BackgroundNeoadjuvant treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has increased, necessitating histopathologic confirmation of cancer. This study evaluates the performance of endoscopic... Show moreBackgroundNeoadjuvant 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.MethodsPathology 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.ResultsOverall, 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%).ConclusionsEUS-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. Show less
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... Show moreBackground 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. Show less
BackgroundSurgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic... Show moreBackgroundSurgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The main concern regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is that only half of patients actually receive adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the other hand, guarantees early systemic treatment and may increase chemotherapy use and thereby improve overall survival. Furthermore, it may prevent futile surgery in patients with rapidly progressive disease. However, some argue that neoadjuvant therapy delays surgery, which could lead to progression towards unresectable disease and thus offset the potential benefits. Comparison of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) with (only) adjuvant administration of mFOLFIRINOX in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to determine the optimal approach.MethodsThis multicenter, phase 3, RCT will include 378 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients are recruited from 20 Dutch centers and three centers in Norway and Sweden. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial contact and & LE; 90 degrees venous contact. Patients in the intervention arm are scheduled for 8 cycles of neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (2-week cycle of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), leucovorin 400 mg/m(2), irinotecan 150 mg/m(2) at day 1, followed by 46 h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 g/m(2)). Patients in the comparator arm start with surgery followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX. The primary outcome is overall survival by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, resection rate, quality of life, adverse events, and surgical complications. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after the inclusion of 378 patients in 36 months, with analysis planned 18 months after the last patient has been randomized.DiscussionThe multicenter PREOPANC-3 trial compares perioperative mFOLFIRINOX with adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. Show less
In two RCTs, comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with upfront surgery in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers, CRT was associated with better survival.... Show moreIn two RCTs, comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with upfront surgery in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers, CRT was associated with better survival. There was no difference in treatment effect between patients with a baseline CA19-9 level higher or lower than 500 units/ml, meaning that neoadjuvant CRT should not be withheld because of a low CA19-9 concentration.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. Show less
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... Show moreBackground: 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 che-moradiotherapy 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 (4 4.4%). 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 1/4 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.(c) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
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... Show moreObjectives: 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. Show less
Objectives: To investigate the effect of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on surgical complications in patients after pancreatic resection for (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer. Summary of... Show moreObjectives: 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. Show less
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... Show morePURPOSE: 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. Show less
PURPOSEThe benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial. Initial results of the PREOPANC trial failed to demonstrate a... Show morePURPOSEThe 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.METHODSIn 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.RESULTSBetween 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.CONCLUSIONNeoadjuvant 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. Show less
Bakker, A.; Valverde, C.P.T.; Tienhoven, G. van; Kolff, M.W.; Kok, H.P.; Slotman, B.J.; ... ; Crezee, H. 2022
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... Show morePurpose: 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 degrees 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. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Show less
