Preoperative chemoradiotherapy but not chemotherapy is associated with reduced risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pancreatic fistula remains the leading cause of significant morbidity after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy has been described to reduce the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula, but randomized trials on neoadjuvant treatment in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma focus increasingly on preoperative chemotherapy rather than preoperative chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the impact of preoperative chemotherapy and preoperative chemoradiotherapy on postoperative pancreatic fistula and other pancreatic-specific surgery related complications on a nationwide level. METHODS: All patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were included in the mandatory nationwide prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2020). Baseline and treatment characteristics were compared between immediate surgery, preoperative chemotherapy, and preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The relationship between preoperative chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery grade B/C) was investigated using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Overall, 2,019 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were included, of whom 1,678 underwent immediate surgery (83.1%), 192 (9.5%) received preoperative chemotherapy, and 149 (7.4%) received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in 8.3% of patients after immediate surgery, 4.2% after preoperative chemotherapy, and 2.0% after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (P = .004). In multivariable analysis, the use of preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with reduced risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.69; P = .033) compared with immediate surgery, whereas preoperative chemotherapy was not (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-1.25; P = .199). Intraoperatively hard, or fibrotic pancreatic texture was most frequently observed after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (53% immediate surgery, 62% preoperative chemotherapy, 77% preoperative chemoradiotherapy, P < .001). CONCLUSION: This nationwide analysis demonstrated that in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, only preoperative chemoradiotherapy, but not preoperative chemotherapy, was associated with a reduced risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula.

Impact of Short-Course Palliative Radiation Therapy on Pancreatic Cancer-Related Pain: Prospective Phase 2 Nonrandomized PAINPANC Trial.

PURPOSE: Clinical evidence is limited regarding palliative radiation therapy for relieving pancreatic cancer-related pain. We prospectively investigated pain response after short-course palliative radiation therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe pancreatic cancer-related pain. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this prospective phase 2 single center nonrandomized trial, 30 patients with moderate-to-severe pain (5-10, on a 0-10 scale) of pancreatic cancer refractory to pain medication, were treated with a short-course palliative radiation therapy; 24 Gy in 3 weekly fractions (2015-2018). Primary endpoint was defined as a clinically relevant average decrease of ≥2 points in pain severity, compared with baseline, within 7 weeks after the start of treatment. Secondary endpoint was global quality of life (QoL), with a clinically relevant increase of 5 to 10 points (0-100 scale). Pain severity reduction and QoL were assessed 9 times using the Brief Pain Inventory and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C15-PAL, respectively. Both outcomes were analyzed using joint modeling. In addition, acute toxicity based on clinician reporting and overall survival (OS) were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 29 of 30 patients (96.7%) received palliative radiation therapy. At baseline, the median oral morphine equivalent daily dose was 129.5 mg (range, 20.0-540.0 mg), which decreased to 75.0 mg (range, 15.0-360.0 mg) after radiation (P = .021). Pain decreased on average 3.15 points from baseline to 7 weeks (one-sided P = .045). Patients reported a clinically relevant mean pain severity reduction from 5.9 to 3.8 points (P = .011) during the first 3 weeks, which further decreased to 3.2 until week 11, ending at 3.4 (P = .006) in week 21 after the first radiation therapy fraction. Global QoL significantly improved from 50.5 to 60.8 during the follow-up period (P = .001). Grade 3 acute toxicity occurred in 3 patients and no grade 4 to 5 toxicity was observed. Median OS was 11.8 weeks, with a 13.3% 1-year actuarial OS rate. CONCLUSIONS: Short-course palliative radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer-related pain was associated with rapid, clinically relevant reduction in pain severity, and clinically relevant improvement in global QoL, with mostly mild toxicity.

