Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Pancreatic Neoplasms: HELP
Articles by Christos Dervenis
Based on 21 articles published since 2009
(Why 21 articles?)
||||

Between 2009 and 2019, C. Dervenis wrote the following 21 articles about Pancreatic Neoplasms.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Guideline Guidelines for time-to-event end-point definitions in trials for pancreatic cancer. Results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials). 2014

Bonnetain, Franck / Bonsing, Bert / Conroy, Thierry / Dousseau, Adelaide / Glimelius, Bengt / Haustermans, Karin / Lacaine, François / Van Laethem, Jean Luc / Aparicio, Thomas / Aust, Daniela / Bassi, Claudio / Berger, Virginie / Chamorey, Emmanuel / Chibaudel, Benoist / Dahan, Laeticia / De Gramont, Aimery / Delpero, Jean Robert / Dervenis, Christos / Ducreux, Michel / Gal, Jocelyn / Gerber, Erich / Ghaneh, Paula / Hammel, Pascal / Hendlisz, Alain / Jooste, Valérie / Labianca, Roberto / Latouche, Aurelien / Lutz, Manfred / Macarulla, Teresa / Malka, David / Mauer, Muriel / Mitry, Emmanuel / Neoptolemos, John / Pessaux, Patrick / Sauvanet, Alain / Tabernero, Josep / Taieb, Julien / van Tienhoven, Geertjan / Gourgou-Bourgade, Sophie / Bellera, Carine / Mathoulin-Pélissier, Simone / Collette, Laurence. ·Methodology and Quality of Life Unit in Cancer, EA 3181, University Hospital of Besançon and CTD-INCa Gercor, UNICNCER GERICO, Besançon, France. Electronic address: franck.bonnetain@univ-fcomte.fr. · Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands. · Department of Medical Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France. · Bordeaux Segalen University & CHRU, Bordeaux, France. · Department of Radiology, Oncology and Radiation Science, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. · Department of Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium. · Digestive Surgical Department, Tenon hospital, Paris, France. · Gastro Intestinal Cancer Unit Erasme Hospital Brussels, Belgium. · Gastroenterology Department, Avicenne Hospital, Paris 13, Bobigny, France. · Institute for Pathology, University Hospital Carl-Gustav-Carus, Dresden, Germany. · Surgical and Gastroenterological Department, Endocrine and Pancreatic Unit, Hospital of 'G.B.Rossi', University of Verona, Italy. · Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest - Centre Paul Papin Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer (CLCC), Angers, France. · Biostatistics Unit, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France. · Oncology Department, Hôpital Saint-Antoine & CTD-INCa GERCOR, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, UPMC Paris VI, Paris, France. · Gastroenterology Department, Hopital la Timone, Assitance publique des Hopitaux de Marseille, Marseille, France. · Department of Surgery, Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille, France. · Department of Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Gastroenterology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France. · Biostatistician, Biostatistics Unit, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France. · Department of Radiotherapy, Institut fuer Radioonkologie, Vienna, Austria. · Department of Surgical Oncology, Royal Liverpool Hospital, United Kingdom. · Department of Gastroenterology, Beaujon Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France. · Digestive Oncology and Gastro-enterology Department, Jules Bordet Institute, Brussels, Belgium. · Digestive Cancer Registry, INSERM U866, Dijon, France. · Medical Oncology Unit, Ospedali Riuniti di Bergamo, Bergame, Italy. · Inserm, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, U1018, Biostatistics Team, Villejuif, France. · Gastroenterology Department, Caritas Hospital, Saarbrücken, Germany. · Department of the Gastrointestinal Tumors and Phase I Unit, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain. · Statistics Department, EORTC, Brussels, Belgium. · Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Hôpital René Huguenin, Saint-Cloud, France. · Division of Surgery and Oncology at the University of Liverpool and Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom. · Department of Digestive Surgery, Universitu Hospital Strasbourg, France. · Department of Hepato-pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Beaujon Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France. · Department of Hepato-gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Georges Pompidou European hospital, Paris, France. · Department of Radiation Oncology, Academisch Medisch Centrum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Institut Du Cancer de Montpellier, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, and Data Center for Cancer Clinical Trials, CTD-INCa, Montpellier, France. · Clinical and Epidemiological Research Unit, Institut Bergonie, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Bordeaux, France; Data Center for Cancer Clinical Trials, CTD-INCa, Bordeaux, France; INSERM, Centre d'Investigation Clinique - Épidémiologie Clinique CIC-EC 7, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. ·Eur J Cancer · Pubmed #25256896.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Using potential surrogate end-points for overall survival (OS) such as Disease-Free- (DFS) or Progression-Free Survival (PFS) is increasingly common in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, end-points are too often imprecisely defined which largely contributes to a lack of homogeneity across trials, hampering comparison between them. The aim of the DATECAN (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials)-Pancreas project is to provide guidelines for standardised definition of time-to-event end-points in RCTs for pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Time-to-event end-points currently used were identified from a literature review of pancreatic RCT trials (2006-2009). Academic research groups were contacted for participation in order to select clinicians and methodologists to participate in the pilot and scoring groups (>30 experts). A consensus was built after 2 rounds of the modified Delphi formal consensus approach with the Rand scoring methodology (range: 1-9). RESULTS: For pancreatic cancer, 14 time to event end-points and 25 distinct event types applied to two settings (detectable disease and/or no detectable disease) were considered relevant and included in the questionnaire sent to 52 selected experts. Thirty experts answered both scoring rounds. A total of 204 events distributed over the 14 end-points were scored. After the first round, consensus was reached for 25 items; after the second consensus was reached for 156 items; and after the face-to-face meeting for 203 items. CONCLUSION: The formal consensus approach reached the elaboration of guidelines for standardised definitions of time-to-event end-points allowing cross-comparison of RCTs in pancreatic cancer.

