Faculty Bibliography

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a leading cause of cancer deaths in the US. Although early detection improves survival, the rarity of the disease has rendered population screening a difficult approach. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To develop and validate a parsimonious, interpretable, and generalizable model predicting incident PDAC-termed PRIME (PDAC Risk Model for Earlier Detection)-using routinely available electronic health record (EHR) data. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:This cohort study used the Optum Labs Data Warehouse, a longitudinal, deidentified US EHR and claims database. Adults 40 years or older with an outpatient clinical encounter between 2016 and 2018 were included. Participants from 23 health systems (n = 4 859 833) comprised the training cohort; 31 additional systems (n = 5 619 091) served as validation. International validation was conducted in the UK Biobank (n = 498 754). Data analysis occurred July 2025 to January 2026. EXPOSURES/UNASSIGNED:Demographics, diagnosis codes, and routinely measured laboratory values were evaluated. Elastic-net regularization with 10-fold cross-validation selected the predictor set. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:Incident PDAC was identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions (ICD-9/10) codes. Model performance was assessed using time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) and calibration metrics. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Overall, the study included more than 11 million adults (2.1% Asian individuals, 8.4% Black individuals, 4.3% Hispanic/Latino individuals, 82.7% White individuals, and 2.4% other race/ethnicity by EHR reporting). In the training cohort (mean [SD] age, 60.4 [11] years), 14 405 individuals were diagnosed with PDAC (incidence 55 per 100 000 person-years) over a mean (SD) of 5.4 (2.5) years; in the validation cohort, 11 693 individuals were diagnosed with PDAC (54 per 100 000 person-years) over a mean (SD) of 3.9 (2.5) years. PRIME retained 19 predictors including history of pancreatitis, gastrointestinal disorders, prior cancers, type 2 diabetes, elevated aspartate aminotransferase levels, smoking, non-type-O blood, and male sex. Discrimination was strong at the 36-month time horizon (AUC = 0.75 in both the training and validation cohorts) with good calibration. In the validation cohort, patients in the top 1% of predicted risk had substantially higher PDAC risk (HR, 7.63; 95% CI, 6.85-8.49) compared with average-risk patients. In the UK Biobank, PRIME achieved a 36-month AUC of 0.71 with good calibration. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:In this validation cohort study, PRIME was a transparent EHR-based model that effectively stratified PDAC risk across diverse US health systems and generalized internationally. Prospective studies should evaluate for EHR-guided PDAC case-finding and integration with blood-based early-detection assays.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with extensive peripancreatic vessel involvement is classified as locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). For this group of patients, the current standard of care does not include considering a potentially curative oncologic resection. However, recent advances in multiagent chemotherapy and surgical techniques are challenging this paradigm. Moreover, the current determination of anatomic resectability is vague and unreliable. Here we propose a definition of local resectability, based on pre- and intra-operative assessment. This anatomic definition of resectability assumes careful patient selection based on tumor biology and patient condition. The pre-operative evaluation of vascular anatomy and tumor involvement is conducted using 3D-rendering of pancreas-protocol computed tomography. Identifying a disease-free arterial or venous segment above and below the tumor involvement ("suitable target") is the single critical factor that determines anatomic resectability. Intraoperative isolation of these target vessels confirms the feasibility of vascular reconstruction before resection. This approach, which focuses on identifying target vessels rather than circumferential involvement, offers a more straightforward and clinically relevant method for assessing surgical eligibility in LAPC patients at centers of excellence. In summary, reconstructability-based on surgical expertise and guided by tumor biology-now defines the modern paradigm of resectability in LAPC.