Enhanced antitumour immunity following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy mediates a favourable prognosis in women with resected pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study investigates sex disparities in clinical outcomes and tumour immune profiles in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who underwent upfront resection or resection preceded by gemcitabine-based neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). METHODS: Patients originated from the PREOPANC randomised controlled trial. Upfront surgery was performed in 82 patients, and 66 received nCRT before resection. The impact of sex on overall survival (OS) was investigated using Cox proportional hazards models. The immunological landscape within the tumour microenvironment (TME) was mapped using transcriptomic and spatial proteomic profiling. RESULTS: The 5-year OS rate differed between the sexes following resection preceded by nCRT, with 43% for women compared with 22% for men. In multivariate analysis, the female sex was a favourable independent prognostic factor for OS only in the nCRT group (HR 0.19; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.52). Multivariate heterogeneous treatment effects analysis revealed a significant interaction between sex and treatment, implying increased nCRT efficacy among women with resected PDAC. The TME of women contained fewer protumoural CD163+MRC1+M2 macrophages than that of men after nCRT, as indicated by transcriptomic and validated using spatial proteomic profiling. CONCLUSION: PDAC tumours of women are more sensitive to gemcitabine-based nCRT, resulting in longer OS after resection compared with men. This may be due to enhanced immunity impeding the infiltration of protumoral M2 macrophages into the TME. Our findings highlight the importance of considering sex disparities and mitigating immunosuppressive macrophage polarisation for personalised PDAC treatment.

Preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgical decision-making in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Surgical resection combined with systemic chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. Upfront surgery is considered suboptimal in cases with extensive vascular involvement, which can be classified as either borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In these patients, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy is currently used as preoperative chemotherapy and is eventually combined with radiotherapy. Thus, more patients might reach 5-year overall survival. Patient selection for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and subsequent surgery is based on anatomical, biological and conditional parameters. Current guidelines and clinical practices vary considerably regarding preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy, response evaluation, and indications for surgery. In this Review, we provide an overview of the clinical evidence regarding disease staging, preoperative therapy, response evaluation and surgery in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, a clinical work-up is proposed based on the available evidence and guidelines. We identify knowledge gaps and outline a proposed research agenda.

Predictive value of baseline serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level on treatment effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer in two randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines suggest that the serum carbohydrate antigen (CA19-9) level should be used when deciding on neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (hereafter referred to as pancreatic cancer). In patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, neoadjuvant therapy is advised when the CA19-9 level is 'markedly elevated'. This study investigated the impact of baseline CA19-9 concentration on the treatment effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis, data were obtained from two RCTs that compared neoadjuvant CRT with upfront surgery in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers. The effect of neoadjuvant treatment on overall survival was compared between patients with a serum CA19-9 level above or below 500 units/ml using the interaction test. RESULTS: Of 296 patients, 179 were eligible for analysis, 90 in the neoadjuvant CRT group and 89 in the upfront surgery group. Neoadjuvant CRT was associated with superior overall survival (HR 0.67, 95 per cent c.i. 0.48 to 0.94; P = 0.019). Among 127 patients (70, 9 per cent) with a low CA19-9 level, median overall survival was 23.5 months with neoadjuvant CRT and 16.3 months with upfront surgery (HR 0.63, 0.42 to 0.93). For 52 patients (29 per cent) with a high CA19-9 level, median overall survival was 15.5 months with neoadjuvant CRT and 12.9 months with upfront surgery (HR 0.82, 0.45 to 1.49). The interaction test for CA19-9 level exceeding 500 units/ml on the treatment effect of neoadjuvant CRT was not significant (P = 0.501). CONCLUSION: Baseline serum CA19-9 level defined as either high or low has prognostic value, but was not associated with the treatment effect of neoadjuvant CRT in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers, in contrast with current guideline advice.

Mapping the location of local and regional recurrences according to breast cancer surgery and radiation therapy: Results from EORTC 22922/10925.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of the extent of surgery and radiation therapy (RT) on the rates and sites of local (LR) and regional recurrences (RR) in the EORTC 22922/10925 trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All data were extracted from the trial's individual patients' case report forms (CRF) and analysed with a median follow-up of 15.7 years. Cumulative incidence curves were produced for LR and RR accounting for competing risks: an exploratory analysis of the effect of the extent of surgical and radiation treatments on LR rate was conducted using the Fine & Gray model accounting for competing risks and adjusted for baseline patient and disease characteristics. The significance level was set at 5%, 2-sided. Frequency tables were used to describe the spatial location of LR and RR. RESULTS: Out of 4004 patients included in the trial, 282 (7%) patients experienced LR and 165 (4.1%) RR, respectively. Cumulative incidence rate of LR at 15 years was lower after mastectomy (3.1%) compared to BCS + RT (7.3%) (F&G: HR (Hazard Ratio) = 0.421, 95%CI = 0.282-0.628, p-value < 0.0001). LR were similar up to 3 years for both mastectomy and BCS but continued to occur at a steady rate for BCS + RT, only. The spatial location of the recurrence was related to the locoregional therapy applied and the absolute gain of RT correlated to stage of disease and extent of surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The extent of locoregional therapies impacts significantly on LR and RR rates and spatial location.

