-
Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer Jun 2023Pancreatic cancer is characterized by its high mortality, usually attributed to its diagnosis in already advanced stages. This article aims at presenting an overview of... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Pancreatic cancer is characterized by its high mortality, usually attributed to its diagnosis in already advanced stages. This article aims at presenting an overview of the economic burden of pancreatic cancer in Europe.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted. It made use of the search engines EconLit, Google Scholar, PubMed and Web of Science, and retrieved articles published after December 31st, 1992, and before April 1st, 2020. Study characteristics and cost information were extracted. Cost per patient and cost per patient per month (PPM) were calculated, and drivers of estimate heterogeneity was analysed. Results were converted into 2019 Euros.
RESULTS
The literature review yielded 26 studies on the economic burden attributable to pancreatic cancer in Europe. Cost per patient was on average 40,357 euros (median 15,991), while figures PPM were on average 3,656 euros (median 1,536). Indirect costs were found to be on average 154,257 euros per patient or 14,568 euros PPM, while direct costs 20,108 euros per patient and 2,004 euros PPM. Nevertheless, variation on cost estimations was large and driven by study methodology, patient sample characteristics, such as type of tumour and cancer stage and cost components included in analyses, such as type of procedure.
CONCLUSION
Pancreatic cancer direct costs PPM are in the upper bound relative to other cancer types; however, direct per patient costs are likely to be lower because of shorter survival. Indirect costs are substantial, mainly attributed to high mortality.
Topics: Humans; Financial Stress; Europe; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Cost of Illness
PubMed: 35474568
DOI: 10.1007/s12029-022-00821-3 -
PloS One 2023The incidence of cancer in acromegaly patients may be higher than that in the general population, although this has not been fully elucidated yet. This study analyzed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The incidence of cancer in acromegaly patients may be higher than that in the general population, although this has not been fully elucidated yet. This study analyzed the risk of various important types of cancer in acromegaly patients. The study was registered in INPLASY (registration number: INPLASY202340037). The PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were searched for studies based on strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, from the time of database inception up to June 30, 2022. All observational studies of acromegaly patients with cancer were included, without language restrictions. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) checklist to assess the quality of evidence. A meta-analysis revealed the relationship between acromegaly and cancer using the standardized incidence rates (SIRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) retrieved from the included studies. Nineteen studies were included and analyzed. The overall incidence of cancer (SIR = 1.45, 95%CI = 1.20-1.75), as well as that of thyroid (SIR = 6.96, 95%CI = 2.51-19.33), colorectal and anal (SIR = 1.95, 95%CI = 1.32-2.87), brain and central nervous system (SIR = 6.14, 95%CI = 2.73-13.84), gastric (SIR = 3.09, 95%CI = 1.47-6.50), urinary (SIR = 2.66, 95%CI = 1.88-3.76), hematological (SIR = 1.89, 95%CI = 1.17-3.06), pancreatic and small intestine (SIR = 2.59, 95%CI = 1.58-4.24), and connective tissue (SIR = 3.15, 95%CI = 1.18-8.36) cancers, was higher among patients with acromegaly than among the general population. No association between acromegaly and hepatobiliary, respiratory, reproductive, skin, breast, or prostate cancer was observed. This study demonstrated that acromegaly patients have a modestly increased chance of cancer as compared to the general population. Risk factors for cancer need to be further explored to monitor patients with acromegaly at a high risk for cancer more carefully.
Topics: Male; Humans; Acromegaly; Neoplasms; Risk Factors; Incidence; Prostatic Neoplasms; Skin
PubMed: 38032888
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285335 -
In Vivo (Athens, Greece) 2020Prophylactic splenectomy has shown no inferiority for tumors not invading the greater curvature side. Despite this, the clinical impact of prophylactic splenectomy for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/AIM
Prophylactic splenectomy has shown no inferiority for tumors not invading the greater curvature side. Despite this, the clinical impact of prophylactic splenectomy for proximal advanced gastric cancer is not clear. This review aimed to clarify the impact of splenectomy for advanced gastric cancer in the upper third of the stomach.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted based on PubMed and EMBASE databases. The following search terms were used: "gastric cancer" OR "splenectomy" OR upper third of the stomach" OR preservation of the spleen.
