Novel Considerations in Surgical Management of Individuals with Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

The management of localized pancreatic cancer (PC) has evolved significantly in the last decade, moving away from prioritizing surgery as the primary treatment modality to embracing the need for preoperative (neoadjuvant) multimodality therapy to achieve durable disease-free control. Neoadjuvant therapy is currently recommended for all patients with borderline and locally advanced PC, and is being increasingly utilized in patients with resectable disease as well. When assessing operability the following 3 factors should be considered: clinical stage of disease, response to neoadjuvant therapy, and patient performance status. Patients who demonstrate a response to neoadjuvant therapy may benefit significant from surgical resection.

Radiographic patterns of first disease recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy and surgery for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: More than 70% of patients with localized pancreatic cancer treated with upfront surgery develop disease recurrence. Herein we describe the radiographic patterns and timing of disease recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy and surgery in patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Radiographic patterns of first disease recurrence were examined in patients with localized pancreatic cancer who completed neoadjuvant therapy and surgery. Disease recurrence was classified as local (pancreas, resection bed, or peripancreatic vasculature); regional (peritoneum or abdominal wall); or distant (liver, lung, bone). Progression-free survival was calculated from the date of diagnosis to the date of recurrence. RESULTS: Of 306 consecutive patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, 149 (49%) had resectable pancreatic cancer and 157 (51%) had borderline resectable disease. Neoadjuvant therapy consisted of chemoradiation (32%), chemotherapy (14%), or both therapies (54%). Overall, primary therapy (including preoperative and postoperative therapy) consisted of chemoradiation alone in 29 (9%), chemotherapy alone in 14 (5%), and both therapies in 263 (86%) patients. At a median follow-up of 27 months, 186 (61%) of the 306 patients had recurrent pancreatic cancer. Sites of first recurrence were local-only in 29 (9%), regional-only in 19 (6%), distant-only in 87 (28%), and multisite in 51 (17%). The overall median progression-free survival for all patients was 24 months. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation reduced the odds of local-only recurrence (odds ratio: 0.21; 95% confidence interval: 0.06-0.77; P = .02). CONCLUSION: After neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, 9% of patients were found to have local-only recurrence. Treatment sequencing that incorporates neoadjuvant chemoradiation may improve local disease control.

Value of Pretreatment 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in Patients With Localized Pancreatic Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Therapy.

Background: 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging is not routine in patients with localized pancreatic cancer (PC). We evaluated the prognostic value of PET/CT in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy. Methods: Patients with localized PC underwent pretreatment PET/CT with or without posttreatment (preop) PET/CT. Maximum standardized uptake values (SUV) were classified as high or low based on a cut point of 7.5 at diagnosis (SUVdx) and 3.5 after neoadjuvant therapy (preoperative; SUVpreop). Preop carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) was classified as normal ( ≤ 35 U/mL) or elevated. Results: Pretreatment PET/CT imaging was performed on 201 consecutive patients; SUVdx was high in 98 (49%) and low in 103 (51%). Preop PET/CT was available in 104 (52%) of the 201 patients; SUVpreop was high in 60 (58%) and low in 44 (42%). Following neoadjuvant therapy, preop CA19-9 was normal in 90 (45%) patients and elevated in 111 (55%). Median overall survival (OS) of all patients was 27 months; 33 months for the 103 patients with a low SUVdx and 22 months for the 98 patients with a high SUVdx (p = 0.03). Median OS for patients with low SUVdx/normal preop CA19-9, high SUVdx/normal preop CA19-9, low SUVdx/elevated preop CA19-9, and high SUVdx/elevated preop CA19-9 were 66, 34, 23, and 17 months, respectively (p < 0.0001). OS was 44 months for the 148 (74%) patients who completed all intended neoadjuvant therapy and surgery and 13 months for the 53 (26%) who did not undergo surgery (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Pretreatment PET/CT avidity and preop CA19-9 are clinically significant prognostic markers in patients with PC.

Impact of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation on Pathologic Response in Patients With Localized Pancreatic Cancer.

