Abstract/Text: INTRODUCTION: There are little data available regarding compliance with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. We investigated variation in the management of pancreatic cancer (PC) among large hospitals in California, USA, specifically to evaluate whether compliance with NCCN guidelines correlates with patient outcomes.
METHODS: The California Cancer Registry was used to identify patients treated for PC from 2001 to 2006. Only hospitals with ≥ 400 beds were included to limit evaluation to centres possessing resources to provide multimodality care (n= 50). Risk-adjusted multivariable models evaluated predictors of adherence to stage-specific NCCN guidelines for PC and mortality.
RESULTS: In all, 3706 patients were treated for PC in large hospitals during the study period. Compliance with NCCN guidelines was only 34.5%. Patients were less likely to get recommended therapy with advanced age and low socioeconomic status (SES). Using multilevel analysis, controlling for patient factors (including demographics and comorbidities), hospital factors (e.g. size, academic affiliation and case volume), compliance with NCCN guidelines was associated with a reduced risk of mortality [odds ratio (OR) for death 0.64 (0.53-0.77, P < 0.0001)].
CONCLUSIONS: There is relatively poor overall compliance with the NCCN PC guidelines in California's large hospitals. Higher compliance rates are correlated with improved survival. Compliance is an important potential measure of the quality of care.

© 2012 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.

