BACKGROUND: Positive peritoneal fluid cytology predicts poor outcome in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has been proposed as a more sensitive means of detection of peritoneal micrometastases than conventional cytology. The clinical significance of RT-PCR positivity in the absence of other evidence of peritoneal disease is unknown. The purpose of the current study was to determine the outcome RT-PCR positive/cytology-negative patients who underwent potentially curative resection. METHODS: Peritoneal washings were collected prospectively from 115 patients with pancreatic cancer undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy at a single institution. Specimens were analyzed by a cytopathologist and by RT-PCR for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). RESULTS: Of the 115 patients, 62 (54%) underwent R0 resection. Eleven of the 62 patients (18%) had peritoneal washings that were negative by conventional cytology but positive for CEA by RT-PCR. Those 11 patients experienced early peritoneal and overall disease recurrence versus those who were RT-PCR negative (P = 0.001, P = 0.003, respectively) independent of nodal status. CONCLUSIONS: RT-PCR for CEA is a sensitive and specific method for the detection of clinically significant peritoneal micrometastases from pancreatic cancer and it might identify a subgroup of patients with otherwise negative findings at staging laparoscopy who might respond better to treatment other than primary surgical resection.
BACKGROUND: Positive peritoneal fluid cytology predicts poor outcome in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has been proposed as a more sensitive means of detection of peritoneal micrometastases than conventional cytology. The clinical significance of RT-PCR positivity in the absence of other evidence of peritoneal disease is unknown. The purpose of the current study was to determine the outcome RT-PCR positive/cytology-negative patients who underwent potentially curative resection. METHODS: Peritoneal washings were collected prospectively from 115 patients with pancreatic cancer undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy at a single institution. Specimens were analyzed by a cytopathologist and by RT-PCR for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). RESULTS: Of the 115 patients, 62 (54%) underwent R0 resection. Eleven of the 62 patients (18%) had peritoneal washings that were negative by conventional cytology but positive for CEA by RT-PCR. Those 11 patients experienced early peritoneal and overall disease recurrence versus those who were RT-PCR negative (P = 0.001, P = 0.003, respectively) independent of nodal status. CONCLUSIONS: RT-PCR for CEA is a sensitive and specific method for the detection of clinically significant peritoneal micrometastases from pancreatic cancer and it might identify a subgroup of patients with otherwise negative findings at staging laparoscopy who might respond better to treatment other than primary surgical resection.
Authors: Antonio Soriano; Antoni Castells; Carmen Ayuso; Juan Ramón Ayuso; Maria Teresa de Caralt; Maria Angels Ginès; Maria Isabel Real; Rosa Gilabert; Llorenç Quintó; Antoni Trilla; Faust Feu; Xavier Montanyà; Laureano Fernández-Cruz; Salvador Navarro Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Timothy K Williams; Ernest L Rosato; Eugene P Kennedy; Karen A Chojnacki; Jocelyn Andrel; Terry Hyslop; Cataldo Doria; Patricia K Sauter; Jordan Bloom; Charles J Yeo; Adam C Berger Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2008-12-18 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: M Nishiyama; I Takashima; T Tanaka; K Yoshida; T Toge; N Nagata; S Iwamori; Y Tamura Journal: World J Surg Date: 1995 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Hop S Tran Cao; Sharmeela Kaushal; Cristina A Metildi; Rhiana S Menen; Claudia Lee; Cynthia S Snyder; Karen Messer; Minya Pu; George A Luiken; Mark A Talamini; Robert M Hoffman; Michael Bouvet Journal: Hepatogastroenterology Date: 2012-09
Authors: Sylvester N Osayi; Mark Bloomston; Carl M Schmidt; E Christopher Ellison; Peter Muscarella Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-06-24 Impact factor: 3.411