BACKGROUND: Facilitation of margin-negative resection is the goal of neoadjuvant therapy regimens used in the treatment of borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer patients. Multiple treatment approaches have shown efficacy in this setting, including neoadjuvant GTX (gemcitabine [Gemzar], docetaxel [Taxotere], and capecitabine [Xeloda]) and radiotherapy (RT). Three-dimensional tumor response may be a more accurate method of assessment compared to traditional 1- and 2-dimensional techniques. We compared these 3 methods in a series of patients who underwent neoadjuvant GTX-RT and surgical resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective review included borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant GTX followed by 5-FU chemoradiotherapy with the intent of downstaging to resectability. Tumor was contoured on computed tomography (CT) scans obtained at the following time points: (A) initial staging, (B) CT simulation, and (C) restaging. These contours were used to determine tumor response according to WHO, RECIST, and volumetric criteria. RESULTS: Fourteen patients all experienced a measurable decrease in tumor volume following neoadjuvant therapy and were deemed suitable for at least surgical exploration. Radiotherapy was delivered to a median 50 Gy (range, 45-52 Gy) in 1.8-2.0 Gy fractions via 3-D conformal (21%) or IMRT (79%). The median percent volume changes before and after CT simulation were -3.4% and -52.6%, respectively. The overall median percent change was -54.5%. The corresponding absolute volume changes were -0.42 cm(3) (range, 9.12 to -12.47), -5.31 cm(3) (range, 2.06 to -15.93), and -6.72 cm(3) (range, 0.53 to -15.47), respectively. Response according to WHO, RECIST, and volumetric methods was identical with the exception of 1 patient. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to quantify volumetric tumor change objectively as a result of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our data suggest that tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy is essentially equivalent between 1-, 2-, and 3-dimensional assessment methods.
BACKGROUND: Facilitation of margin-negative resection is the goal of neoadjuvant therapy regimens used in the treatment of borderline-resectable pancreatic cancerpatients. Multiple treatment approaches have shown efficacy in this setting, including neoadjuvant GTX (gemcitabine [Gemzar], docetaxel [Taxotere], and capecitabine [Xeloda]) and radiotherapy (RT). Three-dimensional tumor response may be a more accurate method of assessment compared to traditional 1- and 2-dimensional techniques. We compared these 3 methods in a series of patients who underwent neoadjuvant GTX-RT and surgical resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective review included borderline-resectable pancreatic cancerpatients treated with neoadjuvant GTX followed by 5-FU chemoradiotherapy with the intent of downstaging to resectability. Tumor was contoured on computed tomography (CT) scans obtained at the following time points: (A) initial staging, (B) CT simulation, and (C) restaging. These contours were used to determine tumor response according to WHO, RECIST, and volumetric criteria. RESULTS: Fourteen patients all experienced a measurable decrease in tumor volume following neoadjuvant therapy and were deemed suitable for at least surgical exploration. Radiotherapy was delivered to a median 50 Gy (range, 45-52 Gy) in 1.8-2.0 Gy fractions via 3-D conformal (21%) or IMRT (79%). The median percent volume changes before and after CT simulation were -3.4% and -52.6%, respectively. The overall median percent change was -54.5%. The corresponding absolute volume changes were -0.42 cm(3) (range, 9.12 to -12.47), -5.31 cm(3) (range, 2.06 to -15.93), and -6.72 cm(3) (range, 0.53 to -15.47), respectively. Response according to WHO, RECIST, and volumetric methods was identical with the exception of 1 patient. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to quantify volumetric tumor change objectively as a result of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our data suggest that tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy is essentially equivalent between 1-, 2-, and 3-dimensional assessment methods.
Authors: K James; E Eisenhauer; M Christian; M Terenziani; D Vena; A Muldal; P Therasse Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-03-17 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Giacomo Luccichenti; Filippo Cademartiri; Mario Sianesi; Luigi Roncoroni; Paolo Pavone; Gabriel P Krestin Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Gauri R Varadhachary; Eric P Tamm; James L Abbruzzese; Henry Q Xiong; Christopher H Crane; Huamin Wang; Jeffrey E Lee; Peter W T Pisters; Douglas B Evans; Robert A Wolff Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2006-07-24 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: D B Evans; P W Pisters; J E Lee; R J Bold; C Charnsangavej; N A Janjan; R A Wolff; J L Abbruzzese Journal: J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg Date: 1998
Authors: Matthew H G Katz; Robert Marsh; Joseph M Herman; Qian Shi; Eric Collison; Alan P Venook; Hedy L Kindler; Steven R Alberts; Philip Philip; Andrew M Lowy; Peter W T Pisters; Mitchell C Posner; Jordan D Berlin; Syed A Ahmad Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2013-02-23 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Avani S Dholakia; Amy Hacker-Prietz; Aaron T Wild; Siva P Raman; Laura D Wood; Peng Huang; Daniel A Laheru; Lei Zheng; Ana De Jesus-Acosta; Dung T Le; Richard Schulick; Barish Edil; Susannah Ellsworth; Timothy M Pawlik; Christine A Iacobuzio-Donahue; Ralph H Hruban; John L Cameron; Elliot K Fishman; Christopher L Wolfgang; Joseph M Herman Journal: J Radiat Oncol Date: 2013-09-22
Authors: Neha Bhooshan; Navesh K Sharma; Shahed Badiyan; Adeel Kaiser; Fred M Moeslein; Young Kwok; Pradip P Amin; Svetlana Kudryasheva; Michael D Chuong Journal: J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2016-12
Authors: Matthew H G Katz; Qian Shi; Jeff Meyers; Joseph M Herman; Michael Chuong; Brian M Wolpin; Syed Ahmad; Robert Marsh; Larry Schwartz; Spencer Behr; Wendy L Frankel; Eric Collisson; James Leenstra; Terence M Williams; Gina Vaccaro; Alan Venook; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Eileen M O'Reilly Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 33.006