Diagnostic performance of endoscopic tissue acquisition for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the PREOPANC and PREOPANC-2 trials.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has increased, necessitating histopathologic confirmation of cancer. This study evaluates the performance of endoscopic tissue acquisition (TA) procedures for borderline resectable and resectable PDAC. METHODS: Pathology reports of patients included in two nationwide randomized controlled trials (PREOPANC and PREOPANC-2) were reviewed. The primary outcome was sensitivity for malignancy (SFM), considering both "suspicious for" and "malignant" as positive. Secondary outcomes were rate of adequate sampling (RAS) and diagnoses other than PDAC. RESULTS: Overall, 892 endoscopic procedures were performed in 617 patients, including endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided TA in 550 (89.1%), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided brush cytology in 188 (30.5%), and periampullary biopsies in 61 patients (9.9%). The SFM was 85.2% for EUS, 88.2% for repeat EUS, 52.7% for ERCP, and 37.7% for periampullary biopsies. The RAS ranged 94-100%. Diagnoses other than PDAC were other periampullary cancers in 24 (5.4%), premalignant disease in five (1.1%), and pancreatitis in three patients (0.7%). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided TA of patients with borderline resectable and resectable PDAC included in RCTs had an SFM above 85% for both first and repeat procedures, meeting international standards. Two percent had false positive result for malignancy and 5% had other (non-PDAC) periampullary cancers.

Accuracy of abdominal organ motion estimation in radiotherapy using the right hemidiaphragm top as a surrogate during prolonged breath-holds quantified with MRI.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory motion presents a challenge in radiotherapy of thoracic and upper abdominal tumors. Techniques to account for respiratory motion include tracking. Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guided radiotherapy systems, tumors can be tracked continuously. Using conventional linear accelerators, tracking of lung tumors is possible by determining tumor motion on kilo voltage (kV) imaging. But tracking of abdominal tumors with kV imaging is hampered by limited contrast. Therefore, surrogates for the tumor are used. One of the possible surrogates is the diaphragm. However, there is no universal method for establishing the error when using a surrogate and there are particular challenges in establishing such errors during free breathing (FB). Prolonged breath-holding might address these challenges. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to quantify the error when using the right hemidiaphragm top (RHT) as surrogate for abdominal organ motion during prolonged breath-holds (PBH) for possible application in radiation treatments. METHODS: Fifteen healthy volunteers were trained to perform PBHs in two subsequent MRI sessions (PBH-MRI1 and PBH-MRI2). From each MRI acquisition, we selected seven images (dynamics) to determine organ displacement during PBH by using deformable image registration (DIR). On the first dynamic, the RHT, right and left hemidiaphragm, liver, spleen and right and left kidney were segmented. We used the deformation vector fields (DVF), generated by DIR, to determine the displacement of each organ between two dynamics in inferior-superior (IS), anterior-posterior (AP), left-right (LR) direction and we calculated the 3D vector magnitude (|d|). The displacements of the RHT, both hemidiaphragms and the abdominal organs were compared using a linear fit to determine the correlation (R2 of the fit) and the displacement ratio (DR, slope of the fit) between displacements of the RHT and each organ. We quantified the median difference between the DRs of PBH-MRI1 and PBH-MRI2 for each organ. Additionally, we estimated organ displacement in the second PBH by applying the DR from the first PBH to the displacement of the RHT measured during the second PBH. We compared the estimated organ displacement to the measured organ displacement during the second PBH. The difference between the two values was defined as the estimation error of using the RHT as a surrogate and assuming a constant DR over MRI sessions. RESULTS: The linear relationships were confirmed by the high R2 values of the linear fit between the displacements of the RHT and the abdominal organs (R2 > 0.96) in the IS and AP direction and |d|, and high to moderate correlations in the LR direction (0.93 > R2 > 0.64). The median DR difference between PBH-MRI1 and PBH-MRI2 varied between 0.13 and 0.31 for all organs. The median estimation error of the RHT as a surrogate varied between 0.4 and 0.8 mm/min for all organs. CONCLUSION: The RHT could serve as an accurate surrogate for abdominal organ motion during radiation treatments, for example, in tracking, provided the error of the RHT as motion surrogate is taken into account in the margins. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NL7603).

