| Literature DB >> 26791083 |
Sohei Satoi1, Hiroaki Yanagimoto2, Tomohisa Yamamoto3, Hideyoshi Toyokawa4, Satoshi Hirooka5, So Yamaki6, Singh Sapam Opendro7, Kentaro Inoue8, Taku Michiura9, Hironori Ryota10, Yoichi Matsui11, Masanori Kon12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of current study is to verify usefulness of staging laparoscopy (stag-lap) for patient's selection and to find prognostic factors in patients with radiographically defined locally advanced (RD-LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26791083 PMCID: PMC4721110 DOI: 10.1186/s12957-016-0767-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Surg Oncol ISSN: 1477-7819 Impact factor: 2.754
Patient characteristics and clinical course in each group
| Parameters | LA ( | CY ( | P ( | L ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (M/F) | 14:14 | 11:5 | 6:7 | 6:4 |
| Age (years) | 66 (47–82) | 63 (41–85) | 69 (42–78) | 63 (55–75) |
| PS 0/1 vs 2 | 26:2 | 16:0 | 12:1 | 8:2 |
| Location (Pbt/Ph) | 11:17 (39) | 6:10 (38) | 10:3 (77) | 6:4 (60) |
| Tumor size (mm) | 41 (23–76) | 41 (27–91) | 47 (21–88) | 37 (28–85) |
| Size > 39.5 vs low | 15:13 | 9:7 | 9:4 | 3:7 |
| DM (yes/no) | 5:23 | 3:13 | 5:8 | 4:6 |
| Obstructive jaundice (yes/no) | 15:13 | 7:9 | 4:9 | 5:5 |
| Bilirubin (mg/dl) | 0.8 (0.3–10) | 0.7 (0.4–2.8) | 0.6 (0.4–1.3) | 0.9 (0.5–1.8) |
| Albumin (g/l) | 3.6 (2.3–4.5) | 3.8 (2.9–4.6) | 4.0 (2.7–4.6) | 4.0 (3.3–4.7) |
| Hemoglobin (g/dl) | 11.7 (8–14.7) | 11.9 (10.5–14.9) | 12.4 (10.2–14.8) | 13.3 (11–14.9) |
| CA19-9 (IU/l) | 232 (1–3978) | 371 (18–13,400) | 385 (6–18,977) | 997 (66–34,408) |
| CTx vs BSC | 23:5 | 16:0 | 9:4 | 9:1 |
| Duration of CTx (months) | 7.5 (0–64) | 10 (1.5–53) | 3 (0–10) | 6 (0–17) |
| GS (yes/no) | 12:16 | 7:9 | 2:11 | 3:7 |
| Radiation (yes/no) | 15:13 | 5:11 | 0:13 | 0:10 |
| Second-line chemotherapy (yes/no) | 18:10 | 10:6 | 1:12 | 7:3 |
| CR/PR vs SD/PD | 9:19 | 6:10 | 2:11 | 2:8 |
| 1-year survival rate | 50 % | 63 % | 31 % | 20 % |
| Adjuvant surgery | 1/28 | 2/16 | 0 | 0 |
| Development of ascites within 1 year | 10/28 (36 %) | 7/16 (44 %) | 11/13 (85 %) | 5/10 (50 %) |
Data are expressed as the median (range) or n (%)
LA locally advanced, CY positive cytology, P peritoneal metastasis, L liver metastasis, M male, F female, PS performance status, Ph pancreas head, Pbt pancreas body and tail, DM diabetes mellitus, CA19-9 carbohydrate antigen 19-9, CTx chemotherapy, BSC best supportive care, GS gemcitabine and S-1, CR complete response, PR partial response, SD stable disease, PD progressive disease
Fig. 1The rate of emergence of ascites according to metastatic site diagnosed by staging laparoscopy. Figure 1 shows the curve of emergence of ascites in patients with locally advanced PDAC (LA, solid black line), with positive cytology (CY, solid grey line), with peritoneal metastasis (P, dotted grey line), and with liver metastasis (L, dotted black line). There were significant differences in the rate of emergence of ascites between LA and P (p < 0.001) and LA and CY (p = 0.033) groups
Fig. 2Survival curves according to metastatic site diagnosed by staging laparoscopy. a shows survival curve of patients with locally advanced PDAC (LA, solid black line), with positive cytology (CY, solid grey line), with peritoneal metastasis (P, dotted grey line), and with liver metastasis (L, dotted black line). There were significant differences between the survival curves of P and CY (p = 0.007) and P and LA (p = 0.04) groups. b shows survival curves of patients with locally advanced PDAC and positive cytology (LA + CY, solid black line) and with peritoneal metastasis and liver metastasis (P + L, dotted black line). The survival curve in LA + CY groups was significantly better than in P + L groups (p = 0.011)
Uni- and multivariate analyses for prognosis
| Variable | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Hazard ratio (95 % CI) | Estimate | SE | p | Hazard ratio (95 % CI)) | |
| CR/PR vs SD/PD | <0.001 | 0.23 (0.12–0.45) | −1.30 | 0.37 | <0.001 | 0.27 (0.13–0.56) |
| Second-line chemotherapy none vs done | <0.001 | 3.60 (2.03–6.37) | 0.98 | 0.40 | 0.013 | 2.67 (1.23–5.78) |
| GS none vs done | 0.009 | 2.05 (1.19–3.52) | 0.21 | 0.34 | 0.53 | 1.24 (0.64–2.39) |
| Radiation none vs done | 0.009 | 2.21 (1.22–4.01) | 0.13 | 0.39 | 0.73 | 1.14 (0.53–2.45) |
| No ascites vs development of ascites at 1 year | <0.001 | 0.39 (0.23–0.65) | −0.12 | 0.31 | 0.70 | 0.89 (0.48–1.63) |
| LA/CY vs P/L | 0.015 | 0.51 (0.30–0.88) | −0.11 | 0.32 | 0.72 | 0.89 (0.48–1.68) |
CI confidential interval, SE standard and error, CR complete response, PR partial response, SD stable disease, PD progressive disease, GS gemcitabine and S-1, LA locally advanced, CY positive cytology, P peritoneal metastasis, L liver metastasis, CTx chemotherapy, BSC best supportive care
Review of the recently published articles on staging laparoscopy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer
| Authors | Year | Duration | Number of patients | Rate of patients | Laparoscopic findings (%) | MST | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| True LA | Occult met | CY | P | Liver | P/Liver | ||||||
| Clark et al. [ | 2010 | 00–08 | 202 | 22 % | 144 (71 %) | 58 (29) | 41 (20) | 5 (3) | 26 (13) | - | 13 |
| Morak et al. [ | 2009 | 95–07 | 68 | - | 44 (65) | 24 (35) | 14 (21) | 5 (7) | 2 (3) | 11.7 | |
| Contreras et al. [ | 2009 | 02–06 | 33 | 15 % | 22 (67) | 11 (33) | - | 7 (21) | 4 (12) | ||
| Shoup et al. [ | 2004 | 94–00 | 100 | 31 % | 63 (63) | 37 (37) | 12 (12) | 18 (18) | 7 (7) | - | |
| Current study | - | 07–12 | 67 | 51 % | 28 (42) | 39 (58) | 16 (24) | 13 (19) | 7 (10) | 3 (4) | 10 |
Pts patients, LA locally advanced, met metastasis, CY positive cytology, P peritoneal metastasis, MST median survival time