RESULTS
Out of 765 articles, 18 studies (combined n=6,341) were included in the analysis. Four randomized controlled trials (RCT) and eight retrospective studies suggested the benefits of spleen-preserving gastrectomy. Six retrospective studies showed no significant benefit of spleen-preserving gastrectomy. Prophylactic splenectomy showed a close association with a higher incidence of postoperative morbidity (pancreatic fistula and anastomotic leakage) with no concomitant improvement in overall survival. Prophylactic splenectomy should not be routinely performed and RCTs are necessary to confirm the impact of splenectomy for cN(+) at the splenic hilum tumors and tumors invading the greater curvature.
Topics: Gastrectomy; Humans; Lymph Node Excision; Retrospective Studies; Spleen; Splenectomy; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 33144415
DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12145 -
Metabolites Jul 2023Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the deadliest cancers, with five-year survival rates around 10%. The only curative option remains complete surgical... (Review)
Review
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the deadliest cancers, with five-year survival rates around 10%. The only curative option remains complete surgical resection, but due to the delay in diagnosis, less than 20% of patients are eligible for surgery. Therefore, discovering diagnostic biomarkers for early detection is crucial for improving clinical outcomes. Metabolomics has become a powerful technology for biomarker discovery, and several metabolomic-based panels have been proposed for PDAC diagnosis, but these advances have not yet been translated into the clinic. Therefore, this review focused on summarizing metabolites identified for the early diagnosis of PDAC in the last five years. Bibliographic searches were performed in the PubMed, Scopus and WOS databases, using the terms "Biomarkers, Tumor", "Pancreatic Neoplasms", "Early Diagnosis", "Metabolomics" and "Lipidome" (January 2018-March 2023), and resulted in the selection of fourteen original studies that compared PDAC patients with subjects with other pancreatic diseases. These investigations showed amino acid and lipid metabolic pathways as the most commonly altered, reflecting their potential for biomarker research. Furthermore, other relevant metabolites such as glucose and lactate were detected in the pancreas tissue and body fluids from PDAC patients. Our results suggest that the use of metabolomics remains a robust approach to improve the early diagnosis of PDAC. However, these studies showed heterogeneity with respect to the metabolomics techniques used and further studies will be needed to validate the clinical utility of these biomarkers.
PubMed: 37512579
DOI: 10.3390/metabo13070872 -
Medicine Aug 2019Previous investigations yielded inconsistent results for the associations between pancreatic cancer (PC) risk and genetic polymorphisms. The study aimed to perform a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUNDS
Previous investigations yielded inconsistent results for the associations between pancreatic cancer (PC) risk and genetic polymorphisms. The study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies exploring association of some genetic polymorphisms and PC risk.
METHODS
We systematically searched on PubMed and Web of Science for association of genetic polymorphisms and PC risk published from 1969 to January 2019. We computed the multivariate odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), comparing different genetic types.
RESULTS
The present meta-analysis showed significant associations between deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) repair gene (X-ray repair cross-complementing group 1 (XRCC1) Arg399GIn and Arg194Trp, excision repair cross complementation 1 (ERCC1) rs11615 and rs3212986, ERCC2 rs13181) polymorphisms and PC risk.
CONCLUSIONS
Because of the limited sample size and ethnicity enrolled in the present meta-analysis, further larger scaled studies should be performed to demonstrate the association.
Topics: DNA Glycosylases; DNA Repair; DNA-Binding Proteins; Endonucleases; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; X-ray Repair Cross Complementing Protein 1; Xeroderma Pigmentosum Group D Protein
PubMed: 31393355
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016541 -
Defining oligometastatic pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and critical synthesis of consensus.ESMO Open Dec 2023Small retrospective series suggest that local consolidative treatment (LCT) may improve survival in oligometastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, no...
