Literature DB >> 24979603

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: number of positive nodes allows to distinguish several N categories.

Oliver Strobel1, Ulf Hinz, Alexander Gluth, Thomas Hank, Thilo Hackert, Frank Bergmann, Jens Werner, Markus W Büchler.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prognostic value of PLN and LNR based on a large series with standardized lymphadenectomy and pathological workup.
BACKGROUND: Lymph node (LN) involvement is a major prognostic factor in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. However, the distinction N0/N1 is not sufficient to accurately predict prognosis. To improve prognostic accuracy in N1 tumors, different LN parameters have been tested. Previous studies were based on series with variable numbers of examined lymph nodes (ELN) and came to inconsistent conclusions as to the value of the number of positive lymph nodes (PLN) and the lymph node ratio (LNR).
METHODS: 811 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma between October 2001 and June 2012 were identified from a prospective database. Clinicopathological parameters included LN status (N0/N1), ELN, PLN, and LNR. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were performed.
RESULTS: The median number of ELN was 24 (interquartile range: 18-32). By univariate analysis, both PLN and LNR were significantly associated with survival in N1 tumors. However, by multivariate analysis, only the number of PLN was confirmed as independent predictor of survival. Median survival in patients with only 1 PLN was 31.1 months and comparable to the survival in N0 (33.2 months). With increasing numbers of PLN median survival significantly decreased (2-3 PLN: 26.1 months, 4-7 PLN: 21.9 months, ≥8 PLN: 18.3 months, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that, based on high numbers of ELN, PLN is superior to LNR in predicting survival and allows to distinguish several N-categories that improve prognostic accuracy in LN-positive resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 24979603     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000814

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  57 in total

1.  Ischemic gastropathy after distal pancreatectomy with en bloc celiac axis resection for pancreatic body cancer.

Authors:  Ken-Ichi Okada; Manabu Kawai; Seiko Hirono; Motoki Miyazawa; Yuji Kitahata; Masaki Ueno; Shinya Hayami; Toshio Shimokawa; Hiroki Yamaue
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  Multi-institutional Validation Study of the American Joint Commission on Cancer (8th Edition) Changes for T and N Staging in Patients With Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Peter J Allen; Deborah Kuk; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; Olca Basturk; Christopher L Wolfgang; John L Cameron; Keith D Lillemoe; Cristina R Ferrone; Vicente Morales-Oyarvide; Jin He; Matthew J Weiss; Ralph H Hruban; Mithat Gönen; David S Klimstra; Mari Mino-Kenudson
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 3.  A meta-analysis of extended versus standard lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Lorenzo A Orci; Jeremy Meyer; Christophe Combescure; Leo Bühler; Thierry Berney; Philippe Morel; Christian Toso
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 3.647

4.  Optimal Extent of Superior Mesenteric Artery Dissection during Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Cancer: Balancing Surgical and Oncological Safety.

Authors:  Yosuke Inoue; Akio Saiura; Atsushi Oba; Shoji Kawakatsu; Yoshihiro Ono; Takafumi Sato; Yoshihiro Mise; Takeaki Ishizawa; Yu Takahashi; Hiromichi Ito
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Lymph node ratio as parameter of regional lymph node involvement in pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Suguru Yamada; Tsutomu Fujii; Akihiro Hirakawa; Mitsuro Kanda; Hiroyuki Sugimoto; Yasuhiro Kodera
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2016-04-05       Impact factor: 3.445

6.  Pancreatic cancer: Clinical practice guidelines - what is the evidence?

Authors:  Oliver Strobel; Markus W Büchler
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 7.  Eighth Edition of the UICC Classification of Malignant Tumours: an overview of the changes in the pathological TNM classification criteria-What has changed and why?

Authors:  Luca Bertero; Federica Massa; Jasna Metovic; Roberto Zanetti; Isabella Castellano; Umberto Ricardi; Mauro Papotti; Paola Cassoni
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 4.064

8.  Three-dimensional computer-assisted dissection of pancreatic lymphatic anatomy on human fetuses: a step toward automatic image alignment.

Authors:  T Bardol; G Subsol; M-J Perez; D Genevieve; A Lamouroux; B Antoine; G Captier; M Prudhomme; M M Bertrand
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2018-03-31       Impact factor: 1.246

9.  Noncontrast Radiomics Approach for Predicting Grades of Nonfunctional Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Authors:  Yun Bian; Zengrui Zhao; Hui Jiang; Xu Fang; Jing Li; Kai Cao; Chao Ma; Shiwei Guo; Li Wang; Gang Jin; Jianping Lu; Jun Xu
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 4.813

10.  International Validation of the Eighth Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM Staging System in Patients With Resected Pancreatic Cancer.

Authors:  Stijn van Roessel; Gyulnara G Kasumova; Joanne Verheij; Robert M Najarian; Laura Maggino; Matteo de Pastena; Giuseppe Malleo; Giovanni Marchegiani; Roberto Salvia; Sing Chau Ng; Susanna W de Geus; Sanne Lof; Francesco Giovinazzo; Jacob L van Dam; Tara S Kent; Olivier R Busch; Casper H van Eijck; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Mohammed Abu Hilal; Claudio Bassi; Jennifer F Tseng; Marc G Besselink
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 14.766

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.