Abstract/Text: CONTEXT: The role of adjuvant therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer is still uncertain, and no recommended standard exists.
OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine administered after complete resection of pancreatic cancer improves disease-free survival by 6 months or more.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Open, multicenter, randomized controlled phase 3 trial with stratification for resection, tumor, and node status. Conducted from July 1998 to December 2004 in the outpatient setting at 88 academic and community-based oncology centers in Germany and Austria. A total of 368 patients with gross complete (R0 or R1) resection of pancreatic cancer and no prior radiation or chemotherapy were enrolled into 2 groups.
INTERVENTION: Patients received adjuvant chemotherapy with 6 cycles of gemcitabine on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (n = 179), or observation ([control] n = 175).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary end point was disease-free survival, and secondary end points were overall survival, toxicity, and quality of life. Survival analysis was based on all eligible patients (intention-to-treat).
RESULTS: More than 80% of patients had R0 resection. The median number of chemotherapy cycles in the gemcitabine group was 6 (range, 0-6). Grade 3 or 4 toxicities rarely occurred with no difference in quality of life (by Spitzer index) between groups. During median follow-up of 53 months, 133 patients (74%) in the gemcitabine group and 161 patients (92%) in the control group developed recurrent disease. Median disease-free survival was 13.4 months in the gemcitabine group (95% confidence interval, 11.4-15.3) and 6.9 months in the control group (95% confidence interval, 6.1-7.8; P<.001, log-rank). Estimated disease-free survival at 3 and 5 years was 23.5% and 16.5% in the gemcitabine group, and 7.5% and 5.5% in the control group, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that the effect of gemcitabine on disease-free survival was significant in patients with either R0 or R1 resection. There was no difference in overall survival between the gemcitabine group (median, 22.1 months; 95% confidence interval, 18.4-25.8; estimated survival, 34% at 3 years and 22.5% at 5 years) and the control group (median, 20.2 months; 95% confidence interval, 17-23.4; estimated survival, 20.5% at 3 years and 11.5% at 5 years; P = .06, log-rank).
CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative gemcitabine significantly delayed the development of recurrent disease after complete resection of pancreatic cancer compared with observation alone. These results support the use of gemcitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy in resectable carcinoma of the pancreas.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN34802808.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: This multicentre randomised phase III trial was designed to determine whether adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine improves the outcomes of patients with resected pancreatic cancer.
METHODS: Eligibility criteria included macroscopically curative resection of invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas and no earlier radiation or chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned at a 1 : 1 ratio to either the gemcitabine group or the surgery-only group. Patients assigned to the gemcitabine group received gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg m(-2) over 30 min on days 1, 8 and 15, every 4 weeks for 3 cycles.
RESULTS: Between April 2002 and March 2005, 119 patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, 118 were eligible and analysable (58 in the gemcitabine group and 60 in the surgery-only group). Both groups were well balanced in terms of baseline characteristics. Although heamatological toxicity was frequently observed in the gemcitabine group, most toxicities were transient, and grade 3 or 4 non-heamatological toxicity was rare. Patients in the gemcitabine group showed significantly longer disease-free survival (DFS) than those in the surgery-only group (median DFS, 11.4 versus 5.0 months; hazard ratio=0.60 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.40-0.89); P=0.01), although overall survival did not differ significantly between the gemcitabine and surgery-only groups (median overall survival, 22.3 versus 18.4 months; hazard ratio=0.77 (95% CI: 0.51-1.14); P=0.19).
CONCLUSION: The current results suggest that adjuvant gemcitabine contributes to prolonged DFS in patients undergoing macroscopically curative resection of pancreatic cancer.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: Although adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine is standard care for resected pancreatic cancer, S-1 has shown non-inferiority to gemcitabine for advanced disease. We aimed to investigate the non-inferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer in terms of overall survival.
METHODS: We did a randomised, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority phase 3 trial undertaken at 33 hospitals in Japan. Patients who had histologically proven invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas, pathologically documented stage I-III, and no local residual or microscopic residual tumour, and were aged 20 years or older were eligible. Patients with resected pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2), intravenously administered on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks [one cycle], for up to six cycles) or S-1 (40 mg, 50 mg, or 60 mg according to body-surface area, orally administered twice a day for 28 days followed by a 14 day rest, every 6 weeks [one cycle], for up to four cycles) at the data centre by a modified minimisation method, balancing residual tumour status, nodal status, and institutions. The primary outcome was overall survival in the two treatment groups, assessed in the per-protocol population, excluding ineligible patients and those not receiving the allocated treatment. The protocol prespecified that the superiority of S-1 with respect to overall survival was also to be assessed in the per-protocol population by a log-rank test, if the non-inferiority of S-1 was verified. We estimated overall and relapse-free survival using the Kaplan-Meier methods, and assessed non-inferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine using the Cox proportional hazard model. The expected hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was 0.87 with a non-inferiority margin of 1.25 (power 80%; one-sided type I error 2.5%). This trial is registered at UMIN CTR (UMIN000000655).
FINDINGS: 385 patients were randomly assigned to treatment between April 11, 2007, and June 29, 2010 (193 to the gemcitabine group and 192 to the S-1 group). Of these, three were exlcuded because of ineligibility and five did not receive chemotherapy. The per-protocol population therefore consisted of 190 patients in the gemcitabine group and 187 patients in the S-1 group. On Sept 15, 2012, following the recommendation from the independent data and safety monitoring committee, this study was discontinued because the prespecified criteria for early discontinuation were met at the interim analysis for efficacy, when all the protocol treatments had been finished. Analysis with the follow-up data on Jan 15, 2016, showed HR of mortality was 0.57 (95% CI 0.44-0.72, pnon-inferiority<0.0001, p<0.0001 for superiority), associated with 5-year overall survival of 24.4% (18.6-30.8) in the gemcitabine group and 44.1% (36.9-51.1) in the S-1 group. Grade 3 or 4 leucopenia, neutropenia, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase were observed more frequently in the gemcitabine group, whereas stomatitis and diarrhoea were more frequently experienced in the S-1 group.
INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 can be a new standard care for resected pancreatic cancer in Japanese patients. These results should be assessed in non-Asian patients.
FUNDING: Pharma Valley Center, Shizuoka Industrial Foundation, Taiho Pharmaceutical.

Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer.
METHODS: We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434.
FINDINGS: Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group.
INTERPRETATION: The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: Among patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, combination chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) leads to longer overall survival than gemcitabine therapy. We compared the efficacy and safety of a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen with gemcitabine as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer.
METHODS: We randomly assigned 493 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to receive a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen (oxaliplatin [85 mg per square meter of body-surface area], irinotecan [180 mg per square meter, reduced to 150 mg per square meter after a protocol-specified safety analysis], leucovorin [400 mg per square meter], and fluorouracil [2400 mg per square meter] every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine (1000 mg per square meter on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks. The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival and safety.
RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, the median disease-free survival was 21.6 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 12.8 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for cancer-related event, second cancer, or death, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 0.73; P<0.001). The disease-free survival rate at 3 years was 39.7% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 21.4% in the gemcitabine group. The median overall survival was 54.4 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 35.0 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.86; P=0.003). The overall survival rate at 3 years was 63.4% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 48.6% in the gemcitabine group. Adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 75.9% of the patients in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and in 52.9% of those in the gemcitabine group. One patient in the gemcitabine group died from toxic effects (interstitial pneumonitis).
CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant therapy with a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen led to significantly longer survival than gemcitabine among patients with resected pancreatic cancer, at the expense of a higher incidence of toxic effects. (Funded by R&D Unicancer and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01526135 ; EudraCT number, 2011-002026-52 .).

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment types and prognosis for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) remain unclear because of the lack of studies involving large series of patients.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed various prognostic factors for 624 BRPC (pancreatic head/body) patients treated from June 2002 to May 2007, by distributing questionnaires to member institutions of the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery in 2010. BRPC was defined according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines (2009).
RESULTS: Among 624 patients, 539 (86.4 %) underwent curative-intent resection, showing an R0 resection rate of 65.9 %. The 3- and 5-year survival rates were 16.1 and 9.9 % in all patients, 22.8 and 12.5 % in the resected patients, and 4.4 and 0 % (P < 0.0001) in the unresected patients, respectively. The following factors influencing survival in all patients were selected as independent prognostic factors using multivariate analysis: major arterial involvement on imaging study; preoperative treatment; surgical resection; and postoperative chemotherapy. Among the resected cases, multivariate analysis revealed that major arterial involvement and remnant tumor status were independent prognostic factors.
CONCLUSION: BRPC included two distinct categories of tumors influencing survival: those with portal vein/superior mesenteric vein invasion alone and those with major arterial invasion, which was the most exacerbating factor in the analysis.

© 2013 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.

Abstract/Text: Background: The aim of this study was to validate a new definition of borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) provided by the 2017 international consensus on the basis of three dimensions of anatomical (A), biological (B), and conditional (C) factors, using the data of the patients who had been registered for our institutional protocol of chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (CRTS) for localized patients with PDAC. Methods: Among 307 consecutive patients pathologically diagnosed with localized PDAC who were enrolled in our CRTS protocol from February 2005 to December 2016, we selected 285 patients who could be re-evaluated after CRT. These 285 patients were classified according to international consensus A definitions as follows: R (resectable; n = 62), BR-PV (borderline resectable, superior mesenteric vein (SMV)/portal vein (PV) involvement alone; n = 27), BR-A (borderline resectable, arterial involvement; n = 50), LA (locally advanced; n = 146). Disease-specific survival (DSS) was analyzed according to A, B (serum CA 19-9 levels and lymph node metastasis diagnosed by computed tomography findings before CRT), and C factors (performance status (PS)) factors. Results: The rates of resection and R0 resection were similar between R (83.9 and 98.0%) and BR-PV (85.2 and 95.5%), but much lower in BR-A (70.0 and 84.8%) and LA (46.6 and 62.5%). DSS evaluated by median survival time (months) showed a similar trend to surgical outcomes: 33.7 in R, 27.3 in BR-PV, 18.9 in BR-A and 19.3 in LA, respectively. DSS in R patients with CA 19-9 levels > 500 U/mL was significantly poorer than in patients with CA 19-9 levels ≤ 500 U/mL, but there were no differences in DSS among BR-PV, BR-A, and LA patients according to CA 19-9 levels. Regarding lymph node metastasis, there was no significant difference in DSS according to each resectability group. DSS in R patients with PS ≥ 2 was significantly worse than in patients with PS 0-1. Conclusions: The international consensus on the definition of BR-PDAC based on three dimensions of A, B, and C is useful and practicable because prognosis of PDAC patients is influenced by anatomical factors as well as biological and conditional factors, which in turn may help to decide treatment strategy.

