Rene Warschkow1, Catherine Tsai2, Nastassja Köhn2, Suna Erdem2, Bruno Schmied1, Daniel P Nussbaum3, Beat Gloor2, Sascha A Müller3, Dan Blazer4, Mathias Worni5,6,7. 1. Department of Surgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Gallen, Switzerland. 2. Department of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland. 3. Berner Viszeralchirurgie, Klinik Beau-Site, Hirslanden, Bern, Switzerland. 4. Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. mathias.worni@duke.edu. 6. Swiss Institute for Translational and Entrepreneurial Medicine, Stiftung Lindenhof, Campus SLB, Bern, Switzerland. mathias.worni@duke.edu. 7. Clarunis, Department of Visceral Surgery, University Centre for Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, St. Clara Hospital and University Hospital Basel, CH-4058, Basel, Switzerland. mathias.worni@duke.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: While the importance of lymphadenectomy is well-established for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, its direct impact on survival in relation to other predictive factors is still ill-defined. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base 2006-2015 was queried for patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma (stage IA-IIB). Patients were dichotomized into the following two groups, those with 1-14 resected lymph nodes and those with ≥ 15. Optimal number of resected lymph nodes and the effect of lymphadenectomy on survival were assessed using various statistical modeling techniques. Mediation analysis was performed to differentiate the direct and indirect effect of lymph node resection on survival. RESULTS: A total of 21,912 patients were included; median age was 66 years (IQR 59-73), 48.9% were female. Median number of resected lymph nodes was 15 (IQR 10-22), 10,163 (46.4%) had 1-14 and 11,749 (53.6%) had ≥ 15 lymph nodes retrieved. Lymph node positivity increased by 4.1% per lymph node up to eight examined lymph nodes, and by 0.6% per lymph node above eight. Five-year overall survival was 17.9%. Overall survival was better in the ≥ 15 lymph node group (adjusted HR 0.91, CI 0.88-0.95, p < 0.001). On a continuous scale, survival improved with increasing LNs collected. Patients who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy and were treated at high-volume centers had improved overall survival compared with their counterparts (adjusted HR 0.59, CI 0.57-0.62, p < 0.001; adjusted HR 0.86, CI 0.83-0.89, p < 0.001, respectively). Mediation analysis revealed that lymphadenectomy had only 18% direct effect on improved overall survival, while 82% of its effect were mediated by other factors like treatment at high-volume hospitals and adjuvant chemotherapy. DISCUSSION: While higher number of resected lymph nodes increases lymph node positivity and is associated with better overall survival, most of the observed survival benefit is mediated by chemotherapy and treatment at high-volume centers.
PURPOSE: While the importance of lymphadenectomy is well-established for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, its direct impact on survival in relation to other predictive factors is still ill-defined. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base 2006-2015 was queried for patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma (stage IA-IIB). Patients were dichotomized into the following two groups, those with 1-14 resected lymph nodes and those with ≥ 15. Optimal number of resected lymph nodes and the effect of lymphadenectomy on survival were assessed using various statistical modeling techniques. Mediation analysis was performed to differentiate the direct and indirect effect of lymph node resection on survival. RESULTS: A total of 21,912 patients were included; median age was 66 years (IQR 59-73), 48.9% were female. Median number of resected lymph nodes was 15 (IQR 10-22), 10,163 (46.4%) had 1-14 and 11,749 (53.6%) had ≥ 15 lymph nodes retrieved. Lymph node positivity increased by 4.1% per lymph node up to eight examined lymph nodes, and by 0.6% per lymph node above eight. Five-year overall survival was 17.9%. Overall survival was better in the ≥ 15 lymph node group (adjusted HR 0.91, CI 0.88-0.95, p < 0.001). On a continuous scale, survival improved with increasing LNs collected. Patients who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy and were treated at high-volume centers had improved overall survival compared with their counterparts (adjusted HR 0.59, CI 0.57-0.62, p < 0.001; adjusted HR 0.86, CI 0.83-0.89, p < 0.001, respectively). Mediation analysis revealed that lymphadenectomy had only 18% direct effect on improved overall survival, while 82% of its effect were mediated by other factors like treatment at high-volume hospitals and adjuvant chemotherapy. DISCUSSION: While higher number of resected lymph nodes increases lymph node positivity and is associated with better overall survival, most of the observed survival benefit is mediated by chemotherapy and treatment at high-volume centers.
Entities:
Keywords:
Lymph node; Mediation analysis; National Cancer Data Base; Pancreatic cancer; Surgery; Survival
Authors: R F de Wilde; M G H Besselink; I van der Tweel; I H J T de Hingh; C H J van Eijck; C H C Dejong; R J Porte; D J Gouma; O R C Busch; I Q Molenaar Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2012-01-11 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: John P Neoptolemos; Daniel H Palmer; Paula Ghaneh; Eftychia E Psarelli; Juan W Valle; Christopher M Halloran; Olusola Faluyi; Derek A O'Reilly; David Cunningham; Jonathan Wadsley; Suzanne Darby; Tim Meyer; Roopinder Gillmore; Alan Anthoney; Pehr Lind; Bengt Glimelius; Stephen Falk; Jakob R Izbicki; Gary William Middleton; Sebastian Cummins; Paul J Ross; Harpreet Wasan; Alec McDonald; Tom Crosby; Yuk Ting Ma; Kinnari Patel; David Sherriff; Rubin Soomal; David Borg; Sharmila Sothi; Pascal Hammel; Thilo Hackert; Richard Jackson; Markus W Büchler Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 79.321
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: Sonja Gillen; Tibor Schuster; Christian Meyer Zum Büschenfelde; Helmut Friess; Jörg Kleeff Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2010-04-20 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Helmut Oettle; Peter Neuhaus; Andreas Hochhaus; Jörg Thomas Hartmann; Klaus Gellert; Karsten Ridwelski; Marco Niedergethmann; Carl Zülke; Jörg Fahlke; Michael B Arning; Marianne Sinn; Axel Hinke; Hanno Riess Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-10-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Johanna A M G Tol; Dirk J Gouma; Claudio Bassi; Christos Dervenis; Marco Montorsi; Mustapha Adham; Ake Andrén-Sandberg; Horacio J Asbun; Maximilian Bockhorn; Markus W Büchler; Kevin C Conlon; Laureano Fernández-Cruz; Abe Fingerhut; Helmut Friess; Werner Hartwig; Jakob R Izbicki; Keith D Lillemoe; Miroslav N Milicevic; John P Neoptolemos; Shailesh V Shrikhande; Charles M Vollmer; Charles J Yeo; Richard M Charnley Journal: Surgery Date: 2014-07-22 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Dimitrios Prassas; Sami Alexander Safi; Maria Chara Stylianidi; Leila Anne Telan; Sarah Krieg; Christoph Roderburg; Irene Esposito; Tom Luedde; Wolfram Trudo Knoefel; Andreas Krieg Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-04-06 Impact factor: 6.639