BACKGROUND: Negative surgical margins are vital to achieve cure and prolong survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. We inquired if fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) could improve surgical outcomes and reduce recurrence rates in orthotopic mouse models of human pancreatic cancer. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized active-control preclinical trial comparing bright light surgery (BLS) to FGS was used. Orthotopic mouse models of human pancreatic cancer were established using the BxPC-3 pancreatic cancer cell line expressing red fluorescent protein (RFP). Two weeks after orthotopic implantation, tumors were resected with BLS or FGS. Pre- and postoperative images were obtained with the OV-100 Small Animal Imaging System to assess completeness of surgical resection in real time. Postoperatively, noninvasive whole body imaging was done to assess recurrence and follow tumor progression. Six weeks postoperatively, mice were sacrificed to evaluate primary pancreatic and metastatic tumor burden at autopsy. RESULTS: A more complete resection of pancreatic cancer was achieved using FGS compared with BLS: 98.9% vs 77.1%, p = 0.005. The majority of mice undergoing BLS (63.2%) had evidence of gross disease with no complete resections; 20% of mice undergoing FGS had complete resection and an additional 75% had only minimal residual disease (p = 0.0001). The mean postoperative tumor burden was significantly less with FGS compared with BLS: 0.08 ± 0.06 mm(2) vs 2.64 ± 0.63 mm(2), p = 0.001. The primary tumor burden at termination was significantly less with FGS compared with BLS: 19.3 ± 5.3 mm(2) vs 6.2 ± 3.6 mm(2), p = 0.048. FGS resulted in significantly longer disease-free survival than BLS (p = 0.02, hazard ratio = 0.39, 95% CI 0.17, 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical outcomes were improved in pancreatic cancer using fluorescence-guidance. This novel approach has significant potential to improve surgical treatment of cancer.
BACKGROUND: Negative surgical margins are vital to achieve cure and prolong survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. We inquired if fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) could improve surgical outcomes and reduce recurrence rates in orthotopic mouse models of humanpancreatic cancer. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized active-control preclinical trial comparing bright light surgery (BLS) to FGS was used. Orthotopic mouse models of humanpancreatic cancer were established using the BxPC-3pancreatic cancer cell line expressing red fluorescent protein (RFP). Two weeks after orthotopic implantation, tumors were resected with BLS or FGS. Pre- and postoperative images were obtained with the OV-100 Small Animal Imaging System to assess completeness of surgical resection in real time. Postoperatively, noninvasive whole body imaging was done to assess recurrence and follow tumor progression. Six weeks postoperatively, mice were sacrificed to evaluate primary pancreatic and metastatic tumor burden at autopsy. RESULTS: A more complete resection of pancreatic cancer was achieved using FGS compared with BLS: 98.9% vs 77.1%, p = 0.005. The majority of mice undergoing BLS (63.2%) had evidence of gross disease with no complete resections; 20% of mice undergoing FGS had complete resection and an additional 75% had only minimal residual disease (p = 0.0001). The mean postoperative tumor burden was significantly less with FGS compared with BLS: 0.08 ± 0.06 mm(2) vs 2.64 ± 0.63 mm(2), p = 0.001. The primary tumor burden at termination was significantly less with FGS compared with BLS: 19.3 ± 5.3 mm(2) vs 6.2 ± 3.6 mm(2), p = 0.048. FGS resulted in significantly longer disease-free survival than BLS (p = 0.02, hazard ratio = 0.39, 95% CI 0.17, 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical outcomes were improved in pancreatic cancer using fluorescence-guidance. This novel approach has significant potential to improve surgical treatment of cancer.
Authors: Susan L Troyan; Vida Kianzad; Summer L Gibbs-Strauss; Sylvain Gioux; Aya Matsui; Rafiou Oketokoun; Long Ngo; Ali Khamene; Fred Azar; John V Frangioni Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2009-07-07 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: C A M Sommerville; P Limongelli; M Pai; R Ahmad; G Stamp; N A Habib; R C N Williamson; L R Jiao Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2009-12-15 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Quyen T Nguyen; Emilia S Olson; Todd A Aguilera; Tao Jiang; Miriam Scadeng; Lesley G Ellies; Roger Y Tsien Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-02-16 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Emilia S Olson; Todd A Aguilera; Tao Jiang; Lesley G Ellies; Quyen T Nguyen; Edmund H Wong; Larry A Gross; Roger Y Tsien Journal: Integr Biol (Camb) Date: 2009-05-11 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Cristina A Metildi; Sharmeela Kaushal; George A Luiken; Robert M Hoffman; Michael Bouvet Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2014-03-02 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Aaron H Colby; Samantha M Berry; Ann M Moran; Kristine Amber Pasion; Rong Liu; Yolonda L Colson; Nelson Ruiz-Opazo; Mark W Grinstaff; Victoria L M Herrera Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Olugbenga T Okusanya; Brian Madajewski; Erin Segal; Brendan F Judy; Ollin G Venegas; Ryan P Judy; Jon G Quatromoni; May D Wang; Shuming Nie; Sunil Singhal Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-12-02
Authors: Ali A Maawy; Yukihiko Hiroshima; Sharmeela Kaushal; George A Luiken; Robert M Hoffman; Michael Bouvet Journal: J Biomed Opt Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 3.170
Authors: Yukihiko Hiroshima; Thinzar M Lwin; Takashi Murakami; Ali A Mawy; Tanaka Kuniya; Takashi Chishima; Itaru Endo; Bryan M Clary; Robert M Hoffman; Michael Bouvet Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2016-10-03 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Livia S Eberlin; Robert J Tibshirani; Jialing Zhang; Teri A Longacre; Gerald J Berry; David B Bingham; Jeffrey A Norton; Richard N Zare; George A Poultsides Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-02-03 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: A C Weems; J E Raymond; A D Easley; M A Wierzbicki; T Gustafson; Mbb Monroe; D J Maitland Journal: RSC Adv Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 3.361