BACKGROUND:The 2024 Kyoto guidelines for the management of intraductal mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) build on previous guidelines that consider worrisome features (WF) and high-risk stigmata (HRS) to recommend surveillance or resection. These new guidelines have not yet been validated. METHODS:Patients undergoing pancreatectomy for an IPMN at an academic medical center between 2012 and 2023 were included. IPMNs were categorized as low-grade dysplasia (LGD), high-grade dysplasia (HGD), or invasive carcinoma (IC). Preoperative imaging was used to determine HRS and WF in accordance with the 2024 Kyoto guidelines. We compared IPMNs with LGD to those with HGD or IC using univariate analyses and evaluated logistic regression models with c-statistics. RESULTS:Of 211 patients, 84 (40%) had LGD, 49 (23%) had HGD, and 78 (37%) had IC. Among HRS, obstructive jaundice (p = 0.004), pancreatic duct ≥ 10 mm (p < 0.001), and suspicious or positive cytology (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with HGD/IC. An increasing number of HRS were associated with higher rates of HGD/IC. Among WFs, an abrupt change in the caliber of pancreatic duct with distal pancreatic atrophy (p = 0.001) and cystic growth ≥ 2.5 mm/year (p = 0.033) were significantly associated with higher rates of HGD/IC. Increasing numbers of WFs were also associated with higher rates of HGD/IC. The 2024 Kyoto model showed improved discrimination (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.849) compared with the 2017 Fukuoka model (AUC=0.780, p = 0.06). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The risk of HGD/IC in IPMNs increased in a stepwise fashion as the number of WFs increased. The 2024 guidelines represent an advancement over the 2017 guidelines, notably with the inclusion of suspicious cytology as an HRS.

BACKGROUND:Pancreatic cancer is a challenging malignancy with an aggressive biology and limited treatment options, contributing to low survival rates. Supportive and palliative care play a key role in improving the quality of life and psychological distress for patients and their families. However, appropriate delivery and effectiveness of these interventions may be influenced by social determinants of health (SDOH). These factors create significant barriers for patients, influencing their access to care and ability to make informed decisions. This review explores the role of SDOH in supportive and palliative care of pancreatic cancer patients and identifies areas for improvement to enhance this type of care for vulnerable populations. METHODS:A thorough narrative review was carried out to evaluate the influence of social determinants of health on supportive and palliative care in the management of pancreatic cancer, focusing on symptom management, psychosocial support, nutritional support, advance care planning, rehabilitation, functional support, and care coordination. RESULTS:This review demonstrates that disparities exist. Black and Asian patients receive less pain medications; those with lower level of education struggle to access psychological support; Hispanic and Black patients often do not receive needed nutritional care; and end-of-life planning is less common among non-White and less-educated patients. CONCLUSIONS:SDOH significantly affects the experience and delivery of supportive and palliative care in pancreatic cancer patients, exacerbating inequities across multiple domains of care. Addressing these disparities requires coordinated efforts at clinical, organizational, and policy levels to ensure equitable access to care for all patients in their final phase of life. Integrating attention to SODH into care delivery models can improve outcomes and enhance quality of life for these patients.

