Consensus in determining the resectability of locally progressed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - results of the Conko-007 multicenter trial

U A Wittel, D Lubgan, M Ghadimi, O Belyaev, W Uhl, W O Bechstein, R Grützmann, W M Hohenberger, A Schmid, L Jacobasch, R S Croner, A Reinacher-Schick, U T Hopt, A Pirkl, H Oettle, R Fietkau, H Golcher, U A Wittel, D Lubgan, M Ghadimi, O Belyaev, W Uhl, W O Bechstein, R Grützmann, W M Hohenberger, A Schmid, L Jacobasch, R S Croner, A Reinacher-Schick, U T Hopt, A Pirkl, H Oettle, R Fietkau, H Golcher

Abstract

Background: One critical step in the therapy of patients with localized pancreatic cancer is the determination of local resectability. The decision between primary surgery versus upfront local or systemic cancer therapy seems especially to differ between pancreatic cancer centers. In our cohort study, we analyzed the independent judgement of resectability of five experienced high volume pancreatic surgeons in 200 consecutive patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Methods: Pretherapeutic CT or MRI scans of 200 consecutive patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer were evaluated by 5 independent pancreatic surgeons. Resectability and the degree of abutment of the tumor to the venous and arterial structures adjacent to the pancreas were reported. Interrater reliability and dispersion indices were compared.

Results: One hundred ninety-four CT scans and 6 MRI scans were evaluated and all parameters were evaluated by all surgeons in 133 (66.5%) cases. Low agreement was observed for tumor infiltration of venous structures (κ = 0.265 and κ = 0.285) while good agreement was achieved for the abutment of the tumor to arterial structures (interrater reliability celiac trunk κ = 0.708 P < 0.001). In patients with vascular tumor contact indicating locally advanced disease, surgeons highly agreed on unresectability, but in patients with vascular tumor abutment consistent with borderline resectable disease, the judgement of resectability was less uniform (dispersion index locally advanced vs. borderline resectable p < 0.05).

Conclusion: Excellent agreement between surgeons exists in determining the presence of arterial abutment and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The determination of resectability in borderline resectable patients is influenced by additional subjective factors.

Trial registration: EudraCT:2009-014476-21 (2013-02-22) and NCT01827553 (2013-04-09).

Keywords: Borderline resectable; Determination of resectability; Locally advanced; Pancreatic cancer; Prospective randomized multicenter trial.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Treatment and Procedure of Evaluation of Pretherapeutic Radiographs. a Schematic view of the treatment algorithm of the Conko-007 trial. Patients will be restaged after induction chemotherapy and if no distant metastasis is present randomized to the two treatment arms. After 6 months of treatment, final evaluation is performed and surgical resection is attempted. Radiographs of the initial staging prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy were analyzed (arrow with asterisk) b Flowchart for the evaluation of the pretherapeutic radiographs. After upload of the abdominal MRI or CT scans by the trial center, the evaluating surgeons were contacted by e-mail and requested to evaluate the radiographs within the next 3 workdays
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Dispersion indices of the parameters evaluated in the individual patients. This dispersion index is a measure of homogeneity of judgement of one parameter in individual patients by several observers. Zero describes a perfect match of all observers. a When the index of dispersion was calculated for the individual vessels evaluated by the surgeons, the dispersion of evaluated tumor contact was not different between the vessels. b To evaluate the influence of the degree of tumor contact to the peripancreatic vascular structures, cases were classified for their anatomical resectability in resectable, borderline resectable and locally advanced. The average of the dispersion index of tumor contact to the vasculature was similar in patients with resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced tumors indicating the degree of tumor contact does not influence the observation of tumor abutment to vessels. c Using the same classification, analyses of the dispersion index of the judgement of resectability indicated, however, that the homogeneity of the conclusion drawn from the observation of tumor contact to the blood vessels depended significantly on the degree of tumor abutment. Especially in patients with resectable and borderline resectable tumors, the heterogeneity in the judgement of resectability was significantly decreased (P < 0.05) indicating a gap between anatomical resectability and subjective judgement by the individual surgeon

