The Value of Biological and Conditional Factors for Staging of Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Cancer Undergoing Upfront Resection: A Nationwide Analysis.

Biological factors Conditional factors Pancreatic cancer Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Journal

Annals of surgical oncology

ISSN: 1534-4681

Titre abrégé: Ann Surg Oncol

Pays: United States

ID NLM: 9420840

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 Feb 2024

Historique:

received: 30 08 2023

accepted: 31 01 2024

medline: 22 2 2024

pubmed: 22 2 2024

entrez: 22 2 2024

Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Novel definitions suggest that resectability status for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) should be assessed beyond anatomical criteria, considering both biological and conditional factors. This has, however, yet to be validated on a nationwide scale. This study evaluated the prognostic value of biological and conditional factors for staging of patients with resectable PDAC. A nationwide observational cohort study was performed, including all consecutive patients who underwent upfront resection of National Comprehensive Cancer Network resectable PDAC in the Netherlands (2014-2019) with complete information on preoperative carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. PDAC was considered biologically unfavorable (R Overall, 688 patients were analyzed with a median overall survival (OS) of 20 months (95% CI 19-23). OS was 14 months (95% CI 10 months-median not reached) in 20 R Survival after upfront resection of anatomically resectable PDAC is worse in patients with CA19-9 ≥ 500 U/mL, while performance status had no impact. This supports consideration of CA19-9 in preoperative staging of resectable PDAC.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND

PATIENTS AND METHODS METHODS

A nationwide observational cohort study was performed, including all consecutive patients who underwent upfront resection of National Comprehensive Cancer Network resectable PDAC in the Netherlands (2014-2019) with complete information on preoperative carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. PDAC was considered biologically unfavorable (R

RESULTS RESULTS

Overall, 688 patients were analyzed with a median overall survival (OS) of 20 months (95% CI 19-23). OS was 14 months (95% CI 10 months-median not reached) in 20 R

CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS

Survival after upfront resection of anatomically resectable PDAC is worse in patients with CA19-9 ≥ 500 U/mL, while performance status had no impact. This supports consideration of CA19-9 in preoperative staging of resectable PDAC.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15070-w PMID: 38386198

pubmed: 38386198

doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-15070-w

pii: 10.1245/s10434-024-15070-w

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Informations de copyright

Références

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020;70(1):7–30.

doi: 10.3322/caac.21590 pubmed: 31912902

Conroy T, Hammel P, Hebbar M, et al. Canadian Cancer Trials Group and the Unicancer-GI–PRODIGE Group. FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine as adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(25):2395-2406.

Neoptolemos JP, Palmer DH, Ghaneh P, et al. Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2017;389:1011–24.

doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32409-6 pubmed: 28129987

Latenstein AEJ, van der Geest LGM, Bonsing BA, et al. Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. Nationwide trends in incidence, treatment and survival of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Eur J Cancer. 2020;125:83-93.

Versteijne E, Suker M, Groothuis K, et al. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: results of the dutch randomized phase III PREOPANC trial. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(16):1763–73.

doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02274 pubmed: 32105518 pmcid: 8265386

Versteijne E, van Dam JL, Suker M, et al. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus upfront surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: long-term results of the dutch randomized PREOPANC trial. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(11):1220–30.

doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.02233 pubmed: 35084987

Mokdad AA, Minter RM, Zhu H, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy followed by resection versus upfront resection for resectable pancreatic cancer: a propensity score matched analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(5):515–22.

doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.5081 pubmed: 27621388

Cloyd JM, Heh V, Pawlik TM, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Med. 2020;9(4):1129.

doi: 10.3390/jcm9041129 pubmed: 32326559 pmcid: 7231310

Janssen QP, van Dam JL, Bonsing BA, et al. Total neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-2 trial): study protocol for a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer. 2021;21(1):300. Published 2021 Mar 23.

Ghanem I, Lora D, Herradón N, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials [published online ahead of print, 2022 May 14]. ESMO Open. 2022;7(3):100485.

Motoi F, Kosuge T, Ueno H, et al. Randomized phase II/III trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer (Prep-02/JSAP05). Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2019;49(2):190–4.

doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyy190 pubmed: 30608598

National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma (Version 1.2020). https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/pancreatic.pdf . [Accessed December 1, 2023]

Ducreux M, Cuhna AS, Caramella C, et al. Cancer of the pancreas: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(Suppl 5):v56-68.

doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv295 pubmed: 26314780

Federatie Medische Specialisten. Richtlijn Pancreascarcinoom 2019. Available via: https://richtlijnendatabase.nl/richtlijn/pancreascarcinoom/startpagina.html [Accessed August 30, 2023].

Bergquist JR, Puig CA, Shubert CR, et al. Carbohydrate Antigen 19–9 Elevation in anatomically resectable, early stage pancreatic cancer is independently associated with decreased overall survival and an indication for neoadjuvant therapy: a national cancer database study. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;223(1):52–65.

doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.02.009 pubmed: 27049786

Daamen LA, Dorland G, Brada LJH, et al. Preoperative predictors for early and very early disease recurrence in patients undergoing resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. HPB (Oxford). 2022;24(4):535–46.

doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.09.004 pubmed: 34642090

Tas F, Sen F, Odabas H, Kılıc L, Keskın S, Yıldız I. Performance status of patients is the major prognostic factor at all stages of pancreatic cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2013;18(5):839–46.

doi: 10.1007/s10147-012-0474-9 pubmed: 22996141

Katz MH, Pisters PW, Evans DB, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: the importance of this emerging stage of disease. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206(5):833–48.

doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.12.020 pubmed: 18471707 pmcid: 5901743

Isaji S, Mizuno S, Windsor JA, et al. International consensus on definition and criteria of borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma 2017. Pancreatology. 2018;18(1):2–11.

doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2017.11.011 pubmed: 29191513

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.

van Rijssen LB, Koerkamp BG, Zwart MJ, et al. Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. Nationwide prospective audit of pancreatic surgery: design, accuracy, and outcomes of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. HPB (Oxford). 2017 Oct;19(10):919-926.