Introduction: Whereas neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy is increasingly used in pancreatic cancer, it is currently not recommended for other periampullary (non-pancreatic) cancers. This has important... Show moreIntroduction: Whereas neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy is increasingly used in pancreatic cancer, it is currently not recommended for other periampullary (non-pancreatic) cancers. This has important implications for the relevance of the preoperative diagnosis for pancreatoduodenectomy. This retrospective multicentre cohort study aimed to determine the frequency of clinically relevant misdiagnoses in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or other periampullary cancer. Methods: Data from all consecutive patients who underwent a pancreatoduodenectomy between 2014 and 2018 were obtained from the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. The preoperative diagnosis as concluded by the multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting was compared with the final postoperative diagnosis at pathology to determine the rate of clinically relevant misdiagnosis (defined as missed pancreatic cancer or incorrect diagnosis of pancreatic cancer). Results: In total, 1244 patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy of whom 203 (16%) had a clinically relevant misdiagnosis preoperatively. Of all patients with a final diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, 13% (87/ 679) were preoperatively misdiagnosed as distal cholangiocarcinoma (n = 41, 6.0%), ampullary cancer (n = 27, 4.0%) duodenal cancer (n = 16, 2.4%), or other (n = 3, 0.4%). Of all patients with a final diagnosis of periampullary (non-pancreatic) cancer, 21% (116/565) were preoperatively incorrectly diagnosed as pancreatic cancer. Accuracy of preoperative diagnosis was 84% for pancreatic cancer, 71% for distal cholangiocarcinoma, 73% for ampullary cancer and 73% for duodenal cancer. A prediction model for the preoperative likelihood of pancreatic cancer (versus other periampullary cancer) prior to pancreatoduodenectomy demonstrated an AUC of 0.88. Discussion: This retrospective multicentre cohort study showed that 16% of patients have a clinically relevant misdiagnosis that could result in either missing the opportunity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer or inappropriate administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer. A preoperative prediction model is available on www.pancreascalculator.com. (c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Show less
Background Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over upfront surgery in patients with localized pancreatic cancer; more patients receive systemic treatment, fewer patients undergo... Show moreBackground Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over upfront surgery in patients with localized pancreatic cancer; more patients receive systemic treatment, fewer patients undergo futile surgery, and R0 resection rates are higher, thereby possibly improving overall survival (OS). Two recent randomized trials have suggested benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over upfront surgery, both including single-agent chemotherapy regimens. Potentially, the multi-agent FOLFIRINOX regimen (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) may further improve outcomes in the neoadjuvant setting for localized pancreatic cancer, but randomized studies are needed. The PREOPANC-2 trial investigates whether neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX improves OS compared with neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients.MethodsThis nationwide multicenter phase III randomized controlled trial includes patients with pathologically confirmed resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with a WHO performance score of 0 or 1. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial and <= 90 degrees venous involvement; borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as <= 90 degrees arterial and <= 270 degrees venous involvement without occlusion. Patients receive 8cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy followed by surgery without adjuvant treatment (arm A), or 3cycles of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with hypofractionated radiotherapy (36Gy in 15 fractions) during the second cycle, followed by surgery and 4cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (arm B). The primary endpoint is OS by intention-to-treat. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, quality of life, resection rate, and R0 resection rate. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after inclusion of 368 eligible patients assuming an accrual period of 3years and 1.5years follow-up.DiscussionThe PREOPANC-2 trial directly compares two neoadjuvant regimens for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our study will provide evidence on the neoadjuvant treatment of choice for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.Trial registrationPrimary registry and trial identifying number: EudraCT: 2017-002036-17.Date of registration: March 6, 2018.Secondary identifying numbers: The Netherlands National Trial Register - NL7094, NL61961.078.17, MEC-2018-004. Show less
BACKGROUNDPreoperative biliary drainage in patients with presumed resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) is hypothesized to promote the occurrence of seeding metastases. Seeding metastases... Show moreBACKGROUNDPreoperative biliary drainage in patients with presumed resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) is hypothesized to promote the occurrence of seeding metastases. Seeding metastases can occur at the surgical scars or at the site of postoperative drains, and in case of percutaneous biliary drainage, at the catheter port-site. To prevent seeding metastases after resection, we routinely treated PHC patients with preoperative radiotherapy (RT) for over 25 years until January 2018.AIMTo investigate the incidence of seeding metastases following resection of PHC.METHODSAll patients who underwent resection for pathology proven PHC between January 2000 and March 2019 were included in this retrospective study. Between 2000-January 2018, patients received preoperative RT (3 x 3.5 Gray). RT was omitted in patients treated after January 2018.RESULTSA total of 171 patients underwent resection for PHC between January 2000 and March 2019. Of 171 patients undergoing resection, 111 patients (65%) were treated with preoperative RT. Intraoperative bile cytology showed no difference in the presence of viable tumor cells in bile of patients undergoing preoperative RT or not. Overall, two patients (1.2%) with seeding metastases were identified, both in the laparotomy scar and both after preoperative RT (one patient with endoscopic and the other with percutaneous and endoscopic biliary drainage).CONCLUSIONThe incidence of seeding metastases in patients with resected PHC in our series was low (1.2%). This low incidence and the inability of providing evidence that preoperative low-dose RT prevents seeding metastases, has led us to discontinue preoperative RT in patients with resectable PHC in our center. Show less
