Neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer
ABSTRACT Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. Surgical resection offers the only hope of cure, though the addition of chemoradiation in the adjuvant setting has been shown to improve survival over surgery alone. Many patients are unable to receive adjuvant therapy due to prolonged postoperative recovery. For this reason, administration of chemoradiation preoperatively (neoadjuvant) has been proposed as an alternative to postoperative treatment. In patients with resectable disease, neoadjuvant therapy results in similar survivals compared to postoperative therapy, with a greater proportion of patients able to complete treatment. For selected patients with borderline or unresectable disease, neoadjuvant therapy offers the potential for tumor downstaging and increasing the likelihood of a margin-negative resection. This article reviews the use of neoadjuvant therapy in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.
- SourceAvailable from: Peter Muscarella[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma discuss the diagnosis and management of adenocarcinomas of the exocrine pancreas and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize major discussion points from the 2014 NCCN Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Panel meeting. The panel discussion focused mainly on the management of borderline resectable and locally advanced disease. In particular, the panel discussed the definition of borderline resectable disease, role of neoadjuvant therapy in borderline disease, role of chemoradiation in locally advanced disease, and potential role of newer, more active chemotherapy regimens in both settings.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network: JNCCN 08/2014; 12(8):1083-93. · 4.24 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In patients with pancreatic cancer treated with curative resection, we evaluated the effect of clinicopathologic parameters on early distant metastasis within 6 months (DM6m) to identify patients who might benefit from surgery. The study involved 84 patients with pancreatic cancer who had undergone curative resection between August 2001 and April 2009. The parameters of gender, age, tumor size, histologic differentiation, T classification, N classification, pre- and postoperative carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 level, resection margin, and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy were analyzed to identify the risk factors associated with DM6m. Of the 84 patients, locoregional recurrence developed in 35 (41.7%) and distant metastasis in 58 (69%). Of the 58 patients with distant metastasis, DM6m had developed in 27 (46.6%). Multivariate analysis showed that preoperative CA 19-9 level was significantly associated with DM6m (p<.05). Of all 84 patients, DM6m was observed in 9.1%, 50%, and 80% of those with a preoperative CA 19-9 level of ≤100 U/mL, 101-400 U/mL, and >400 U/mL, respectively (p<.001). The preoperative CA 19-9 level might be a useful predictor of DM6m and to identify those who would benefit from surgical resection.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 12/2010; 81(5):e743-8. DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.10.011 · 4.18 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To evaluate serum CA19-9 alterations during preoperative gemcitabine-based chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for resectable pancreatic cancer (PC) in the earlier identification of patients who are likely to benefit from subsequent resection. One of the advantages of the preoperative CRT strategy for patients with advanced PC is that undetectable systemic disease may be revealed during preoperative CRT, thus avoiding unnecessary surgery. Serum CA19-9 has been evaluated as a predictive indicator of the treatment efficacy and outcome in various clinical settings. We retrospectively reviewed 64 consecutive patients with resectable PC (at diagnosis) who received preoperative CRT at our hospital between 2002 and 2008. Patients were divided into 2 groups (efficacy grouping) to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative CRT according to the clinical course. Group A included patients who were unable to receive the subsequent resection due to the development of unresectable factors during preoperative CRT and those who received the subsequent resection but developed recurrent disease within 6 months after surgery; group B included patients who received the subsequent resection and survived without recurrences for more than 6 months after surgery. We developed a new classification utilizing pretreatment CA19-9 and proportional alteration of CA19-9 2 months after the initiation of treatment. The categories were defined as: I (increased), MD (modestly decreased), and SD (substantially decreased). Clinicopathological variables and CA19-9 alteration status were correlated with the efficacy grouping and overall survival. All of the category I patients were included in group A, 93.5% of the category SD patients in group B, and approximately half of the category MD patients in group A. CA19-9 alteration status was a single independent variable associated with efficacy grouping and overall patient survival, with the 1-year survival rate of category I patients, and the 4-year survival rate of category MD and SD patients being 22.2%, 34.1%, and 58.9%, respectively. CA19-9 alteration status is useful in identifying those who will benefit from the preoperative CRT and subsequent resection and those who will not; it was a significant predictor for patient prognosis in the setting of the preoperative CRT strategy for resectable PC.Annals of surgery 03/2010; 251(3):461-9. DOI:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181cc90a3 · 7.19 Impact Factor