Survival benefit of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with non‐metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A propensity matching and intention‐to‐treat analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 120 (6) ◽  
pp. 976-984 ◽  
Author(s):  
Motokazu Sugimoto ◽  
Naoki Takahashi ◽  
Michael B. Farnell ◽  
Thomas C. Smyrk ◽  
Mark J. Truty ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 1986-1996 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanne Lof ◽  
◽  
Maarten Korrel ◽  
Jony van Hilst ◽  
Adnan Alseidi ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Several studies have suggested a survival benefit of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in the pancreatic head. Data concerning NAT for PDAC located in pancreatic body or tail are lacking. Methods Post hoc analysis of an international multicenter retrospective cohort of distal pancreatectomy for PDAC in 34 centers from 11 countries (2007–2015). Patients who underwent resection after NAT were matched (1:1 ratio), using propensity scores based on baseline characteristics, to patients who underwent upfront resection. Median overall survival was compared using the stratified log-rank test. Results Among 1236 patients, 136 (11.0%) received NAT, most frequently FOLFIRINOX (25.7%). In total, 94 patients receiving NAT were matched to 94 patients undergoing upfront resection. NAT was associated with less postoperative major morbidity (Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3a, 10.6% vs. 23.4%, P = 0.020) and pancreatic fistula grade B/C (9.6% vs. 21.3%, P = 0.026). NAT did not improve overall survival [27 (95% CI 14–39) versus 31 months (95% CI 19–42), P = 0.277], as compared with upfront resection. In a sensitivity analysis of 251 patients with radiographic tumor involvement of splenic vessels, NAT (n = 37, 14.7%) was associated with prolonged overall survival [36 (95% CI 18–53) versus 20 months (95% CI 15–24), P = 0.049], as compared with upfront resection. Conclusion In this international multicenter cohort study, NAT for resected PDAC in pancreatic body or tail was associated with less morbidity and pancreatic fistula but similar overall survival in comparison with upfront resection. Prospective studies should confirm a survival benefit of NAT in patients with PDAC and splenic vessel involvement.


2008 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. S77-S78
Author(s):  
A.W. Avolio ◽  
M. Siciliano ◽  
S. Agnes ◽  
A. Gasbarrini ◽  
G. Caracciolo ◽  
...  

Pancreatology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. S20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lena Haeberle ◽  
Anne-Christine Kapp ◽  
Irene Esposito

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 375-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan M Cloyd ◽  
Allan Tsung ◽  
John Hays ◽  
Celia E Wills ◽  
John FP Bridges

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 455-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedikt Kaufmann ◽  
Daniel Hartmann ◽  
Jan G. D’Haese ◽  
Pavel Stupakov ◽  
Dejan Radenkovic ◽  
...  

One of the main reasons for the dismal prognosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is its late diagnosis. At the time of presentation, only approximately 15–20% of all patients with PDAC are considered resectable and around 30% are considered borderline resectable. A surgical approach, which is the only curative option, is limited in borderline resectable patients by local involvement of surrounding structures. In borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC), neoadjuvant treatment regimens have been introduced with the rationale to downstage and downsize the tumor in order to enable resection and eliminate ­microscopic distant metastases. However, there are no official guidelines for the preoperative treatment of BRPC. In the majority of cases, patients are administered ­Gemcitabine-based or FOLFIRINOX-based chemotherapy regimens with or without radiation. Radiologic restaging after neoadjuvant therapy has to be judged with caution when it comes to predict tumor response and resectability, since inflammation induced by neoadjuvant therapy may mimic solid tumor. Patients who do not show any disease progression during neoadjuvant therapy should be offered surgical exploration, since a high percentage is likely to undergo resection with negative margins (R0) and, thus, achieve improved overall survival although imaging judged it unlikely. Despite the promising new approaches of neoadjuvant treatment regimens during the last 2 decades, surgery remains the first choice if the tumor appears to be primary resectable at the time of diagnosis. At present, there are no international guidelines regarding the preoperative treatment of BRPC. Therefore, in order to standardize and adjust neoadjuvant treatment in the future, new guidelines have to be determined on the basis of upcoming prospective randomized studies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document