BACKGROUND
Small retrospective series suggest that local consolidative treatment (LCT) may improve survival in oligometastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, no uniform definition of oligometastatic disease (OMD) in PDAC exists; this impedes meaningful conclusions.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search using PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL registries for studies and protocols reporting on definitions and/or LCT of OMD in PDAC was performed. The primary endpoint was the definition of OMD. Levels of agreement were categorized as consensus (≥75% agreement between studies), fair agreement (50%-74%), and absent/poor agreement (<50%).
RESULTS
After screening of 5374 abstracts, the full text of 218 studies was assessed, of which 76 were included in the qualitative synthesis. The majority of studies were retrospective (n = 66, 87%), two were prospective studies and eight were study protocols. Studies investigated mostly liver (n = 38, 51%) and lung metastases (n = 15, 20%). Across studies, less than one-half (n = 32, 42%) reported a definition of OMD, while 44 (58%) did not. Involvement was limited to a single organ (consensus). Additional criteria for defining OMD were the number of lesions (consensus), metastatic site (poor agreement), metastatic size (poor agreement), treatment possibilities (poor agreement), and biomarker response (poor agreement). Liver OMD could involve three or fewer lesions (consensus) and synchronous disease (fair agreement), while lung metastases could involve two or fewer lesions and metachronous disease (consensus). The large majority of studies were at a high risk of bias or did not include any control groups.
CONCLUSION
Definitions of OMD were not used or varied widely between studies hampering across-study comparability and highlighting an unmet need for a consensus. The present study is part of a multistep process that aims to develop an interdisciplinary consensus on OMD in pancreatic cancer.
Topics: Humans; Retrospective Studies; Prospective Studies; Consensus; Lung Neoplasms; Pancreatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 37988953
DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2023.102067 -
Modern Pathology : An Official Journal... Oct 2022Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) and adenosquamous carcinoma (ASC) have overlapping histopathological appearances and sites of occurrence, which may cause diagnostic...
Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) and adenosquamous carcinoma (ASC) have overlapping histopathological appearances and sites of occurrence, which may cause diagnostic difficulty impacting subsequent treatment. We conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature to determine whether molecular alterations were sufficiently different in MEC and ASC to aid in classifying the two entities. We searched Medline, Embase and Web of Science for studies reporting molecular determinations of ASC and/or MEC and screened retrieved records for eligibility. Two independent researchers reviewed included studies, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. Of 8623 identified records, 128 articles were included for analysis: 5 which compared the two tumors in the same investigation using the same methods and 123 which examined the tumors separately. All articles, except one were case series of moderate to poor methodological quality. The 5 publications examining both tumors showed that 52/88 (59%) MEC and 0% of 110 ASC had rearrangement of the MAML2 gene as detected by FISH and/or RT-PCR, but did not investigate other genes. In the entire series MEC had MAML2 gene rearrangement in 1337/2009 (66.6%) of tumors studied. The articles examining tumors separately found that MEC had mutations in EGFR (11/329 cases, 3.3%), KRAS (11/266, 4.1%) and ERBB2 (9/126, 7.1%) compared with ASC that had mutations in EGFR (660/1705, 38.7%), KRAS (143/625, 22.9%) and ERBB2 (6/196, 3.1%). The highest level of recurrent mutations was in pancreatic ASC where (108/126, 85.7%) reported mutations in KRAS. The EGFR mutations in ASC were similar in number and kind to those in lung adenocarcinoma. By standards of systematic review methodology and despite the large number of retrieved studies, we did not find adequate evidence for a distinctive molecular profile of either MEC or ASC that could definitively aid in its classification, especially in histologically difficult cases that are negative for MAML2 rearrangement. The case series included in this review indicate the relevance of MAML2 rearrangement to support the diagnosis of MEC, findings that should be confirmed by additional research with adequate study design.
