Article

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy generates a significant tumor response in resectable pancreatic cancer without increasing morbidity: results of a prospective phase II trial.

Swiss HPB-Center, Department of Surgery and Institute of Surgical Pathology, Zurich, Switzerland.
Annals of surgery (Impact Factor: 7.19). 01/2009; 248(6):1014-22. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318190a6da
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To evaluate the morbidity of pancreaticoduodenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable pancreatic cancer and to assess its histologic and metabolic response.
Adjuvant chemotherapy improves the outcome of pancreatic cancer, but 25% of patients remain unfit after surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be offered to all patients in a multimodality approach, but its efficacy and surgical morbidity are unknown.
Patients with resectable, cytologically proven adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head received 4 bi-weekly cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2)) and cisplatin (50 mg/m(2)) in this prospective phase II trial. Staging and restaging included chest x-ray, abdominal computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography (PET)/CT, endoscopic ultrasound, and laparoscopy. Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake was quantified by the standard-uptake value (SUV) on baseline and restaging PET/CT. Immunohistochemistry for GLUT-1 and Ki-67 was performed. The histologic response, cytopathic effects, and surgical complications were graded by respective scores.
Twenty-four of 28 patients had resection for histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma. The surgical morbidity was low without perioperative death and one pancreatic fistula. Histologic response was documented in 54% and cytopathic effects in 83% of the patients. A significant SUV decrease occurred during chemotherapy (P = 0.031), which correlated with the baseline SUV (P = 0.001), Ki-67 expression (P = 0.016), and histologic response (P = 0.01). Neither the metabolic nor the histologic response was predictive of the median disease-free (9.2 months) or overall survival (26.5 months).
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy induced a significant metabolic and histologic response, which was best predicted by PET. Most importantly, surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer was safe.

Full-text

Available from: Thomas Hany, May 22, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
98 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment of pancreatic cancer is increasingly multimodal, with patients receiving chemotherapy, radiation, and surgical extirpation in hope of long-term cure. There is ongoing debate over the timing, sequence, and necessity of these treatments as they pertain to the spectrum of local-regional disease. Current guidelines support a neoadjuvant strategy in patients with locally advanced and borderline resectable disease. Although there is currently no high-level evidence to recommend neoadjuvant therapy for all patients, there are data to suggest that wider application of neoadjuvant therapy may be beneficial. Random-assignment prospective trials are ongoing. In this review we examine the literature addressing a neoadjuvant approach to potentially resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer and highlight the outcomes of preoperative emergence of latent metastatic disease, attempted resection rates, margin negative resection rates, and pathologic response to treatment. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Seminars in Oncology 02/2015; 42(1):86-97. DOI:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2014.12.008 · 3.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An increasing number of studies investigate the use of neoadjuvant treatment for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. While a strong rationale supports this approach, study results are difficult to interpret and compare due to marked variance in multiple aspects of study design and performance. Divergence in pathology examination and reporting as a cause for heterogeneity and incomparability of study results has not been brought into this discussion yet, despite the fact that several key outcome measures for neoadjuvant treatment are pathology-based. This article discusses areas of controversy and difficulty regarding the evaluation of the extent of residual tumour tissue, grading of tumour regression and assessment of the margins, and explains the important clinical implications of the present uncertainty and divergence in pathology practice.
    Cancer Treatment Reviews 11/2014; 41(1). DOI:10.1016/j.ctrv.2014.11.002 · 6.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in the industrialized world. Despite progress in the understanding of the molecular and genetic basis of this disease, the 5-year survival rate has remained low and usually does not exceed 5%. Only 20%-25% of patients present with potentially resectable disease and surgery represents the only chance for a cure. After decades of gemcitabine hegemony and limited therapeutic options, more active chemotherapies are emerging in advanced PDAC, like 5-Fluorouracil, folinic acid, irinotecan and oxaliplatin and nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, that have profoundly impacted therapeutic possibilities. PDAC is considered a systemic disease because of the high rate of relapse after curative surgery in patients with resectable disease at diagnosis. Neoadjuvant strategies in resectable, borderline resectable, or locally advanced pancreatic cancer may improve outcomes. Incorporation of tissue biomarker testing and imaging techniques into preoperative strategies should allow clinicians to identify patients who may ultimately achieve curative benefit from surgery. This review summarizes current knowledge of adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment for PDAC and discusses the rationale for moving from adjuvant to preoperative and perioperative therapeutic strategies in the current era of more active chemotherapies and personalized medicine. We also discuss the integration of good specimen collection, tissue biomarkers, and imaging tools into newly designed preoperative and perioperative strategies.