References

    1. Vincent A, Herman J, Schulick R, Hruban RH, Goggins M. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet Lond Engl. 2011;378:607–620. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62307-0.
    1. Li D, Xie K, Wolff R, Abbruzzese JL. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet Lond Engl. 2004;363:1049–1057. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15841-8.
    1. Neoptolemos JP, Stocken DD, Dunn JA, et al. Influence of resection margins on survival for patients with pancreatic cancer treated by adjuvant chemoradiation and/or chemotherapy in the ESPAC-1 randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2001;234:758–768. doi: 10.1097/00000658-200112000-00007.
    1. McGuigan A, Kelly P, Turkington RC, Jones C, Coleman HG, McCain RS. Pancreatic cancer: a review of clinical diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment and outcomes. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24:4846–4861. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i43.4846.
    1. Gilbert JW, Wolpin B, Clancy T, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: conceptual evolution and current approach to image-based classification. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2017;28:2067–2076. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx180.
    1. Soweid AM. The borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: definition. Endosc Ultrasound. 2017;6:S76–S78. doi: 10.4103/eus.eus_66_17.
    1. Lopez NE. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: definitions and management. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20:10740. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i31.10740.
    1. Katz MHG, Pisters PWT, Evans DB, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: the importance of this emerging stage of disease. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206:833–846. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.12.020.
    1. Varadhachary GR, Tamm EP, Abbruzzese JL, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: definitions, management, and role of preoperative therapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13:1035–1046. doi: 10.1245/ASO.2006.08.011.
    1. Callery MP, Chang KJ, Fishman EK, Talamonti MS, William Traverso L, Linehan DC. Pretreatment assessment of resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: expert consensus statement. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:1727–1733. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0408-6.
    1. Tempero MA, Arnoletti JP, Behrman SW, et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma, version 2.2012: featured updates to the NCCN guidelines. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw JNCCN. 2012;10:703–713. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2012.0073.
    1. Bockhorn M, Uzunoglu FG, Adham M, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a consensus statement by the international study group of pancreatic surgery (ISGPS) Surgery. 2014;155:977–988. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2014.02.001.
    1. Mollberg N, Rahbari NN, Koch M, Hartwig W, Hoeger Y, Büchler MW, Weitz J. Arterial resection during pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2011;254:882–893. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31823ac299.
    1. Loizou L, Albiin N, Ansorge C, et al. Computed tomography staging of pancreatic cancer: a validation study addressing interobserver agreement. Pancreatology. 2013;13:570–575. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2013.09.004.
    1. Mazzola R, Fersino S, Aiello D, et al. Linac-based stereotactic body radiation therapy for unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer: risk-adapted dose prescription and image-guided delivery. Strahlenther Onkol. 2018;194(9):835–842. doi: 10.1007/s00066-018-1306-2.
    1. Dobiasch S, Goerig NL, Fietkau R, Combs SE. Essential role of radiation therapy for the treatment of pancreatic cancer: novel study concepts and established treatment recommendations. Strahlenther Onkol. 2018;194:185–195. doi: 10.1007/s00066-017-1227-5.
    1. Bachmayer S, Fastner G, Vaszi A, et al. Nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer: improved survival with chemoradiotherapy > 40 Gy after systemic treatment. Strahlenther Onkol. 2018;194(7):627–637. doi: 10.1007/s00066-018-1281-7.
    1. Prokosch H-U, Ries M, Beyer A, et al. IT infrastructure components to support clinical care and translational research projects in a comprehensive cancer center. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2011;169:892–896.
    1. García-pérez MA, Núñez-antón V. Cellwise residual analysis in two-way contingency tables. Educ Psychol Meas. 2003;63:825–839. doi: 10.1177/0013164403251280.
    1. Loether HJ, MacTavish DG. Descriptive statistics for sociologists: an introduction. 3. print. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 1976.
    1. Somers I, Bipat S. Contrast-enhanced CT in determining resectability in patients with pancreatic carcinoma: a meta-analysis of the positive predictive values of CT. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:3408–3435. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4708-5.
    1. Hartwig W, Gluth A, Hinz U, et al. Outcomes after extended pancreatectomy in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg. 2016;103:1683–1694. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10221.
    1. Loyer EM, David CL, Dubrow RA, Evans DB, Charnsangavej C. Vascular involvement in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: reassessment by thin-section CT. Abdom Imaging. 1996;21:202–206. doi: 10.1007/s002619900046.
    1. Li H, Zeng MS, Zhou KR, Jin DY, Lou WH. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: the different CT criteria for peripancreatic major arterial and venous invasion. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2005;29:170–175. doi: 10.1097/01.rct.0000155060.73107.83.
    1. Prokesch RW, Chow LC, Beaulieu CF, Bammer R, Jeffrey RB. Isoattenuating pancreatic adenocarcinoma at multi-detector row CT: secondary signs. Radiology. 2002;224:764–768. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2243011284.
    1. Wellner UF, Krauss T, Csanadi A, et al. Mesopancreatic stromal clearance defines curative resection of pancreatic head cancer and can be predicted preoperatively by radiologic parameters: a retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e2529. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002529.
    1. Mohammad WM, Martel G, Mimeault R, Fairfull-Smith RJ, Auer RC, Balaa FK. Evaluating agreement regarding the resectability of colorectal liver metastases: a national case-based survey of hepatic surgeons. HPB. 2012;14:291–297. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00440.x.
    1. Folprecht G, Gruenberger T, Bechstein WO, et al. Tumour response and secondary resectability of colorectal liver metastases following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cetuximab: the CELIM randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:38–47. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70330-4.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit