Literature DB >> 30091124

Tumour origin and R1 rates in pancreatic resections: towards consilience in pathology reporting.

Munita Bal1, Swapnil Rane2, Sanjay Talole3, Mukta Ramadwar2, Kedar Deodhar2, Prachi Patil4, Mahesh Goel5, Shailesh Shrikhande5.   

Abstract

To evaluate differences in the R1 rates of ampullary (AC), pancreatic (PC), and distal bile duct (DBD) cancers in pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) using standardised pathology assessment. Data of PD (2010-2011) analysed in accordance with the Royal College of Pathologists (UK) protocol, were retrieved. Clinicopathologic features, including frequency, topography, and mode of margin involvement in AC (n = 87), PC (n = 18), and DBD (n = 5) cancers were evaluated. The R1 rate was 7%, 67%, and 20% in the AC, PC, and DBD cancers (p < 0.001). Within the PC cohort, R1 rate was heterogeneous (chemo-naïve, 77%; post-neoadjuvant, 40%). Commonest involved margins were as follows: posterior in overall PD (35%), AC (43%), overall PC (33%), and post-neoadjuvant PC (100%); superior mesenteric artery margin in chemo-naïve PC (38%) and common bile duct margin in DBD (100%) cancers. In AC, majority (66%) of R1 were signet ring cell type. Indirect margin involvement due to tumour within lymph node, perineural sheath or lymphovascular space was observed in 26% cases, and altered R1 rate in AC, PC, and DBD cohorts by 1%, 12%, and 0%, respectively. Although not statistically significant, patients with R1 had lower disease-free survival than those with R0 (mean, 25.4 months versus 44.4 months). Tumour origin impacts R1 data in PD necessitating its accurate classification by pathologists. Indirect involvement, histology, and neoadjuvant therapy influence the R1 rate, albeit in a minority of cases. Generating cogent R1 data based on standardised pathology reporting is the foremost need of the hour.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Pancreatoduodenectomy; R1 rate; Resection margin; Standardised pathology evaluation protocol; Tumour origin

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30091124     DOI: 10.1007/s00428-018-2429-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Virchows Arch        ISSN: 0945-6317            Impact factor:   4.064


  35 in total

Review 1.  Meta-analysis of radical resection rates and margin assessment in pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  M D Chandrasegaram; D Goldstein; J Simes; V Gebski; J G Kench; A J Gill; J S Samra; N D Merrett; A J Richardson; A P Barbour
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2015-09-09       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  One thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies.

Authors:  John L Cameron; Taylor S Riall; JoAnn Coleman; Kenneth A Belcher
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 3.  Resection margins and R1 rates in pancreatic cancer--are we there yet?

Authors:  C S Verbeke
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2007-12-13       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 4.  Retroperitoneal margin of the pancreaticoduodenectomy specimen: anatomic mapping for the surgical pathologist.

Authors:  Mahmoud A Khalifa; Vlad Maksymov; Corwyn Rowsell
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2008-12-06       Impact factor: 4.064

5.  Redefining the R1 resection in pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  C S Verbeke; D Leitch; K V Menon; M J McMahon; P J Guillou; A Anthoney
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 6.939

6.  R0 Versus R1 Resection Matters after Pancreaticoduodenectomy, and Less after Distal or Total Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Cancer.

Authors:  Ihsan Ekin Demir; Carsten Jäger; A Melissa Schlitter; Björn Konukiewitz; Lynne Stecher; Stephan Schorn; Elke Tieftrunk; Florian Scheufele; Lenika Calavrezos; Rebekka Schirren; Irene Esposito; Wilko Weichert; Helmut Friess; Güralp O Ceyhan
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Standardization of surgical and pathologic variables is needed in multicenter trials of adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer: results from the ACOSOG Z5031 trial.

Authors:  Matthew H G Katz; Nipun B Merchant; Steven Brower; Megan Branda; Mitchell C Posner; L William Traverso; Ross A Abrams; Vincent J Picozzi; Peter W T Pisters
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 5.344

8.  Survival estimates after pancreatoduodenectomy skewed by non-standardized histopathology reports.

Authors:  Arne Westgaard; Ole Petter F Clausen; Ivar P Gladhaug
Journal:  APMIS       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 3.205

9.  Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: is there a survival difference for R1 resections versus locally advanced unresectable tumors? What is a "true" R0 resection?

Authors:  Ioannis T Konstantinidis; Andrew L Warshaw; Jill N Allen; Lawrence S Blaszkowsky; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; Vikram Deshpande; Theodore S Hong; Eunice L Kwak; Gregory Y Lauwers; David P Ryan; Jennifer A Wargo; Keith D Lillemoe; Cristina R Ferrone
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Evolution of pancreatoduodenectomy in a tertiary cancer center in India: improved results from service reconfiguration.

Authors:  Shailesh V Shrikhande; Savio George Barreto; B A Somashekar; Kunal Suradkar; Guruprasad S Shetty; Sanjay Talole; Bhawna Sirohi; Mahesh Goel; Parul J Shukla
Journal:  Pancreatology       Date:  2012-11-10       Impact factor: 3.996

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.