Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

pancreatic cancer: chemoradiation

1,027 views

Published on

What would you recommend as first line therapy for a 68 y/o woman with local pancreatic cancer and no metastatic disease with ECOG-1?
Chemoradiation: Rachna Shroff, MD
Surgical Resection: Yongyut Sirivatanauksorn, MD

Published in: Health & Medicine
  • A Unique Easy To Follow 5-Step Plan To Eliminating Vitiligo And Related Auto-Immune Skin Disorders Using Proven Holistic Strategies. Learn More ➽➽ https://j.mp/3kTNHDZ
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

pancreatic cancer: chemoradiation

  1. 1. PREOPERATIVE THERAPY FOR RESECTABLE PANCREATIC CANCER R AC H N A S H ROF F , MD , MS A S S I S T A N T P ROF E S SOR , D E P T OF GI ME D I CA L ONCOLOGY M. D . A N D E R SON CA NCE R CE N T E R R S H ROF F@MD A N D E R SON .ORG A U B HO 2 0 1 4
  2. 2. PANCREATIC CANCER SURVIVAL BY STAGE/TREATMENT n 5-yr OS (%) Median OS (Mos.) Adjusted HR (95% CI) Resectable -> OR 2736 24.6 19.3 Resectable -> No OR 3644 2.9 8.4 2.24 (2.07 – 2.43) Stage III or IV 68521 0.8 4.2 4.16 (3.86 – 4.48) Billimoria, Ann Surg 2007
  3. 3. LOCAL DISEASE STAGING Potentially Resectable Borderline Resectable* Locally Advanced SMV-PV T-V-I < 180º T-V-I ≥ 180º and / or reconstructable occlusion Unreconstructable Occlusion SMA No T-V-I T-V-I < 180º T-V-I ≥ 180º CHA No T-V-I Reconstructable short-segment T-V-I of any degree Unreconstructable Celiac Trunk No T-V-I T-V-I < 180º T-V-I ≥ 180 *, Intergroup Definition; T-V-I: tumor-vessel interface
  4. 4. CONKO-001 Oettle, JAMA 2007 DFS with surgery alone: DISMAL DFS with postoperative gemcitabine: BETTER
  5. 5. EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ADJUVANT THERAPY Trial Year n Treatment arm Control arm Median OS (mos) (treatment v. control) Systemic gemcitabine +/- CXRT is standard postoperative therapy p GITSG 1985 43 5-FU-based chemoradiation followed by maintenance 5-FU Observation 21.0 v. 10.9 0.03 EORTC 1999 114 5-FU-based chemoradiation Observation 17.1 v. 12.6 NS ESPAC-1 2001 541 Chemotherapy No chemotherapy 19.7 v. 14.0 < 0.01 Chemoradiation No chemoradiation 15.5 v. 16.1 NS ESPAC-1 2004 289 Chemotherapy No chemotherapy 20.1 v. 15.5 < 0.01 Chemoradiation No chemoradiation 15.9 v. 17.9 0.05 CONKO 2008 368 Gemcitabine Observation 22.8 v. 20.2 0.005 RTOG 97-04 2008 388 Gemcitabine, 5-FU-based chemoradiation, Gemcitabine 5-FU, 5-FU-based chemoradiation, 5-FU 20.5 v. 16.9 NS
  6. 6. Oettle, JAMA 2007 CONKO-001 3-year DFS: 24% DFS with adjuvant therapy for the “best of the best” Let’s face it: also pretty dismal. Median age: 61 Median PS: 80 Postop CA 19-9: < 2.5 ULN Median time to randomization: 3 weeks Most rec in year 1-2
  7. 7. RATIONALE FOR NEOADJUVANT THERAPY • Provides immediate therapy for subclinical mets • All resected patients get multimodality therapy • Patient selection for surgery • Oncologic issues • Performance status • Enhancement of R0 resection
  8. 8. OCCULT MICROSCOPIC METASTASES Rapid recurrence common following “radical” resection +/- postop therapy due to existing disease that is not dealt with surgically Van den Broeck, E J Surg Onc 2009
  9. 9. ADJUVANT VS. NEOADJUVANT THERAPY Recovery 4-8 weeks S CTX +/- CXRT (~6 months) Presentation with PDAC OR S Dropout S CTX +/- CXRT on/off protocol (2 – 6 months) S OR The goal is eradication of microscopic disease – local and distant
  10. 10. Series (Year) N Margin Status % Median OS (Mos.) p Johns Hopkins (2006) 1175 R1/R2 42 14 < 0.0001 R0 58 20 University of Leeds - UK (2006) 26 R1 85 11 0.01 R0 15 37 ESPAC -1 (2001) 541 R1 19 11 0.006 R0 81 17 University of Naples - Italy (2000) 75 R1/R2 20 9 0.001 R0 80 26 Rush-Presbyterian- St. Luke's (1999) 75 R1 29 8 0.01 R0 71 17 MGH (1993) 72 R1/R2 51 12 0.05 R0 49 20 At least macroscopically complete resection is critical to OS
  11. 11. WHAT IS RESECTABLE PANCREATIC CANCER? • Absence of extrapancreatic disease • Tissue plane between tumor and SMA/CA • Patent SMV-PV confluence 2 3 1 T V A Criteria yield high rates of microscopically complete (R0) resection
  12. 12. Concordance Coefficient 0.07 (95% CI: 0.02 – 0.13) The SMA margin distance is routinely overestimated by preoperative CT Overestimated Underestimated RADIOLOGY:PATHOLOGY
  13. 13. SMA margin distance measured histopathologically following SMA Margin Distance N pancreaticoduodenectomy (n = 194) Preop CXRT (n = 147) Initial Surgery (n = 47) p* Positive 8 3 (2) 5 (11) 0.01 ≤1mm 40 28 (19) 12 (26) >1mm < 1cm 72 53 (36) 19 (40) ≥1cm 66 57 (39) 9 (19) Preop CXRT associated with longer SMA margin distance even though include all patients with borderline resectable disease * Not recorded in 8 patients
  14. 14. TIME TO LOCAL RECURRENCE Neoadjuvant Local recurrence from dartmouth Greer, JACS 2008 Neodjuvant P = 0.03 Adjuvant Preoperative CXRT prolongs time to LR
  15. 15. DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL P = 0.003 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 100 80 60 40 20 0 CXRT, > 1mm Initial Surgery, > 1mm CXRT, <= 1mm Initial Surgery, <= 1mm Months Percent survival 26 (95% CI: 15 - 38) mos Katz, JOGS 2011 Margin length and preop CXRT prolong DFS

×