BACKGROUND: The prognostic impact of pathologic response to preoperative therapy on patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma (DA) and ampullary adenocarcinoma (AMPA) has not been established. METHODS: A retrospective review of 266 patients who underwent curative resection for DA (n = 97) or AMPA (n = 169) during 1993-2015 was performed. For patients who underwent preoperative therapy, the pathologic response was systematically evaluated and classified as major (0-49% of viable residual tumor cells) or minor (≥ 50% of viable residual tumor cells). Uni- and multivariable analyses were performed to identify predictors of pathologic response and disease-specific survival (DSS). RESULTS: For the 79 patients treated with preoperative therapy (DA: n = 34; AMPA: n = 45), concomitant use of radiation (80%, 67/79) was the sole independent predictor of major pathologic response (odds ratio [OR] 8.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.85-58.2; P = 0.005). The patients with major pathologic response had a better 5-year DSS rate than the patients with minor pathologic response (DA: 65 vs 25%; P = 0.028; AMPA: 85 vs 43%; P = 0.016). In the multivariable analysis of DSS for the 79 patients who underwent preoperative therapy, major pathologic response was the sole predictor of improved DSS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.88; 95% CI 1.41-5.98; P = 0.004). In the multivariable analysis of DSS for the entire cohort, pathologic stage 2 or lower was the sole predictor of better DSS. CONCLUSION: The major pathologic response to preoperative therapy predicted improved DSS after resection of DA and AMPA and might represent a new prognosticator after resection of DA and AMPA.
BACKGROUND: The prognostic impact of pathologic response to preoperative therapy on patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma (DA) and ampullary adenocarcinoma (AMPA) has not been established. METHODS: A retrospective review of 266 patients who underwent curative resection for DA (n = 97) or AMPA (n = 169) during 1993-2015 was performed. For patients who underwent preoperative therapy, the pathologic response was systematically evaluated and classified as major (0-49% of viable residual tumor cells) or minor (≥ 50% of viable residual tumor cells). Uni- and multivariable analyses were performed to identify predictors of pathologic response and disease-specific survival (DSS). RESULTS: For the 79 patients treated with preoperative therapy (DA: n = 34; AMPA: n = 45), concomitant use of radiation (80%, 67/79) was the sole independent predictor of major pathologic response (odds ratio [OR] 8.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.85-58.2; P = 0.005). The patients with major pathologic response had a better 5-year DSS rate than the patients with minor pathologic response (DA: 65 vs 25%; P = 0.028; AMPA: 85 vs 43%; P = 0.016). In the multivariable analysis of DSS for the 79 patients who underwent preoperative therapy, major pathologic response was the sole predictor of improved DSS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.88; 95% CI 1.41-5.98; P = 0.004). In the multivariable analysis of DSS for the entire cohort, pathologic stage 2 or lower was the sole predictor of better DSS. CONCLUSION: The major pathologic response to preoperative therapy predicted improved DSS after resection of DA and AMPA and might represent a new prognosticator after resection of DA and AMPA.
Authors: Edwin O Onkendi; Sarah Y Boostrom; Michael G Sarr; Michael B Farnell; David M Nagorney; John H Donohue; Michael L Kendrick; Kaye M Reid Lombardo; Michael G Haddock; Florencia G Que Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2011-09-29 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: J H Klinkenbijl; J Jeekel; T Sahmoud; R van Pel; M L Couvreur; C H Veenhof; J P Arnaud; D G Gonzalez; L T de Wit; A Hennipman; J Wils Journal: Ann Surg Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Stefano Cereda; Paolo Passoni; Michele Reni; Maria G Viganò; Luca Aldrighetti; Roberto Nicoletti; Eugenio Villa Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-05-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Manisha Palta; Pretesh Patel; Gloria Broadwater; Christopher Willett; Joseph Pepek; Douglas Tyler; S Yousuf Zafar; Hope Uronis; Herbert Hurwitz; Rebekah White; Brian Czito Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Rosa Autorino; Gian Carlo Mattiucci; Francesco Ardito; Mario Balducci; Francesco Deodato; Gabriella Macchia; Giovanna Mantini; Vincenzo Perri; Andrea Tringali; Maria Antonietta Gambacorta; Luca Tagliaferri; Felice Giuliante; Alessio Giuseppe Morganti; Vincenzo Valentini Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: Deyali Chatterjee; Matthew H Katz; Asif Rashid; Gauri R Varadhachary; Robert A Wolff; Hua Wang; Jeffrey E Lee; Peter W T Pisters; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Christopher Crane; Henry F Gomez; James L Abbruzzese; Jason B Fleming; Huamin Wang Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-10-25 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Nakul P Valsangkar; Thun Ingkakul; Camilo Correa-Gallego; Mari Mino-Kenudson; Ricard Masia; Keith D Lillemoe; Carlos Fernández-del Castillo; Andrew L Warshaw; Andrew S Liss; Sarah P Thayer Journal: Surgery Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Michael J Overman; Gauri R Varadhachary; Scott Kopetz; Rosni Adinin; E Lin; Jeffrey S Morris; Cathy Eng; James L Abbruzzese; Robert A Wolff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-01-21 Impact factor: 44.544