Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Strahlenther Onkol ; 197(1): 8-18, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32914237

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy is the standard in patients with initially nonmetastatic unresectable pancreatic cancer. Additional surgery is in discussion. The CONKO-007 multicenter randomized trial examines the value of radiotherapy. Our interim analysis showed a significant effect of surgery, which may be relevant to clinical practice. METHODS: One hundred eighty patients received induction chemotherapy (gemcitabine or FOLFIRINOX). Patients without tumor progression were randomized to either chemotherapy alone or to concurrent chemoradiotherapy. At the end of therapy, a panel of five independent pancreatic surgeons judged the resectability of the tumor. RESULTS: Following induction chemotherapy, 126/180 patients (70.0%) were randomized to further treatment. Following study treatment, 36/126 patients (28.5%) underwent surgery; (R0: 25/126 [19.8%]; R1/R2/Rx [n = 11/126; 6.1%]). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly better for patients with R0 resected tumors (median DFS and OS: 16.6 months and 26.5 months, respectively) than for nonoperated patients (median DFS and OS: 11.9 months and 16.5 months, respectively; p = 0.003). In the 25 patients with R0 resected tumors before treatment, only 6/113 (5.3%) of the recommendations of the panel surgeons recommended R0 resectability, compared with 17/48 (35.4%) after treatment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Tumor resectability of pancreatic cancer staged as unresectable at primary diagnosis should be reassessed after neoadjuvant treatment. The patient should undergo surgery if a resectability is reached, as this significantly improves their prognosis.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/surgery , Chemoradiotherapy , Pancreatectomy/methods , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/mortality , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/therapy , Deoxycytidine/administration & dosage , Deoxycytidine/analogs & derivatives , Disease-Free Survival , Fluorouracil/administration & dosage , Humans , Irinotecan/administration & dosage , Leucovorin/administration & dosage , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Oxaliplatin/administration & dosage , Pancreatic Neoplasms/mortality , Pancreatic Neoplasms/therapy , Postoperative Complications , Radiotherapy, Conformal , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated , Survival Analysis , Gemcitabine
2.
BMC Cancer ; 19(1): 979, 2019 Oct 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31640628

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: One critical step in the therapy of patients with localized pancreatic cancer is the determination of local resectability. The decision between primary surgery versus upfront local or systemic cancer therapy seems especially to differ between pancreatic cancer centers. In our cohort study, we analyzed the independent judgement of resectability of five experienced high volume pancreatic surgeons in 200 consecutive patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Pretherapeutic CT or MRI scans of 200 consecutive patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer were evaluated by 5 independent pancreatic surgeons. Resectability and the degree of abutment of the tumor to the venous and arterial structures adjacent to the pancreas were reported. Interrater reliability and dispersion indices were compared. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-four CT scans and 6 MRI scans were evaluated and all parameters were evaluated by all surgeons in 133 (66.5%) cases. Low agreement was observed for tumor infiltration of venous structures (κ = 0.265 and κ = 0.285) while good agreement was achieved for the abutment of the tumor to arterial structures (interrater reliability celiac trunk κ = 0.708 P < 0.001). In patients with vascular tumor contact indicating locally advanced disease, surgeons highly agreed on unresectability, but in patients with vascular tumor abutment consistent with borderline resectable disease, the judgement of resectability was less uniform (dispersion index locally advanced vs. borderline resectable p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Excellent agreement between surgeons exists in determining the presence of arterial abutment and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The determination of resectability in borderline resectable patients is influenced by additional subjective factors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT:2009-014476-21 (2013-02-22) and NCT01827553 (2013-04-09).


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/surgery , Consensus , Pancreatectomy , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/diagnostic imaging , Germany , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Prospective Studies , Surgeons/psychology , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...