multifocal or diffuse IPMN (2002-2022). Log-rank test and multivariable Cox-analysis with interaction analysis was performed to assess overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local-DFS. RESULTS:Of 359 included patients, 162 (45%) were treated with TP, whereas 197 (55%) underwent PP. Despite TP and PP having similar R0-rates (59% vs. 58%, P=0.866), patients undergoing a TP had significantly longer local-DFS compared to PP (P=0.039). However, no difference in OS was observed between the two surgical approaches (P=0.487). In a multivariable analysis, young age (optimal cut-off ≤63.6 yrs) was associated with an OS benefit derived from TP (HR:0.44, 95%CI:0.22-0.89), whereas no significant difference was observed in elderly patients (HR:1.24, 95%CI:0.92-1.67, Pinteraction=0.007). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Since overall, patients with diffuse or multifocal IPMN with an invasive component do not benefit from TP in terms of OS, the indication for TP may be individualized to young patients who have sufficient life expectancy to benefit from the prevention of secondary progression or local recurrence.

BACKGROUND:The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) eighth edition is based on pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), a biologically distinct entity from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN)-derived pancreatic cancer. The role of nodal disease and the AJCC's prognostic utility for IPMN-derived pancreatic cancer are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic role of nodal disease and the AJCC eighth-edition N-staging for IPMN-derived pancreatic cancer. METHODS:Upfront-surgery patients with IPMN-derived PDAC from four centers were stratified according to the AJCC eighth-edition N stage. Disease characteristics were compared using descriptive statistics, and both overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were evaluated using log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox regression was performed to determine the prognostic value of N stage for OS, presented as hazard ratios with 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CIs). A lowest p value log-rank statistic was used to derive the optimal cutoff for node-positive disease. RESULTS:For 360 patients, advanced N stage was associated with worse T stage, grade, tubular histology, and perineural and lymphovascular invasion (all p < 0.05). The median OS was 98.3 months (95 % CI 82.8-122.0 months) for N0 disease, 27.8 months (95 % CI 24.4-41.7 months) for N1 disease, and 18.1 months (95 % CI 16.2-25.9 months) for N2 disease (p < 0.001). The AJCC N stage was validated and associated with worse OS (N1 [HR 1.64; range, 1.05-2.57], N2 [HR2.42; range, 1.48-3.96]) and RFS (N1 [HR 1.81; range, 1.23-2.68], N2 [HR 3.72; range, 2.40-5.77]). The optimal cutoff for positive nodes was five nodes. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The AJCC eighth-edition N-staging is valid and prognostic for both OS and RFS in IPMN-derived PDAC.

The REDISCOVER guidelines present 34 recommendations for the selection and perioperative care of borderline-resectable (BR-PDAC) and locally advanced ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (LA-PDAC). These guidelines represent a significant shift from previous approaches, prioritizing tumor biology over anatomical features as the primary indication for resection. Condensed herein, they provide a practical management algorithm for clinical practice. However, the guidelines also highlight the need to redefine LA-PDAC to align with modern treatment strategies and to solve some contradictions within the current definition, such as grouping "difficult" and "impossible" to resect tumors together. Furthermore, the REDISCOVER guidelines highlight several areas requiring urgent research. These include the resection of the superior mesenteric artery, the management strategies for patients with LA-PDAC who are fit for surgery but unable to receive multi-agent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the approach to patients with LA-PDAC who are fit for surgery but demonstrate high serum Ca 19.9 levels even after neoadjuvant treatment, and the optimal timing and number of chemotherapy cycles prior to surgery. Additionally, the role of primary chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in LA-PDAC, the timing of surgical resection post-neoadjuvant/primary chemoradiotherapy, the efficacy of ablation therapies, and the management of oligometastasis in patients with LA-PDAC warrant investigation. Given the limited evidence for many issues, refining existing management strategies is imperative. The establishment of the REDISCOVER registry ( https://rediscover.unipi.it/ ) offers promise of a unified research platform to advance understanding and improve the management of BR-PDAC and LA-PDAC.

Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most aggressive solid tumors. As a systemic disease, despite the improvement of multi-modality treatment strategies, the prognosis of pancreatic cancer was not improved dramatically. For resectable or borderline resectable patients, the surgical strategy centered on improving R0 resection rate is consensus; however, the role of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable patients and the optimal neoadjuvant therapy of chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy in borderline resectable patients were debated. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy of gemcitabine/capecitabine or mFOLFIRINOX is recommended regardless of the margin status. Chemotherapy as the first-line treatment strategy for advanced or metastatic patients included FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel, or NALIRIFOX regimens whereas 5-FU plus liposomal irinotecan was the only standard of care second-line therapy. Immunotherapy is an innovative therapy although anti-PD-1 antibody is currently the only agent approved by for MSI-H, dMMR, or TMB-high solid tumors, which represent a very small subset of pancreatic cancers. Combination strategies to increase the immunogenicity and to overcome the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment may sensitize pancreatic cancer to immunotherapy. Targeted therapies represented by PARP and KRAS inhibitors are also under investigation, showing benefits in improving progression-free survival and objective response rate. This review discusses the current treatment modalities and highlights innovative therapies for pancreatic cancer.

The notion that technically resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma presents as localized disease is now known to be inaccurate. Evidence supports that most patients have subclinical systemic dissemination at the time of diagnosis. It is now widely accepted that both a local and systemic component of disease coexist, each requiring treatment of improved survival and potential cure. The advent of multiagent chemotherapy regimens has resulted in a modest improvement in survival. Consequently, this article will emphasize the expanding potential and significance of circulating tumor cells in the prognostication and management of patients with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND:Pancreatic adenocarcinoma located in the pancreatic body might require a portomesenteric venous resection (PVR), but data regarding surgical risks after distal pancreatectomy (DP) with PVR are sparse. Insight into additional surgical risks of DP-PVR could support preoperative counseling and intraoperative decision making. This study aimed to provide insight into the surgical outcome of DP-PVR, including its potential risk elevation over standard DP. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective, multicenter study including all patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma who underwent DP ± PVR (2018-2020), registered in four audits for pancreatic surgery from North America, Germany, Sweden, and The Netherlands. Patients who underwent concomitant arterial and/or multivisceral resection(s) were excluded. Predictors for in-hospital/30-day major morbidity and mortality were investigated by logistic regression, correcting for each audit. RESULTS:Overall, 2924 patients after DP were included, of whom 241 patients (8.2%) underwent DP-PVR. Rates of major morbidity (24% vs. 18%; p = 0.024) and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage grade B/C (10% vs. 3%; p = 0.041) were higher after DP-PVR compared with standard DP. Mortality after DP-PVR and standard DP did not differ significantly (2% vs. 1%; p = 0.542). Predictors for major morbidity were PVR (odds ratio [OR] 1.500, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.086-2.071) and conversion from minimally invasive to open surgery (OR 1.420, 95% CI 1.032-1.970). Predictors for mortality were higher age (OR 1.087, 95% CI 1.045-1.132), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 4.167, 95% CI 1.852-9.374), and conversion from minimally invasive to open surgery (OR 2.919, 95% CI 1.197-7.118), whereas concomitant PVR was not associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS:PVR during DP for pancreatic adenocarcinoma in the pancreatic body is associated with increased morbidity, but can be performed safely in terms of mortality.

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.