Topics: Carcinoma, Adenosquamous; Carcinoma, Mucoepidermoid; DNA-Binding Proteins; ErbB Receptors; Humans; In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence; Nuclear Proteins; Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras); Salivary Gland Neoplasms; Trans-Activators; Transcription Factors
PubMed: 35871081
DOI: 10.1038/s41379-022-01100-z -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... May 2022Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is used as a locoregional treatment modality for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), but is non-curative and is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is used as a locoregional treatment modality for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), but is non-curative and is associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing survival outcomes of multimodal therapy with or without IRE.
METHODS
Separate searches were performed for multimodal therapy + IRE and multimodal therapy alone given the lack of comparative literature using PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library in 3/2021. We determined overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from diagnosis and time of IRE. Treatment-related morbidity and mortality was determined.
RESULTS
Of 585 published articles, 48 met inclusion criteria for IRE (n = 27) and without IRE (n = 21) with data for 1420 (IRE) and 1348 (without IRE) patients. The 6/12/24 months OS with IRE was 99%/84%/28%. The 6/12/24 months OS without IRE was 99%/80%/12%. At 12 months from IRE, OS was 55% and PFS was 12%. The mean major complication and 90-day mortality rates for IRE were 17.95% and 2.65%.
CONCLUSION
Multimodal therapy alone is associated with similar OS to multimodal therapy + IRE in patients with LAPC. Most patients progress and nearly half die within 1 year of the IRE procedure. Given the lack of quality prospective data, IRE should remain experimental and be used with caution in LAPC.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Electroporation; Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35000842
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.12.014 -
Abdominal Radiology (New York) Sep 2022Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related death with a 5-year survival rate of 10%. Quantitative CT perfusion (CTP) can... (Review)
Review
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related death with a 5-year survival rate of 10%. Quantitative CT perfusion (CTP) can provide additional diagnostic information compared to the limited accuracy of the current standard, contrast-enhanced CT (CECT). This systematic review evaluates CTP for diagnosis, grading, and treatment assessment of PDAC. The secondary goal is to provide an overview of scan protocols and perfusion models used for CTP in PDAC. The search strategy combined synonyms for 'CTP' and 'PDAC.' Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched from January 2000 to December 2020 for studies using CTP to evaluate PDAC. The risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2. 607 abstracts were screened, of which 29 were selected for full-text eligibility. 21 studies were included in the final analysis with a total of 760 patients. All studies comparing PDAC with non-tumorous parenchyma found significant CTP-based differences in blood flow (BF) and blood volume (BV). Two studies found significant differences between pathological grades. Two other studies showed that BF could predict neoadjuvant treatment response. A wide variety in kinetic models and acquisition protocol was found among included studies. Quantitative CTP shows a potential benefit in PDAC diagnosis and can serve as a tool for pathological grading and treatment assessment; however, clinical evidence is still limited. To improve clinical use, standardized acquisition and reconstruction parameters are necessary for interchangeability of the perfusion parameters.
Topics: Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Perfusion Imaging; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 34223961
DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-03190-w -
Annals of Translational Medicine Nov 2019Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) of the pancreas is a cystic tumor with a disease spectrum ranging from low-grade dysplasia to invasive carcinoma. The... (Review)
Review
Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) of the pancreas is a cystic tumor with a disease spectrum ranging from low-grade dysplasia to invasive carcinoma. The evidence for adjuvant treatment in invasive IPMN is limited and mostly derived from studies in conventional pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We performed a systematic review focusing on all clinical studies concerning the efficacy of adjuvant therapy in patients with invasive IPMN. We identified 8 retrospective cohort studies, using either adjuvant chemotherapy alone (n=1), adjuvant radiotherapy alone (n=1) or adjuvant chemotherapy in combination with radiation (n=6). Adjuvant therapy was associated with a survival benefit in 7 out of the 8 studies. Specific survival benefit was noted for patients with node-positive disease, higher TNM stage, positive resection margins, poor differentiation and tubular subtype. We conclude that adjuvant therapy may be beneficial in invasive IPMN, but current data suggest that it should be given selectively based on individual tumor characteristics. Further prospective, randomized studies are warranted.
PubMed: 31930090
DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.10.37