Bakker, A.; Zweije, R.; Tienhoven, G. van; Kok, H.P.; Sijbrands, J.; Bongard, H.J.G.D. van den; ... ; Crezee, H. 2020
Temperature measurement during superficial hyperthermia is limited by poor spatial resolution. We investigated two sheets to improve temperature monitoring of the skin surface. Two different sheets... Show moreTemperature measurement during superficial hyperthermia is limited by poor spatial resolution. We investigated two sheets to improve temperature monitoring of the skin surface. Two different sheets were studied with a grid of temperature sensors with one sensor per similar to 5 cm(2). The first was a matrix of multisensor thermocouple probes laced through a silicone sheet. The second sheet had rows of thermistors connected by meandering copper leads mounted on stretchable printed circuit board (SPCB). Accuracy, temperature resolution and two hour stability of both sheets were investigated. Furthermore, we determined the ability to follow body contours, thermal conduction errors and electromagnetic (EM) compatibility to clinically used 434 and 915 MHz hyperthermia applicators. For both sheets the accuracy (<= 0.2 degrees C), temperature resolution (<= 0.03 degrees C) and stability (<= 0.01 degrees C hr(-1)) were adequate for clinical use. Thermal conduction errors ranged from 5.25-11.25 mm vs. 2.15 mm for the thermocouple probe and thermistor, respectively. Both sheets could follow body contours, where the ratio air/water bolus surface was <5%. When aligned perpendicularly to the EM field the meandering copper tracks used on the SPCB did induce self-heating, while the thermocouple probes did not. Self-heating had a linear relationship with the angle of the leads with respect to the EM field direction for both sensors at both frequencies. Self-heating of the thermistor was similar for both frequencies, while it was circa two-fold higher for 915 vs. 434 MHz for the thermocouple. The use of SPCB technology for skin surface monitoring was promising. However, suppressing self-heating induced by the horseshoe shaped copper tracks needed for stretchability of the SPCB requires more in-depth investigation. The thermocouple matrix was the most promising for clinical application, meeting 6/7 of the major requirements for skin surface temperature monitoring when positioned perpendicular to the EM field. Show less
PURPOSE Preoperative chemoradiotherapy may improve the radical resection rate for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, but the overall benefit is unproven.PATIENTS AND METHODS In... Show morePURPOSE Preoperative chemoradiotherapy may improve the radical resection rate for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, but the overall benefit is unproven.PATIENTS AND METHODS In this randomized phase III trial in 16 centers, patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned to receive preoperative chemoradiotherapy, which consisted of 3 courses of gemcitabine, the second combined with 15 x 2.4 Gy radiotherapy, followed by surgery and 4 courses of adjuvant gemcitabine or to immediate surgery and 6 courses of adjuvant gemcitabine. The primary end point was overall survival by intention to treat.RESULTS Between April 2013 and July 2017, 246 eligible patients were randomly assigned; 119 were assigned to preoperative chemoradiotherapy and 127 to immediate surgery. Median overall survival by intention to treat was 16.0 months with preoperative chemoradiotherapy and 14.3 months with immediate surgery (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.05; P = .096). The resection rate was 61% and 72% (P = .058). The R0 resection rate was 71% (51 of 72) in patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy and 40% (37 of 92) in patients assigned to immediate surgery (P < .001). Preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with significantly better disease-free survival and locoregional failure-free interval as well as with significantly lower rates of pathologic lymph nodes, perineural invasion, and venous invasion. Survival analysis of patients who underwent tumor resection and started adjuvant chemotherapy showed improved survival with preoperative chemoradiotherapy (35.2 v 19.8 months; P = .029). The proportion of patients who suffered serious adverse events was 52% versus 41% (P = .096).CONCLUSION Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer did not show a significant overall survival benefit. Although the outcomes of the secondary end points and predefined subgroup analyses suggest an advantage of the neoadjuvant approach, additional evidence is required. Show less