Abstract/Text: Background: The aim of this study was to validate a new definition of borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) provided by the 2017 international consensus on the basis of three dimensions of anatomical (A), biological (B), and conditional (C) factors, using the data of the patients who had been registered for our institutional protocol of chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (CRTS) for localized patients with PDAC. Methods: Among 307 consecutive patients pathologically diagnosed with localized PDAC who were enrolled in our CRTS protocol from February 2005 to December 2016, we selected 285 patients who could be re-evaluated after CRT. These 285 patients were classified according to international consensus A definitions as follows: R (resectable; n = 62), BR-PV (borderline resectable, superior mesenteric vein (SMV)/portal vein (PV) involvement alone; n = 27), BR-A (borderline resectable, arterial involvement; n = 50), LA (locally advanced; n = 146). Disease-specific survival (DSS) was analyzed according to A, B (serum CA 19-9 levels and lymph node metastasis diagnosed by computed tomography findings before CRT), and C factors (performance status (PS)) factors. Results: The rates of resection and R0 resection were similar between R (83.9 and 98.0%) and BR-PV (85.2 and 95.5%), but much lower in BR-A (70.0 and 84.8%) and LA (46.6 and 62.5%). DSS evaluated by median survival time (months) showed a similar trend to surgical outcomes: 33.7 in R, 27.3 in BR-PV, 18.9 in BR-A and 19.3 in LA, respectively. DSS in R patients with CA 19-9 levels > 500 U/mL was significantly poorer than in patients with CA 19-9 levels ≤ 500 U/mL, but there were no differences in DSS among BR-PV, BR-A, and LA patients according to CA 19-9 levels. Regarding lymph node metastasis, there was no significant difference in DSS according to each resectability group. DSS in R patients with PS ≥ 2 was significantly worse than in patients with PS 0-1. Conclusions: The international consensus on the definition of BR-PDAC based on three dimensions of A, B, and C is useful and practicable because prognosis of PDAC patients is influenced by anatomical factors as well as biological and conditional factors, which in turn may help to decide treatment strategy.

Abstract/Text: PURPOSE: A multicenter survey was conducted to explore the role of adjuvant surgery for initially unresectable pancreatic cancer with a long-term favorable response to non-surgical cancer treatments.
METHODS: Clinical data including overall survival were retrospectively compared between 58 initially unresectable pancreatic cancer patients who underwent adjuvant surgery with a favorable response to non-surgical cancer treatments over 6 months after the initial treatment and 101 patients who did not undergo adjuvant surgery because of either unchanged unresectability, a poor performance status, and/or the patients' or surgeons' wishes.
RESULTS: Overall mortality and morbidity were 1.7 and 47 % in the adjuvant surgery group. The survival curve in the adjuvant surgery group was significantly better than in the control group (p < 0.0001). The propensity score analysis revealed that adjuvant surgery was a significant independent prognostic variable with an adjusted hazard ratio (95 % confidence interval) of 0.569 (0.36-0.89). Subgroup analysis according to the time from initial treatment to surgical resection showed a significant favorable difference in the overall survival in patients who underwent adjuvant surgery over 240 days after the initial treatment.
CONCLUSION: Adjuvant surgery for initially unresectable pancreatic cancer patients can be a safe and effective treatment. The overall survival rate from the initial treatment is extremely high, especially in patients who received non-surgical anti-cancer treatment for more than 240 days.

© 2013 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.