Introduction/Background: Multimodal neoadjuvant therapy has resulted in increased rates of histologic response in pancreatic tumors and adjacent lymph nodes. The biologic significance of the collective response in the primary tumor and lymph nodes is not understood. Methods: Patients with localized PC who received neoadjuvant therapy and surgery with histologic assessment of the primary tumor and local-regional lymph nodes were included. Histopathologic response was classified using the modified Ryan score as follows: no viable cancer cells (CR), rare groups of cancer cells (nCR), residual cancer with evident tumor regression (PR), and extensive residual cancer with no evident tumor regression (NR). Nodal status was defined by number of lymph nodes (LN) with tumor metastases: N0 (0 LN), N1 (1-3), N2 (≥4). Results: Of 341 patients with localized PC who received neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, 107 (31%) received chemoradiation alone, 44 (13%) received chemotherapy alone, and 190 (56%) received chemotherapy and chemoradiation. Histopathologic response consisted of 15 (4%) CRs, 59 (17%) nCRs, 188 (55%) PRs, and 79 (23%) NRs. Patients who received chemotherapy alone had the worst responses (n = 21 for NR, 48%) as compared to patients who received chemoradiation alone (n = 25 for NR, 24%) or patients who received both therapies (n = 33 for NR, 17%) (Table 1; p = 0.001). Median overall survival for all 341 patients was 39 months; OS by histopathologic subtype was not reached (CR), 49 months (nCR), 38 months (PR), and 34 months (NR), respectively (p = 0.004). Of the 341 patients, 208 (61%) had N0 disease, 97 (28%) had N1 disease, and 36 (11%) had N2 disease. In an adjusted hazards model, modified Ryan score of PR or NR (HR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.15-2.54; p = 0.008) and N1 (HR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.1.02-2.01; p = 0.04), or N2 disease (HR: 2.54, 95% CI: 1.64-3.93; p < 0.001) were associated with increased risk of death. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone is associated with lower rates of pathologic response. Patients with CR or nCR have a significantly improved OS as compared to patients with PR or NR. Nodal status is the most important pathologic prognostic factor. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation may be an important driver of pathologic response.

Importance of Normalization of CA19-9 Levels Following Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients With Localized Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) is a prognostic marker for patients with pancreatic cancer (PC), but its value as a treatment biomarker is unclear. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Although CA19-9 is an established prognostic marker for patients with PC, it is unclear how CA19-9 monitoring should be used to guide multimodality treatment and what level of change in CA19-9 constitutes a meaningful treatment response. METHODS: CA19-9 measurements at diagnosis (pretx), after completion of all planned neoadjuvant therapy (preop), and after surgery (postop) were analyzed in patients with localized PC who had an elevated CA19-9 (≥35 U/dL) at diagnosis. Patients were classified by: 1) quartiles of pretx CA19-9 (Q1-4); 2) proportional changes in CA19-9 (ΔCA19-9) after the completion of neoadjuvant therapy; 3) normalization (CA19-9 <35 U/dL) of preop CA19-9; and 4) normalization of postop CA19-9. RESULTS: Among 131 patients, the median overall survival (OS) was 30 months; 68 months for the 33 patients in Q1 of pretx CA19-9 (<80 U/dL) compared with 25 months for the 98 patients in Q2-4 (P = 0.03). For the 98 patients in Q2-4, preop CA19-9 declined (from pretx) in 86 (88%), but there was no association between the magnitude of ΔCA19-9 and OS (P = 0.77). Median OS of the 98 patients who did (n = 29) or did not (n = 69) normalize their preop CA19-9 were 46 and 23 months, respectively (P = 0.02). Of the 69 patients with an elevated preop CA19-9, 32 (46%) normalized their postop CA19-9. Failure to normalize preop or postop CA19-9 was associated with a 2.77-fold and 4.03-fold increased risk of death, respectively (P < 0.003) as compared with patients with normal preop CA19-9. CONCLUSIONS: Following neoadjuvant therapy, normalization of CA19-9, rather than the magnitude of change, is the strongest prognostic marker for long-term survival.

Survival of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy and surgery.