Radiotherapy or Surgery of the Axilla After a Positive Sentinel Node in Breast Cancer: 10-Year Results of the Randomized Controlled EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS Trial.

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10981-22023 AMAROS trial evaluated axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) versus axillary radiotherapy (ART) in patients with cT1-2, node-negative breast cancer and a positive sentinel node (SN) biopsy. At 5 years, both modalities showed excellent and comparable axillary control, with significantly less morbidity after ART. We now report the preplanned 10-year analysis of the axillary recurrence rate (ARR), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS), and an updated 5-year analysis of morbidity and quality of life. METHODS: In this open-label multicenter phase III noninferiority trial, 4,806 patients underwent SN biopsy; 1,425 were node-positive and randomly assigned to either ALND (n = 744) or ART (n = 681). RESULTS: Per intention-to-treat analysis, 10-year ARR cumulative incidence was 0.93% (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.68; seven events) after ALND and 1.82% (95% CI, 0.74 to 2.94; 11 events) after ART (hazard ratio [HR], 1.71; 95% CI, 0.67 to 4.39). There were no differences in OS (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.52) or DFS (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.46). ALND was associated with a higher lymphedema rate in updated 5-year analyses (24.5% v 11.9%; P < .001). Quality-of-life scales did not differ by treatment through 5 years. Exploratory analysis showed a 10-year cumulative incidence of second primary cancers of 12.1% (95% CI, 9.6 to 14.9) after ART and 8.3% (95% CI, 6.3 to 10.7) after ALND. CONCLUSION: This 10-year analysis confirms a low ARR after both ART and ALND with no difference in OS, DFS, and locoregional control. Considering less arm morbidity, ART is preferred over ALND for patients with SN-positive cT1-2 breast cancer.

The yield of staging laparoscopy for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer in the PREOPANC randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The necessity of the staging laparoscopy in patients with pancreatic cancer is still debated. The objective of this study was to assess the yield of staging laparoscopy for detecting occult metastases in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. METHOD: This was a post-hoc analysis of the randomized controlled PREOPANC trial in which patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were randomized between preoperative chemoradiotherapy or immediate surgery. Patients assigned to preoperative treatment underwent a staging laparoscopy prior to preoperative treatment according to protocol, to avoid unnecessary chemoradiotherapy in patients with occult metastatic disease. RESULTS: Of the 246 included patients, 7 did not undergo surgery. A staging laparoscopy was performed in 133 patients (55.6%) and explorative laparotomy in 106 patients (44.4%). At staging laparoscopy, occult metastases were detected in 13 patients (9.8%); 12 liver metastases and 1 peritoneal metastasis. At direct explorative laparotomy, occult metastases were found in 9 patients (8.5%); 6 with liver metastases, 1 with peritoneal metastases, and 2 with metastases at multiple sites. One patient had peritoneal metastases at exploration after a negative staging laparoscopy. Patients with occult metastases were more likely to receive palliative chemotherapy if found with staging laparoscopy compared to laparotomy (76.9% vs. 30.0%, p = 0.040). CONCLUSIONS: Staging laparoscopy detected occult metastases in about 10% of patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. These patients were more likely to receive palliative systemic chemotherapy compared to patients in whom occult metastases were detected with laparotomy. A staging laparoscopy is recommended before planned resection.

Comparison of the clinical performance of a hybrid Alba 4D and the AMC-4 locoregional hyperthermia systems.

OBJECTIVE: The in-house developed 70 MHz AMC-4 locoregional hyperthermia system has been in clinical use since 1984. This device was recently commercialized as the Alba 4D (Medlogix®, Rome, Italy), with a similar geometrical 4-waveguide design. At the time of this study a hybrid Alba 4D was installed at our center, which incorporated elements of the AMC-4. This study aims to compare clinical performance of both devices. METHODS: During one year after clinical acceptance of the hybrid Alba 4D, both devices were used for treatment delivery in patients scheduled for locoregional hyperthermia. Each patient started with the AMC-4, next sessions were allocated to either device. Possible differences between Alba 4D and AMC-4 sessions in power, achieved temperature T0, T10, T50, T90, T100, treatment time and complaints per session, were evaluated using linear mixed models (LMMs) for repeated measures with patient as random effect. RESULTS: From March 2018 to April 2019, eleven patients with cervical, pancreatic, vaginal carcinoma and uterine leiomyosarcoma received 27 locoregional hyperthermia sessions with the Alba 4D and 34 sessions with the AMC-4. Median number of sessions per patient was 5 (range 3-13). Treatment results for both devices were not significantly different: T50 was 40.5 ± 1.0 °C vs. 40.8 ± 0.7 °C, applied power was 500 ± 79 W vs. 526 ± 108 W, for the Alba 4D vs. AMC-4, respectively. CONCLUSION: Results of the first patients treated with the hybrid Alba 4D demonstrated comparable clinical performance of the Alba 4D and AMC-4 locoregional hyperthermia systems, and both devices are expected to yield similar favorable clinical results.

