Toshiro Masuda1,2, Amanda M Dann1, Irmina A Elliott1, Hideo Baba2, Stephen Kim3, Alireza Sedarat3, V Raman Muthusamy3, Mark D Girgis1, O Joe Hines1, Howard A Reber1, Timothy R Donahue4,5. 1. Department of Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, 10833 Le Conte Ave, CHS Room 72-215, PO Box 956904, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA. 2. Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjyo, Chuo-ku, Kumamoto, 860-0811, Japan. 3. Division of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, 10833 Le Conte Ave, CHS Room 72-215, PO Box 956904, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA. tdonahue@mednet.ucla.edu. 5. Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA. tdonahue@mednet.ucla.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The current (seventh edition) American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) Staging System for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) dichotomizes pathologic lymph node (LN) involvement into absence (pN0) or presence (pN1) of disease. The recently announced eighth edition also includes stratification on the number of positive nodes. Furthermore, LNs detected on preoperative imaging (CT, MRI, or endoscopic ultrasound-EUS) are considered to be pathologically involved in other gastrointestinal cancers. However, this is less well defined for PDAC. Therefore, the three aims of this study were to determine (1) whether the new AJCC staging system led to more accurate staging, (2) the number of nodes needed to be examined to detect pathologic involvement, and (3) if pN disease could be reliably detected on preoperative imaging in PDAC. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing pancreatectomy at a single US academic center from January 1990 to September 2015. Pathology reports of resected specimens were reviewed to determine the total number of LNs examined and those positive for metastasis. CT, MRI, and/or EUS reports were used to determine the presence or absence of preoperatively detectable LN enlargement. RESULTS: Of the 490 surgical resections for PDAC, pN1 disease was detected in 59.4% (n = 291) and was positively correlated with the number of LNs pathologically examined (P < 0.001). Patients with pN1 disease had a shorter overall survival (OS) than those without nodal involvement (25.1 vs. 44.0 months; P < 0.001); however, OS was not different when stratifying by the number of nodes as on the eighth AJCC system. Pathologic examination of > 20 LNs in treatment naïve patients was optimal to detect pN1 disease and predict longer OS for those without nodal involvement (median survival > 41.1 months, P = 0.03 when compared to < 15 or 15-19 LNs examined). LNs were detected by CT, MRI, or EUS in 30.7% (103/335) of patients. The positive predictive value (PPV) of preoperative LN detection for pathologic involvement was 77.3% for treatment naïve patients and 84.2% for those without biliary obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Although the LN scoring in the seventh PDAC AJCC Staging System was sufficient to predict OS of our patients, more LNs than previously considered (20 vs. 15) were optimal to detect pathologic involvement. Preoperative LN detection was an accurate predictor of pN1 disease for treatment naïve patients without biliary obstruction.
BACKGROUND: The current (seventh edition) American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) Staging System for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) dichotomizes pathologic lymph node (LN) involvement into absence (pN0) or presence (pN1) of disease. The recently announced eighth edition also includes stratification on the number of positive nodes. Furthermore, LNs detected on preoperative imaging (CT, MRI, or endoscopic ultrasound-EUS) are considered to be pathologically involved in other gastrointestinal cancers. However, this is less well defined for PDAC. Therefore, the three aims of this study were to determine (1) whether the new AJCC staging system led to more accurate staging, (2) the number of nodes needed to be examined to detect pathologic involvement, and (3) if pN disease could be reliably detected on preoperative imaging in PDAC. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing pancreatectomy at a single US academic center from January 1990 to September 2015. Pathology reports of resected specimens were reviewed to determine the total number of LNs examined and those positive for metastasis. CT, MRI, and/or EUS reports were used to determine the presence or absence of preoperatively detectable LN enlargement. RESULTS: Of the 490 surgical resections for PDAC, pN1 disease was detected in 59.4% (n = 291) and was positively correlated with the number of LNs pathologically examined (P < 0.001). Patients with pN1 disease had a shorter overall survival (OS) than those without nodal involvement (25.1 vs. 44.0 months; P < 0.001); however, OS was not different when stratifying by the number of nodes as on the eighth AJCC system. Pathologic examination of > 20 LNs in treatment naïve patients was optimal to detect pN1 disease and predict longer OS for those without nodal involvement (median survival > 41.1 months, P = 0.03 when compared to < 15 or 15-19 LNs examined). LNs were detected by CT, MRI, or EUS in 30.7% (103/335) of patients. The positive predictive value (PPV) of preoperative LN detection for pathologic involvement was 77.3% for treatment naïve patients and 84.2% for those without biliary obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Although the LN scoring in the seventh PDAC AJCC Staging System was sufficient to predict OS of our patients, more LNs than previously considered (20 vs. 15) were optimal to detect pathologic involvement. Preoperative LN detection was an accurate predictor of pN1 disease for treatment naïve patients without biliary obstruction.
Authors: Marco La Torre; Giuseppe Nigri; Niccolò Petrucciani; Marco Cavallini; Paolo Aurello; Giulia Cosenza; Genoveffa Balducci; Vincenzo Ziparo; Giovanni Ramacciato Journal: Pancreatology Date: 2014-06-14 Impact factor: 3.996
Authors: K L Prenzel; A H Hölscher; D Vallböhmer; U Drebber; C A Gutschow; S P Mönig; D L Stippel Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2010-07-01 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Timothy R Donahue; William H Isacoff; O Joe Hines; James S Tomlinson; James J Farrell; Yasser M Bhat; Edward Garon; Barbara Clerkin; Howard A Reber Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2011-07
Authors: Giuseppe Malleo; Laura Maggino; Paola Capelli; Francesco Gulino; Silvia Segattini; Aldo Scarpa; Claudio Bassi; Giovanni Butturini; Roberto Salvia Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-02-28 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Ammar A Javed; Ding Ding; Erum Baig; Michael J Wright; Jonathan A Teinor; Daniyal Mansoor; Elizabeth Thompson; Ralph H Hruban; Amol Narang; William R Burns; Richard A Burkhart; Kelly Lafaro; Matthew J Weiss; John L Cameron; Christopher L Wolfgang; Jin He Journal: World J Surg Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Amanda L Blackford; Marcia Irene Canto; Alison P Klein; Ralph H Hruban; Michael Goggins Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Dorine S J Tseng; Bobby K Pranger; Maarten S van Leeuwen; Jan Pieter Pennings; Lodewijk A Brosens; Nadja Haj Mohammad; Vincent E de Meijer; Hjalmar C van Santvoort; Joris I Erdmann; I Quintus Molenaar Journal: Radiol Imaging Cancer Date: 2021-03-19
Authors: Sherif B Elsherif; Sanaz Javadi; Ott Le; Nathan Lamba; Matthew H G Katz; Eric P Tamm; Priya R Bhosale Journal: Radiol Imaging Cancer Date: 2022-03
Authors: Min Su You; Sang Hyub Lee; Young Hoon Choi; Bang-Sup Shin; Woo Hyun Paik; Ji Kon Ryu; Yong-Tae Kim; Dong Kee Jang; Jun Kyu Lee; Wooil Kwon; Jin-Young Jang; Sun-Whe Kim Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2019-10-15 Impact factor: 4.430