BACKGROUND: It is difficult to successfully deliver multimodality therapy to patients with operable pancreatic cancer. Data on the natural history of such efforts are necessary for physicians to guide shared decision-making with patients and families. We report the survival of consecutive patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy before surgery. METHODS: Data regarding demographics, neoadjuvant therapy, surgery, pathology, and survival duration were abstracted on consecutive patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer diagnosed between 2009 and 2017 and not treated on available clinical trials. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer was defined based on ≥1 of the following: local tumor anatomy, pretreatment serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 >2,000 U/mL, and the presence of radiographic lesions indeterminate for metastases. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant therapy was delivered to 185 patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer who were not enrolled in competing clinical trials; 13 (7%) patients received chemoradiation, 12 (7%) received chemotherapy, and 160 (86%) received both. Of the 185 patients, 115 (62%) completed all intended neoadjuvant therapy and surgery; 81 (70%) of 115 underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy; and vascular reconstruction was performed in 51 (44%). A margin negative resection was achieved in 111 (97%) of 115 patients, and 83 (72%) were node negative. Median overall survival for all 185 patients was 20 months; 31 months for the 115 patients who completed all neoadjuvant therapy and surgery as compared to 13 months for the 70 patients who were not resected (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: After neoadjuvant therapy, surgical resection was performed in 62% of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Those who normalized preoperative serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 and had node negative pathology achieved the longest survival. To further improve median survival for all patients, we are incorporating adaptive approaches to neoadjuvant therapy sequencing based on objective assessments of response.

Development of a high risk pancreatic screening clinic using 3.0 T MRI.

Selective screening for pancreatic cancer (PC) has been proposed. We describe the establishment of a comprehensive multidisciplinary screening program using 3.0 T MRI. Criteria for screening included the presence of PC in: ≥ 2 first degree relatives (FDR), 1 FDR and 1 s degree relative (SDR), ≥ 3 any degree relatives (ADR), or any known hereditary cancer syndrome with increased PC risk. Imaging with 3.0 T MRI was performed routinely and endoscopic ultrasound was used selectively. Screening was completed in 75 patients (pts). Hereditary cancer syndromes were present in 42 (56%) of the 75 pts: BRCA2 (18), ATM (8), BRCA1 (6), CDKN2A (4), PALB2 (3), Lynch (2), and Peutz-Jeghers (1). A family history of PC was present in ≥ 2 FDR in 12 (16%) pts, 1 FDR and 1 SDR in 5 (7) pts, and ≥ 3 ADR in 16 (21%) pts. Of the 65 pts who received screening MRI, 28 (43%) pts had pancreatic cystic lesions identified, including 1 (1%) patient in whom a cholangiocarcinoma was diagnosed as well. No patient underwent surgical resection. Using a 3.0 T MRI to screen patients at high risk for developing PC identified radiographic abnormalities in 43% of patients, which were stable on subsequent surveillance. Specific guidelines for the frequency of surveillance and indications for surgery remain areas of active investigation as the global experience with high risk screening continues to mature.

Is Adjuvant Therapy Necessary for All Patients with Localized Pancreatic Cancer Who Have Received Neoadjuvant Therapy?

BACKGROUND: Among patients with localized pancreatic cancer (PC), the benefit of adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant therapy and surgery is unknown. METHODS: Patients with localized PC who completed all intended neoadjuvant therapy and surgery were categorized based on the receipt of adjuvant therapy and by pathologic lymph node status (LN-/LN+). RESULTS: Data was available from 234 consecutive patients, 121 (52%) with resectable and 113 (48%) with borderline resectable PC. Of the 234 patients, 92 (39%) were LN+ and 142 (61%) were LN-. The median overall survival (OS) for the 234 patients was 39 months, 42.3 months for patients who received any adjuvant therapy and 34.1 months for those who did not (p = 0.29). Of the 92 LN+ patients, the median OS with and without adjuvant therapy was 29.5 and 23.2 months, respectively (p = 0.02). Of the142 LN- patients, the median OS was 45 months with or without adjuvant therapy (p = 0.86). In an adjusted hazard model, additional adjuvant therapy had a significant protective effect among LN+ patients (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.21-0.70; p = 0.002) but not in LN- patients (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.53-1.52; p = 0.68). CONCLUSION: Among patients with localized PC who received neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, the benefit of adjuvant therapy was limited to those with node-positive disease.

Comparison of adverse events of laser and light-assisted hair removal systems in skin types IV-VI.

Photoepilation, utilizing lasers and noncoherent light sources, is designed to irradiate as much of the follicular unit as possible, with melanin as the target chromophore. Wavelength absorption should generate energy sufficient to heat and destroy the hair follicle, while preserving the surrounding tissue. When performing photoepilation on African-American skin (Fitzpatrick skin types IV-VI) a greater risk of potential epidermal adverse events, such as dyspigmentation, blistering, crusting, edema, and subsequent scarring, is possible. To reduce epidermal melanin absorption of energy longer wavelengths are considered safer for use on Fitzpatrick skin types IV to VI. This article reviews and compares the reported incidences of adverse events in African-American skin, utilizing lasers and noncoherent light sources for assisted hair removal.