Background: In recent years, new treatment options have become available for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) including 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin. The impact... Show moreBackground: In recent years, new treatment options have become available for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) including 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin. The impact hereof has not been assessed in nationwide cohort studies. This population-based study aimed to investigate nationwide trends in incidence, treatment and survival of PDAC.Materials and methods: Patients with PDAC (1997-2016) were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Results were categorised by treatment and by period of diagnosis (1997-2000, 2001-2004, 2005-2008, 2009-2012 and 2013-2016). Kaplane-Meier survival analysis was used to calculate overall survival.Results: In a national cohort of 36,453 patients with PDAC, the incidence increased from 12.1 (1997-2000) to 15.3 (2013-2016) per 100,000 (p < 0.001), whereas median overall survival increased from 3.1 to 3.8 months (p < 0.001). Over time, the resection rate doubled (8.3% -16.6%, p-trend<0.001), more patients received adjuvant chemotherapy (3.0%-56.2%, p-trend<0.001) and 3-year overall survival following resection increased (16.9%-25.4%, p < 0.001). Over time, the proportion of patients with metastatic disease who received palliative chemotherapy increased from 5.3% to 16.1% (p-trend<0.001), whereas 1-year survival improved from 13.3% to 21.2% (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients who only received supportive care decreased from 84% to 61% (p-trend<0.001).Conclusion: The incidence of PDAC increased in the past two decades. Resection rates and use of adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy increased with improved survival in these patients. In all patients with PDAC, however, the survival benefit of 3 weeks is negligible because the majority of patients only received supportive care. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Objective: Unmet health care needs require additional care resources to achieve optimal patient well-being. In this nationwide study we examined associations between a number of risk factors and... Show moreObjective: Unmet health care needs require additional care resources to achieve optimal patient well-being. In this nationwide study we examined associations between a number of risk factors and unmet needs after treatment among women with breast cancer, while taking into account their health care practices. We expected that more care use would be associated with lower levels of unmet needs. Methods: A multicenter, prospective, observational design was employed. Women with primary breast cancer completed questionnaires 6 and 15 months post-diagnosis. Medical data were retrieved from medical records. Direct and indirect associations between sociodemographic and clinical risk factors, distress, care use, and unmet needs were investigated with structural equation modeling. Results: Seven hundred forty-six participants completed both questionnaires (response rate 73.7%). The care services received were not negatively associated with the reported levels of unmet needs after treatment. Comorbidity was associated with higher physical and daily living needs. Higher age was associated with higher health system-related and informational needs. Having had chemotherapy and a mastectomy were associated with higher sexuality needs and breast cancer-specific issues, respectively. A higher level of distress was associated with higher levels of unmet need in all domains. Conclusions: Clinicians may use these results to timely identify which women are at risk of developing specific unmet needs after treatment. Evidence-based, cost-effective (online) interventions that target distress, the most influential risk factor, should be further implemented and disseminated among patients and clinicians. Show less
Bakker, A.; Zee, J. van der; Tienhoven, G. van; Kok, H.P.; Rasch, C.R.N.; Crezee, H. 2019
Objective: Hyperthermia therapy (HT), heating tumors to 40?45??C, is a known radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy sensitizer. The additional benefit of HT to RT for recurrent breast cancer has been... Show moreObjective: Hyperthermia therapy (HT), heating tumors to 40?45??C, is a known radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy sensitizer. The additional benefit of HT to RT for recurrent breast cancer has been proven in multiple randomized trials. However, published outcome after RT?+?HT varies widely. We performed a systematic review to investigate whether there is a relationship between achieved HT dose and clinical outcome and thermal toxicity for patients with recurrent breast cancer treated with RT?+?HT. Method: Four databases, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane library and clinicaltrials.gov, were searched with the terms breast, radiotherapy, hyperthermia therapy and their synonyms. Final search was performed on 3 April 2019. Twenty-two articles were included in the systematic review, reporting on 2330 patients with breast cancer treated with RT?+?HT. Results: Thirty-two HT parameters were tested for a relationship with clinical outcome. In studies reporting a relationship, the relationship was significant for complete response in 10/15 studies, in 10/13 studies for duration of local control, in 2/2 studies for overall survival and in 7/11 studies for thermal toxicity. Patients who received high thermal dose had on average 34% (range 27%?53%) more complete responses than patients who received low thermal dose. Patients who achieved higher HT parameters had increased odds/probability on improved clinical outcome and on thermal toxicity. Conclusion: Temperature and thermal dose during HT had significant influence on complete response, duration of local control, overall survival and thermal toxicity of patients with recurrent breast cancer treated with RT?+?HT. Higher temperature and thermal dose improved outcome, while higher maximum temperature increased incidence of thermal toxicity. Show less
