-
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jul 2014Pancreatic cancer (PC) is the fourth cause of cancer death in Western countries, the only chance for long term survival is an R0 surgical resection that is feasible in... (Review)
Review
Pancreatic cancer (PC) is the fourth cause of cancer death in Western countries, the only chance for long term survival is an R0 surgical resection that is feasible in about 10%-20% of all cases. Five years cumulative survival is less than 5% and rises to 25% for radically resected patients. About 40% has locally advanced in PC either borderline resectable (BRPC) or unresectable locally advanced (LAPC). Since LAPC and BRPC have been recognized as a particular form of PC neoadjuvant therapy (NT) has increasingly became a valid treatment option. The aim of NT is to reach local control of disease but, also, it is recognized to convert about 40% of LAPC patients to R0 resectability, thus providing a significant improvement of prognosis for responding patients. Once R0 resection is achieved, survival is comparable to that of early stage PCs treated by upfront surgery. Thus it is crucial to look for a proper patient selection. Neoadjuvant strategies are multiples and include neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT), and the association of nCT with radiotherapy (nCRT) given as either a combination of a radio sensitizing drug as gemcitabine or capecitabine or and concomitant irradiation or as upfront nCT followed by nRT associated to a radio sensitizing drug. This latter seem to be most promising as it may select patients who do not go on disease progression during initial treatment and seem to have a better prognosis. The clinical relevance of nCRT may be enhanced by the application of higher active protocols as FOLFIRINOX.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Neoplasm Staging; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Patient Selection; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25071332
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i28.9374 -
World Journal of Gastrointestinal... Sep 2021Colorectal carcinoma (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and up to 50% of patients with CRC develop colorectal liver metastases... (Review)
Review
Colorectal carcinoma (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and up to 50% of patients with CRC develop colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). For these patients, surgical resection remains the only opportunity for cure and long-term survival. Over the past few decades, outcomes of patients with metastatic CRC have improved significantly due to advances in systemic therapy, as well as improvements in operative technique and perioperative care. Chemotherapy in the modern era of oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-containing regimens has been augmented by the introduction of targeted biologics and immunotherapeutic agents. The increasing efficacy of contemporary systemic therapies has led to an expansion in the proportion of patients eligible for curative-intent surgery. Consequently, the use of neoadjuvant strategies is becoming progressively more established. For patients with CRLM, the primary advantage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is the potential to down-stage metastatic disease in order to facilitate hepatic resection. On the other hand, the routine use of NCT for patients with resectable metastases remains controversial, especially given the potential risk of inducing chemotherapy-associated liver injury prior to hepatectomy. Current guidelines recommend upfront surgery in patients with initially resectable disease and low operative risk, reserving NCT for patients with borderline resectable or unresectable disease and high operative risk. Patients undergoing NCT require close monitoring for tumor response and conversion of CRLM to resectability. In light of the growing number of treatment options available to patients with metastatic CRC, it is generally agreed that these patients are best served at tertiary centers with an expert multidisciplinary team.
PubMed: 34616511
DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v13.i9.1043 -
Medicine Aug 2018The refinement in surgical techniques combined with the preoperative management has improved the resectability rate of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA). However, the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The refinement in surgical techniques combined with the preoperative management has improved the resectability rate of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA). However, the prognosis of pCCA with curative resection is still dismal. This meta-analysis was performed to investigate the prognostic clinicopathological factors in resectable pCCA.PubMed, the Cochran Library, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science were searched systematically to identify reports focusing on studying the prognostic clinicopathological factors in resectable pCCA. The hazard ratios (HRs) and its 95% confidence interval (95%CI) from the identified studies using Cox proportional hazard regression model were extracted for overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and disease-free survival (DFS) analysis.Three prospective and 35 retrospective cohort studies including 5681 resectable pCCA were included in the pooled analysis. Among more than 20 clinicopathological factors associated with negative survival of pCCA, only 6 were included in quantitative analysis which showed that lymph node involvement was associated with a reduced OS (HR = 2.04; 95%CI: 2.10-2.62), DSS (HR = 1.80; 95%CI: 1.39-2.34), DFS (HR = 4.38; 95%CI: 1.89-10.14), negative resection margin (HR = 2.04; 95%CI:1.73-2.41), operative transfusion (HR = 1.82; 95%CI: 1.06-3.11), and T3 or T4-stage (HR = 2.04; 95%CI: 2.04-2.53) were poor prognostic factors of OS, and poor or moderate differentiation was also an adverse prognostic factor of OS (HR = 2.71; 95%CI: 1.80-4.07) and DSS (HR = 1.74; 95%CI: 1.25-2.44). The overall median resectability rate (95CI%), R0 resection (95CI%), and 5-year OS (95CI%) in Eastern and Western countries were 74.9 (66.4-78.4) % and 41.3 (32.6-80.8) %, 70.7 (65.6-80.8) % and 75.9 (64.0-80.4) %, and 33.0 (29.7-39.7) % and 25.5 (20.0-31.6) %, respectively.Negative resection margin, lymph node involvement, poor or moderate differentiation grade was identified as the negative predictor factors of resectable pCCA. Operative transfusion and T3/T4 stage were also associated with a reduced survival of resectable pCCA.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Bile Duct Neoplasms; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Hepatic Duct, Common; Humans; Klatskin Tumor; Male; Margins of Excision; Middle Aged; Prognosis; Proportional Hazards Models; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Survival Rate
PubMed: 30142840
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011999 -
Journal of Visualized Surgery 2017A subset of pancreatic body and tail cancers present with locally advanced disease due to involvement of the celiac axis. Previously considered unresectable, these T4... (Review)
Review
A subset of pancreatic body and tail cancers present with locally advanced disease due to involvement of the celiac axis. Previously considered unresectable, these T4 tumors may be extirpated with a distal pancreatectomy and resection of the celiac trunk in carefully selected patients. In the setting of multimodality treatment, these resections can yield survival similar to resectable and borderline resectable lesions. Robotic surgery has been shown to be safe and feasible in complex pancreatic resections. This article summarizes our patient selection criteria and operative approach to robotic distal pancreatectomy with celiac axis resection (DP-CAR) for locally advanced body and tail tumors of the pancreas.