Donders AR, van der Heijden GJ, Stijnen T, Moons KG. Review: a gentle introduction to imputation of missing values. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(10):1087–91.

doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.01.014 pubmed: 16980149

Hartwig W, Strobel O, Hinz U, et al. CA19-9 in potentially resectable pancreatic cancer: perspective to adjust surgical and perioperative therapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(7):2188–96. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2809-1 .

doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2809-1 pubmed: 23247983

La Greca G, Sofia M, Lombardo R, et al. Adjusting CA19-9 values to predict malignancy in obstructive jaundice: influence of bilirubin and C-reactive protein. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18(31):4150–5.

doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i31.4150 pubmed: 22919247 pmcid: 3422795

Anger F, Lock JF, Klein I, et al. Does concurrent cholestasis alter the prognostic value of preoperatively elevated CA19-9 serum levels in patients with pancreatic head adenocarcinoma? Ann Surg Oncol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-12460-w .

Tempero, Margaret A., et al. Relationship of carbohydrate antigen 19-9 and Lewis antigens in pancreatic cancer. Cancer Research 47.20 (1987): 5501-5503.

Scarà S, Bottoni P, Scatena R. CA 19–9: Biochemical and Clinical Aspects. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2015;867:247–60.

doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-7215-0_15 pubmed: 26530370

Tzeng CW, Fleming JB, Lee JE, et al. Defined clinical classifications are associated with outcome of patients with anatomically resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant therapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(6):2045–53. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-2211-4 .

doi: 10.1245/s10434-011-2211-4 pubmed: 22258816

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma. https://www.mdanderson.org/for-physicians/clinical-tools-resources/clinical-practice-algorithms/cancer-treatment-algorithms.html [Accessed March 22, 2022)

Moons KG, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, Grobbee DE, Altman DG. Prognosis and prognostic research: what, why, and how? Brit Med J. 2009;338:b375.

doi: 10.1136/bmj.b375 pubmed: 19237405

Kato Y, Yamada S, Tashiro M, et al. Biological and conditional factors should be included when defining criteria for resectability for patients with pancreatic cancer. HPB (Oxford). 2019;21(9):1211–8.

doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.01.012 pubmed: 30773450

Hayasaki A, Isaji S, Kishiwada M, et al. Survival analysis in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma undergoing chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery according to the international consensus on the 2017 definition of borderline resectable cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2018;10(3):65.

doi: 10.3390/cancers10030065 pubmed: 29510561 pmcid: 5876640

Lee B, Yoon YS, Kang M, et al. Validation of the anatomical and biological definitions of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer according to the 2017 international consensus for survival and recurrence in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma undergoing upfront surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2023;30(6):3444–54. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-13043-5 .

doi: 10.1245/s10434-022-13043-5 pubmed: 36695994

Anger F, Döring A, van Dam J, et al. Impact of borderline resectability in pancreatic head cancer on patient survival: biology matters according to the new International Consensus Criteria. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28(4):2325–36. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09100-6 .

doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-09100-6 pubmed: 32920720

Medrano J, Garnier J, Ewald J, et al. Patient outcome according to the 2017 international consensus on the definition of borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Pancreatology. 2020;20(2):223–8.

doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2019.12.001 pubmed: 31839458

Humphris JL, Chang DK, Johns AL, et al. The prognostic and predictive value of serum CA19.9 in pancreatic cancer. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(7):1713-1722.

Takahashi H, Yamada D, Asukai K, et al. Clinical implications of the serum CA19-9 level in “biological borderline resectability” and “biological downstaging” in the setting of preoperative chemoradiation therapy for pancreatic cancer. Pancreatology. 2020;20(5):919–28.

doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2020.05.020 pubmed: 32563596

Tzeng CW, Katz MH, Fleming JB, et al. Morbidity and mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with borderline resectable type C clinical classification. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18(1):146–56.

doi: 10.1007/s11605-013-2371-6 pubmed: 24129825

Shi H, Wei Y, Cheng S, et al. Survival prediction after upfront surgery in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: radiomic, clinic-pathologic and body composition analysis. Pancreatology. 2021;21(4):731–7.

doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2021.02.009 pubmed: 33678581

van der Kroft G, Wee L, Rensen SS, et al. Identifying radiomics signatures in body composition imaging for the prediction of outcome following pancreatic cancer resection. Front Oncol. 2023;13:1062937. Published 2023 Aug 10.

Henry AC, Schouten TJ, Daamen LA, et al. Short- and long-term outcomes of pancreatic cancer resection for elderly patients: a nationwide analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022;29(9):6031–42. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11831-7 .

doi: 10.1245/s10434-022-11831-7 pubmed: 35653069 pmcid: 9356963

Khorana AA, Mangu PB, Berlin J, et al. Potentially curable pancreatic cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(21):2541–56.

doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.67.5553 pubmed: 27247221

van Dam JL, Janssen QP, Besselink MG, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy or upfront surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Eur J Cancer. 2022;160:140–9.

doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.10.023 pubmed: 34838371

Allen VB, Gurusamy KS, Takwoingi Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;7:CD009323

Ta R, O’Connor DB, Sulistijo A, et al. The role of staging laparoscopy in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Surg. 2019;36:251–60.

doi: 10.1159/000488372 pubmed: 29649825