Consensus Statement on Mandatory Measurements for Pancreatic Cancer Trials for Patients With Resectable or Borderline Resectable Disease (COMM-PACT-RB): A Systematic Review and Delphi Consensus Statement.

Importance: Pancreatic cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death; however, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of survival in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer lack mandatory measures for reporting baseline and prognostic factors, which hampers comparisons between outcome measures. Objective: To develop a consensus on baseline and prognostic factors to be used as mandatory measurements in RCTs of resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Evidence Review: We performed a systematic literature search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, and Embase for RCTs on resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with overall survival as the primary outcome. We produced a systematic summary of all baseline and prognostic factors identified in the RCTs. A Delphi panel that included 13 experts was surveyed to reach a consensus on mandatory and recommended baseline and prognostic factors. Findings: The 42 RCTs that met inclusion criteria reported a total of 60 baseline and 19 prognostic factors. After 2 Delphi rounds, agreement was reached on 50 mandatory baseline and 20 mandatory prognostic factors for future RCTs, with a distinction between studies of neoadjuvant vs adjuvant treatment. Conclusion and Relevance: This findings of this systematic review and international expert consensus have produced this Consensus Statement on Mandatory Measurements in Pancreatic Cancer Trials for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Disease (COMM-PACT-RB). The baseline and prognostic factors comprising the mandatory measures will facilitate better comparison across RCTs and eventually will enable improved clinical practice among patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

A randomized phase-II study of reirradiation and hyperthermia versus reirradiation and hyperthermia plus chemotherapy for locally recurrent breast cancer in previously irradiated area.

BACKGROUND: In patients with inoperable local regional recurrences of breast cancer in previously irradiated areas, local control is difficult to maintain and treatment options are limited. The Dutch standard treatment for such recurrences is reirradiation combined with hyperthermia. Apart from enhancing the effect of reirradiation, hyperthermia is also known to improve local effects of chemotherapy like cisplatin. This randomized phase-II trial compares reirradiation and hyperthermia versus the same treatment combined with cisplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From December 2010 up to January 2019, 49 patients were randomized, 27 in the standard arm and 22 in the combined arm. A total of 32 Gy was given in eight fractions of 4 Gy in 4 weeks, at two fractions per week. After January 2015, the radiation schedule was changed to 46 Gy in 23 fractions of 2 Gy, at five fractions per week. Hyperthermia was added once a week after radiotherapy. The combined arm was treated with four cycles of weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m2. RESULTS: Complete response rate was 60.9% in the standard arm and 61.1% in the combined arm (p = 0.87). Partial response rate was 30.4% in the standard arm and 33.3% in the combined arm (p = 0.79). One-year overall survival was 63.4% in the standard arm and 57.4% in the combined arm. One-year local progression-free interval was 81.5% in the standard arm and 88.1% in the combined arm (p = 0.95). Twenty-five percentage of patients in the standard arm experienced grade 3 or 4 acute toxicity and 29% of patients in the combined arm (p = 0.79). CONCLUSION: No potential benefit could be detected of adding cisplatin to reirradiation and hyperthermia in patients with recurrent breast cancer in a previously irradiated area. With or without cisplatin, most patients had subsequent local control until last follow-up or death.

Post-operative re-irradiation with hyperthermia in locoregional breast cancer recurrence: Temperature matters.

PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of hyperthermia thermal dose (TD) on locoregional control (LRC), overall survival (OS) and toxicity in locoregional recurrent breast cancer patients treated with postoperative re-irradiation and hyperthermia. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 112 women with resected locoregional recurrent breast cancer treated in 2010-2017 with postoperative re-irradiation 8frx4Gy (n = 34) or 23frx2Gy (n = 78), combined with 4-5 weekly hyperthermia sessions guided by invasive thermometry, were subdivided into 'low' (n = 56) and 'high' TD (n = 56) groups by the best session with highest median cumulative equivalent minutes at 43 °C (Best CEM43T50) < 7.2 min and ≥7.2 min, respectively. Actuarial LRC, OS and late toxicity incidence were analyzed. Backward multivariable Cox regression and inverse probability weighting (IPW) analysis were performed. RESULTS: TD subgroups showed no significant differences in patient/treatment characteristics. Median follow-up was 43 months (range 1-107 months). High vs. low TD was associated with LRC (p = 0.0013), but not with OS (p = 0.29) or late toxicity (p = 0.58). Three-year LRC was 74.0% vs. 92.3% in the low and high TD group, respectively (p = 0.008). After three years, 25.0% and 0.9% of the patients had late toxicity grade 3 and 4, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed that distant metastasis (HR 17.6; 95%CI 5.2-60.2), lymph node involvement (HR 2.9; 95%CI 1.2-7.2), recurrence site (chest wall vs. breast; HR 4.6; 95%CI 1.8-11.6) and TD (low vs. high; HR 4.1; 95%CI 1.4-11.5) were associated with LRC. TD was associated with LRC in IPW analysis (p = 0.0018). CONCLUSIONS: High thermal dose (best CEM43T50 ≥ 7.2 min) was associated with significantly higher LRC for patients with locoregional recurrent breast cancer treated with postoperative re-irradiation and hyperthermia, without augmenting toxicity.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Versus Upfront Surgery for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Long-Term Results of the Dutch Randomized PREOPANC Trial.

PURPOSE: The benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial. Initial results of the PREOPANC trial failed to demonstrate a statistically significant overall survival (OS) benefit. The long-term results are reported. METHODS: In this multicenter, phase III trial, patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or upfront surgery in 16 Dutch centers. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy consisted of three cycles of gemcitabine combined with 36 Gy radiotherapy in 15 fractions during the second cycle. After restaging, patients underwent surgery followed by four cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine. Patients in the upfront surgery group underwent surgery followed by six cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine. The primary outcome was OS by intention-to-treat. No safety data were collected beyond the initial report of the trial. RESULTS: Between April 24, 2013, and July 25, 2017, 246 eligible patients were randomly assigned to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (n = 119) and upfront surgery (n = 127). At a median follow-up of 59 months, the OS was better in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group than in the upfront surgery group (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.96; P = .025). Although the difference in median survival was only 1.4 months (15.7 months v 14.3 months), the 5-year OS rate was 20.5% (95% CI, 14.2 to 29.8) with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 6.5% (95% CI, 3.1 to 13.7) with upfront surgery. The effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was consistent across the prespecified subgroups, including resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant gemcitabine improves OS compared with upfront surgery and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

External Validity of the Multicenter Randomized PREOPANC Trial on Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer: Outcome of Eligible but Nonrandomized Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the accrual proportion and patients' reasons for not participating in the PREOPANC trial on neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and to compare these patients' outcomes with those of patients who had been randomized in the trial. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The external validity of multicenter randomized trials in cancer treatment has been criticized for suboptimal non-representative inclusion. In trials, it is unclear how outcomes compare between randomized and nonrandomized patients. METHODS: At 8 of 16 participant centers, this multicenter observational study identified validation patients, who had been eligible but not randomized during recruitment for the PREOPANC trial. We assessed the accrual proportion, investigated their most common reasons for not participating in the trial, and compared resection rates, radical (R0) resection rates, and overall survival between the validation patients and PREOPANC patients, who had been randomized in the trial to immediate surgery. RESULTS: In total, 455 patients had been eligible during the recruitment period, 151 of whom (33%) had been randomized. Fifty-five percent of the 304 validation patients had refused to participate. Median overall survival in the validation group was 15.2 months, against 15.5 months in the PREOPANC group (P = 1.00). The respective resection rates (76% vs 73%) and R0 resection rates (51% vs 46%) did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The PREOPANC trial included a reasonable percentage of 33% of eligible patients. In terms of the outcomes survival, resection rate, and R0 resection rate, this appeared to be a representative group.