PubMed: 29302421
DOI: 10.21037/jovs.2017.08.18 -
Oncology (Williston Park, N.Y.) Jun 2017In the United States, cancer of the pancreas accounts for nearly 40,000 deaths annually and is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality. The vast majority of... (Review)
Review
In the United States, cancer of the pancreas accounts for nearly 40,000 deaths annually and is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality. The vast majority of patients present with metastatic or unresectable disease. Only 20% of patients are candidates for surgery, and therefore curable. The 5-year survival rate for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma is only 6%, with surgical resection being essential for long-term survival. Recent research has identified a precise subset of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer for whom resection yielding durable survival is possible. This population is being actively studied to identify optimal treatment strategies for long-term survival. In this article we will discuss the definitions of resectability, describe the current diagnostic tests for pancreatic cancer, and review strategies for maximizing treatment outcomes in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Humans; Neoplasm Staging; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Prognosis; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 28620900
DOI: No ID Found -
Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery Sep 2019Pancreatic cancer remains a therapeutic challenge. Surgical resection in combination with systemic chemotherapy is the only option promising long-term survival and... (Review)
Review
Pancreatic cancer remains a therapeutic challenge. Surgical resection in combination with systemic chemotherapy is the only option promising long-term survival and potential cure. However, only about 20% of patients are diagnosed with tumors that are still in a resectable stage. Even after potentially curative resection and modern regimens for adjuvant chemotherapy, the majority of patients develop local and systemic recurrence resulting in median overall survival times of 28-54 months. The predominance of systemic recurrence and its impact on survival may lead to the assumption that surgical radicality and local control play only minor roles in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. This review provides an overview of the recent literature on surgical radicality and survival outcome in pancreatic cancer. The current evidence on the extent of lymphadenectomy, the prognostic impact of the extent of lymph node involvement, and the impact of the resection margin status on postresection survival are reviewed. Data from recent studies performed in the context of modern surgery and adjuvant therapy provide good evidence of a considerable impact of local radicality on survival after pancreatic cancer surgery. Surgical techniques that have been developed to refine oncological resections and to increase local control as well as resectability are highlighted. These techniques include artery-first approaches, level-3 dissection with removal of the periarterial nerve plexus, the triangle operation, and extended resections. Local radicality and quality of surgical resection remain among the most important parameters that determine the chances for survival in patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer.
PubMed: 31549006
DOI: 10.1002/ags3.12273 -
Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology Mar 2014Portal vein occlusion through embolization or ligation (PVE, PVL) offers the possibility of increasing the future liver remnant (FLR) and thus reducing the risk of... (Review)
Review
Portal vein occlusion through embolization or ligation (PVE, PVL) offers the possibility of increasing the future liver remnant (FLR) and thus reducing the risk of hepatic failure after extended hepatectomy We reviewed the indications, scope and applicability of PVE/PVL in treatment of primary and secondary liver tumours. A thorough PubMED, Embase, Ovid and Cochrane database search was carried out for all original articles with 30 patients or more undergoing either PVE and any patient series with PVL, irrespective of number with outcome measure in at least one of the following parameters: FLR volume change, complications, length of stay, time to surgery, proportion resectable and survival data. PVE can be performed with a technical success in 98.9 % (95 % confidence interval 97-100) patients, with a mean morbidity of 3.13 % (95 % CI 1.21-5.04) and a median in-hospital stay of 2.1 (range 1-4) days (very few papers had data on length of stay following PVE). The mean increase in volume of the FLR following PVE was 39.75 % (95 % CI 30.8-48.6) facilitating extended liver resection after a mean of 37.13 days (95 % CI 28.51-45.74) with a resectability rate of 76.88 % (95 % CI 70.91-82.84). Morbidity and mortality following such extended liver resections after PVE is 26.58 % (95 % CI 19.20-33.95) and 2.59 % (95 % CI 1.34-3.83) respectively with an in-patient stay of 13.57 days (95 % CI 9.8-17.37). However following post-PVE liver hypertrophy 6.29 % (95 % CI 2.24-10.34) patients still have post-resection liver failure and up to 14.2 % (95 % CI -8.7 to 37) may have positive resection margins. Up to 4.80 % (95 % CI 2.07-7.52) have failure of hypertrophy after PVE and 17.46 % (95 % CI 11.89-23.02) may have disease progression during the interim awaiting hypertrophy and subsequent resection. PVL has a greater morbidity and duration of stay of 5.72 % (95 % CI 0-15.28) and 10.16 days (95 % CI 6.63-13.69) respectively; as compared to PVE. Duration to surgery following PVL was greater at 53.6 days (95 % CI 32.14-75.05). PVL induced FLR hypertrophy by a mean of 64.65 % (95 % CI 0-136.12) giving a resectability rate of 63.68 % (95 % CI 56.82-70.54). PVL failed to produce enough liver hypertrophy in 7.4 % of patients (95 % CI 0-16.12). Progression of disease following PVL was 29.29 (95%CI 15.69-42.88). PVE facilitates an extended hepatectomy in patients with limited or inadequate FLR, with good short and long-term outcomes. Patients need to be adequately counselled and consented for PVE and EH in light of these data. PVL would promote hypertrophy as well, but clearly PVE has advantages as compared to PVL on account of its inherent "minimally invasive" nature, fewer complications, length of stay and its feasibility to have shorter times to surgery.