This manuscript describes the evolution in the operative management of pancreatic cancer. Early attempts at pancreatic resection were met with daunting peri‑operative outcomes but were fine-tuned to yield today's established pancreatic resections. Advances in medical therapy, including neo-adjuvant therapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancers and refined adjuvant regimens, have improved oncologic outcomes and are allowing surgeons to move beyond current anatomic distinctions of resectability. Venous, hepatic artery and celiac axis resection during pancreatectomy are now common vascular operations at specialty centers which have been associated with favorable oncologic outcomes. Recent efforts are addressing locally advanced pancreatic cancer with superior mesenteric artery and/or multivessel involvement using either arterial divestment or arterial resection and reconstruction. An additional consideration in the treatment of pancreatic cancer is the benefit and risks of neoadjuvant radiation in locally advanced cases which has been avoided thus far given concerns regarding the effect of radiation on the vasculature. Therefore, with these improvements in peri‑operative therapy and robust preoperative planning often with the aid of vascular and microvascular surgeons, several centers have been exploring new frontiers in the operative management of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND:Antithrombotic therapy (AT) aims to strike a balance between preventing thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications. However, evidence for AT management after pancreatectomy with vascular reconstruction is lacking. We aimed to provide an overview of the current use of AT for pancreatic surgery with vascular reconstructions. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:A web-based survey was distributed to 123 surgeons from high-volume pancreas centers (>50 pancreatic resections/year). AT management after different types of vascular reconstruction were investigated. An "aggressive" protocol was defined as the use of any AT protocol other than prophylactic heparin, aspirin, or their combination. RESULTS:The survey was completed by 80 surgeons (59% Europe, 30% USA, 11% Asia). In Europe/Asia, prophylactic heparin was the most commonly reported protocol after partial venous resection/end-to-end anastomosis/human graft (71%/65%/50%, respectively), and an "aggressive" protocol (86%) was the most frequently used after prosthetic graft reconstruction. Conversely, in the USA, prophylactic heparin + aspirin was the most commonly reported protocol after all types of venous reconstruction. Following arterial reconstruction, heparin + aspirin was the most commonly reported protocol, regardless of region. An "aggressive" protocol was more frequently used in Europe/Asia (odds ratio (OR) 1.28; p < 0.001) and following vein reconstruction with either human graft (OR 1.2; p = 0.007) or prosthetic graft (OR 1.56, p <0.001), while ultrasound (OR 1.65; p < 0.001) and arterial reconstruction (OR 1.64; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with antiplatelet use. CONCLUSIONS:In an international cohort of high-volume pancreas surgeons, significant variation in the use of AT following pancreatectomy with vascular reconstruction was observed. This variation was driven by geographical differences and the type of vascular reconstructions performed. In an international cohort of high-volume pancreas surgeons, this Worldwide Snapshot Survey analyzed the current use of antithrombotic therapy for pancreatic surgery with vascular reconstruction. A significant heterogeneity in antithrombotic practice was found and it was mainly driven by geographical differences and the type of vascular reconstructions performed.

With a rising annual incidence, pancreatic cancer is now the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality in American men and women [...].

BACKGROUND:The parasympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system has shown tumor-suppressive effects in preclinical models of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) by inhibiting cancer stem cells and suppressing inflammatory cytokine production. Based on these findings, we hypothesized that bethanechol, an FDA-approved parasympathomimetic agent targeting muscarinic receptors, could enhance treatment efficacy in PDAC. METHODS:We conducted a Phase 0/window of opportunity study evaluating short term parasympathetic activation with fixed dose bethanechol (100 mg twice daily) in subjects with resectable or borderline resectable PDAC prior to surgery. The primary endpoint was change in cell proliferation by Ki-67 expression compared to stage matched controls. Secondary endpoints included tissue expression of stem cell markers (CD44), infiltrating immune cells (CD8a, Granzyme B, and CD68), and changes in circulating inflammatory cytokine concentrations. RESULTS:Seventeen patients were enrolled with 13 eligible for analysis of endpoints. Median age was 74 (59-86), 6 female (46%), all ECOG 0-1 and median duration of treatment was 8 days (7-13). R0 resections were achieved in 9 patients (69%). There was no difference in Ki67 and CD44 tissue biomarkers between bethanechol-treated and control samples. Decreased numbers of Granzyme B-expressing cells were seen in bethanechol-treated tissues. Bethanechol treatment was associated with suppression of circulating IL-18. The most common treatment related adverse events (TRAE) were hot flashes (30.7%), urinary frequency (15.4%), increased salivation (15.4%), hyperhidrosis (7.7%), and nausea (7.7%). There were no Grade 3 or higher adverse effects. No surgical complications were attributed to bethanechol treatment. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Bethanechol 100 mg twice daily is well tolerated in patients with PDAC in this small phase 0/window of opportunity study (NCT03572283). Bethanechol treatment was associated with decreased Granzyme B positive cells and decreased circulating IL-18 consistent with an anti-inflammatory role for parasympathetic muscarinic signaling in PDAC.