Neoadjuvant therapy or upfront surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant therapy may improve survival compared with upfront surgery in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, but high-quality evidence is lacking. METHODS: We systematically searched for randomised trials comparing neoadjuvant therapy with upfront surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer published since database inception until December 2020. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) by intention-to-treat with subgroup analyses for resectability status. Meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Seven trials with 938 patients were included. All trials included a neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemo(radio)therapy arm. None of the studies used adjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Neoadjuvant therapy improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52-0.85; P = 0.001; I2 = 46%) compared with upfront surgery. This represents an increase in median OS from 19 to 29 months. In the subgroup of resectable pancreatic cancer (i.e., venous contact ≤180°, no arterial contact), no statistically significant difference in OS was observed (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.53-1.12; P = 0.18; I2 = 20%). In the subgroup of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (i.e. venous contact >180°, any arterial contact), neoadjuvant therapy improved OS (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.85; P = 0.004; I2 = 59%). The GRADE certainty of evidence was high for the outcome of OS. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant therapy improves OS compared with upfront surgery in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. More evidence is required on whether neoadjuvant therapy improves survival for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.

Surgical Complications in a Multicenter Randomized Trial Comparing Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy and Immediate Surgery in Patients With Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer (PREOPANC Trial).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on surgical complications in patients after pancreatic resection for (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is increasingly used in patients with (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer. concerns have been raised about the potential harmful effect of any preoperative therapy on the surgical complication rate after pancreatic resection. METHODS: An observational analysis was performed within the multicenter randomized controlled PREOPANC trial (April 2013-July 2017). The trial randomly assigned (1:1) patients to preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and the remaining adjuvant chemotherapy or to immediate surgery, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. The main analysis consisted of a per-protocol approach. The endpoints of the present analyses were the rate of postoperative complications. RESULTS: This study included 246 patients from 16 centers, of whom 66 patients underwent resection after preoperative therapy and 98 patients after immediate surgery. No differences were found regarding major complications (37.9% vs 30.6%, P=0.400), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (9.1% vs 5.1%, P=0.352), delayed gastric emptying (21.2% vs 22.4%, P=0.930), bile leakage (4.5% vs 3.1%, P=0.686), intra-abdominal infections (12.1% vs 10.2%, P=0.800), and mortality (3.0% vs 4.1%, P=1.000). There was a significant lower incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula in patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy (0% vs 9.2%, P=0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy did not increase the incidence of surgical complications or mortality and reduced the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula after resection in patients with (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer.

Evaluating differences in respiratory motion estimates during radiotherapy: a single planning 4DMRI versus daily 4DMRI.

BACKGROUND: In radiotherapy, respiratory-induced tumor motion is typically measured using a single four-dimensional computed tomography acquisition (4DCT). Irregular breathing leads to inaccurate motion estimates, potentially resulting in undertreatment of the tumor and unnecessary dose to healthy tissue. The aim of the research was to determine if a daily pre-treatment 4DMRI-strategy led to a significantly improved motion estimate compared to single planning 4DMRI (with or without outlier rejection). METHODS: 4DMRI data sets from 10 healthy volunteers were acquired. The first acquisition simulated a planning MRI, the respiratory motion estimate (constructed from the respiratory signal, i.e. the 1D navigator) was compared to the respiratory signal in the subsequent scans (simulating 5-29 treatment fractions). The same procedure was performed using the first acquisition of each day as an estimate for the subsequent acquisitions that day (2 per day, 4-20 per volunteer), simulating a daily MRI strategy. This was done for three outlier strategies: no outlier rejection (NoOR); excluding 5% of the respiratory signal whilst minimizing the range (Min95) and excluding the datapoints outside the mean end-inhalation and end-exhalation positions (MeanIE). RESULTS: The planning MRI median motion estimates were 27 mm for NoOR, 18 mm for Min95, and 13 mm for MeanIE. The daily MRI median motion estimates were 29 mm for NoOR, 19 mm for Min95 and 15 mm for MeanIE. The percentage of time outside the motion estimate were for the planning MRI: 2%, 10% and 32% for NoOR, Min95 and MeanIE respectively. These values were reduced with the daily MRI strategy: 0%, 6% and 17%. Applying Min95 accounted for a 30% decrease in motion estimate compared to NoOR. CONCLUSION: A daily MRI improved the estimation of respiratory motion as compared to a single 4D (planning) MRI significantly. Combining the Min95 technique with a daily 4DMRI resulted in a decrease of inclusion time of 6% with a 30% decrease of motion. Outlier rejection alone on a planning MRI often led to underestimation of the movement and could potentially lead to an underdosage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: protocol W15_373#16.007.