PubMed: 24669163
DOI: 10.1007/s13193-013-0279-y -
World Journal of Gastrointestinal... Mar 2017In resectable colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) the role and use of molecular biomarkers is still controversial. Several biomarkers have been linked to clinical...
In resectable colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) the role and use of molecular biomarkers is still controversial. Several biomarkers have been linked to clinical outcomes in CRLM, but none have so far become routine for clinical decision making. For several reasons, the clinical risk score appears to no longer hold the same predictive value. Some of the reasons include the ever expanding indications for liver resection, which now increasingly tend to involve extrahepatic disease, such as lung metastases (both resectable and non-resectable) and the shift in indication from "what is taken out" (., how much liver has to be resected) to "what is left behind" (that is, how much functional liver tissue the patient has after resection). The latter is amenable to modifications by using adjunct techniques of portal vein embolization and the associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy techniques to expand indications for liver resection. Added to this complexity is the increasing number of molecular markers, which appear to hold important prognostic and predictive information, for which some will be discussed here. Beyond characteristics of tissue-based genomic profiles will be liquid biopsies derived from circulating tumor cells and cell-free circulating tumor DNA in the blood. These markers are present in the peripheral circulation in the majority of patients with metastatic cancer disease. Circulating biomarkers may represent more readily available methods to monitor, characterize and predict cancer biology with future implications for cancer care.
PubMed: 28344745
DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v9.i3.98 -
The Surgical Clinics of North America Apr 2016Liver anatomy can be variable, and understanding of anatomic variations is crucial to performing hepatic resections, particularly parenchymal-sparing resections.... (Review)
Review
Liver anatomy can be variable, and understanding of anatomic variations is crucial to performing hepatic resections, particularly parenchymal-sparing resections. Anatomic knowledge is a critical prerequisite for effective hepatic resection with minimal blood loss, parenchymal preservation, and optimal oncologic outcome. Each anatomic resection has pitfalls, about which the operating surgeon should be aware and comfortable managing intraoperatively.
Topics: Hepatectomy; Humans; Liver; Liver Neoplasms
PubMed: 27017858
DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2015.11.003 -
Annals of Hepato-biliary-pancreatic... Nov 2021Supported by the expanding indications for neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC), the concept of resectability has evolved from being mostly... (Review)
Review
Supported by the expanding indications for neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC), the concept of resectability has evolved from being mostly based on the anatomical tumor extent to considering the biological and conditional factors relevant to prognosis. Therefore, it is more reasonable to define the "criteria for surgical resection" instead of using the "(technical) resectability criteria." NAT has been used in resectable PCs (RPC) with a high risk of early systemic recurrence, as predicted by various biological or anatomical markers. Moreover, the indications for NAT followed by conversion surgery or adjuvant surgery for borderline resectable or locally advanced PC (LAPC) are gradually expanding. Therefore, it is important to define the RPC group that will benefit from NAT and the LAPC group that will benefit from post-NAT surgery. At diagnosis, population-based approaches, such as prognostic stratification and staging systems and personalized outcome-based approaches using prognostic prediction models can be used to determine the criteria for treatment options. Standardized indications for conversion surgery are needed for patients who are initially treated with NAT. In addition to imaging-based morphological criteria, biological criteria, including CA19-9, and various metabolic criteria can be used to establish predicted outcome-based criteria. Multicenter collaboration is required to develop a large database with standardized data collection for various biomarkers and response data after NAT to establish more accurate outcome prediction models to define the new resectability criteria.
PubMed: 34845115
DOI: 10.14701/ahbps.2021.25.4.451