2 Guideline Definition of a standard lymphadenectomy in surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a consensus statement by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). 2014

Tol, Johanna A M G / Gouma, Dirk J / Bassi, Claudio / Dervenis, Christos / Montorsi, Marco / Adham, Mustapha / Andrén-Sandberg, Ake / Asbun, Horacio J / Bockhorn, Maximilian / Büchler, Markus W / Conlon, Kevin C / Fernández-Cruz, Laureano / Fingerhut, Abe / Friess, Helmut / Hartwig, Werner / Izbicki, Jakob R / Lillemoe, Keith D / Milicevic, Miroslav N / Neoptolemos, John P / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Vollmer, Charles M / Yeo, Charles J / Charnley, Richard M / Anonymous3050801. ·Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: D.J.Gouma@amc.nl. · Department of Surgery and Oncology, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of First Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of General Surgery, Instituto Clinico Humanitas IRCCS, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. · Department of HPB Surgery, Hopital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France. · Department of Surgery, Karolinska Institutet at Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden. · Department of General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. · Department of General-, Visceral- and Thoracic-Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. · Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. · Professorial Surgical Unit, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. · Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · First Department of Digestive Surgery, Hippokrateon Hospital, University of Athens, Athens, Greece; Section for Surgical Research, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. · Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and the Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. · First Surgical Clinic, Clinical Center of Serbia, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia. · Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Liverpool Cancer Research-UK Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Gastrointestinal and HPB Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Department of Surgery, Penn Medicine, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. · Department of Surgery, Jefferson Pancreas, Biliary and Related Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA. · Department of HPB & Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. ·Surgery · Pubmed #25061003.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The lymph node (Ln) status of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an important predictor of survival. The survival benefit of extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy is, however, disputed, and there is no true definition of the optimal extent of the lymphadenectomy. The aim of this study was to formulate a definition for standard lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy. METHODS: During a consensus meeting of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery, pancreatic surgeons formulated a consensus statement based on available literature and their experience. RESULTS: The nomenclature of the Japanese Pancreas Society was accepted by all participants. Extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatoduodenectomy with resection of Ln's along the left side of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and around the celiac trunk, splenic artery, or left gastric artery showed no survival benefit compared with a standard lymphadenectomy. No level I evidence was available on prognostic impact of positive para-aortic Ln's. Consensus was reached on selectively removing suspected Ln's outside the resection area for frozen section. No consensus was reached on continuing or terminating resection in cases where these nodes were positive. CONCLUSION: Extended lymphadenectomy cannot be recommended. Standard lymphadenectomy for pancreatoduodenectomy should strive to resect Ln stations no. 5, 6, 8a, 12b1, 12b2, 12c, 13a, 13b, 14a, 14b, 17a, and 17b. For cancers of the body and tail of the pancreas, removal of stations 10, 11, and 18 is standard. Furthermore, lymphadenectomy is important for adequate nodal staging. Both pancreatic resection in relatively fit patients or nonresectional palliative treatment were accepted as acceptable treatment in cases of positive Ln's outside the resection plane. This consensus statement could serve as a guide for surgeons and researchers in future directives and new clinical studies.

3 Guideline Extended pancreatectomy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: definition and consensus of the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). 2014

Hartwig, Werner / Vollmer, Charles M / Fingerhut, Abe / Yeo, Charles J / Neoptolemos, John P / Adham, Mustapha / Andrén-Sandberg, Ake / Asbun, Horacio J / Bassi, Claudio / Bockhorn, Max / Charnley, Richard / Conlon, Kevin C / Dervenis, Christos / Fernandez-Cruz, Laureano / Friess, Helmut / Gouma, Dirk J / Imrie, Clem W / Lillemoe, Keith D / Milićević, Miroslav N / Montorsi, Marco / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Vashist, Yogesh K / Izbicki, Jakob R / Büchler, Markus W / Anonymous1520795. ·Department of Surgery, Klinikum Großhadern, University of Munich, Munich, Germany. · Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Penn Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. · Department of Digestive Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal, Poissy, France. · Department of Surgery, Jefferson Pancreas, Biliary and Related Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA. · Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Liverpool Cancer Research-UK Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Department of HPB Surgery, Hopital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France. · Department of Surgery, Karolinska Institutet at Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden. · Department of General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. · Department of Surgery and Oncology, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of General-, Visceral- and Thoracic-Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. · Department of HPB & Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · Professorial Surgical Unit, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. · Department of First Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Academic Unit of Surgery, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. · Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. · First Surgical Clinic, Clinical Center of Serbia, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia. · Department of General Surgery, Instituto Clinico Humanitas IRCCS, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. · Department of Gastrointestinal and HPB Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: markus.buechler@med.uni-heidelberg.de. ·Surgery · Pubmed #24856668.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Complete macroscopic tumor resection is one of the most relevant predictors of long-term survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Because locally advanced pancreatic tumors can involve adjacent organs, "extended" pancreatectomy that includes the resection of additional organs may be needed to achieve this goal. Our aim was to develop a common consistent terminology to be used in centers reporting results of pancreatic resections for cancer. METHODS: An international panel of pancreatic surgeons working in well-known, high-volume centers reviewed the literature on extended pancreatectomies and worked together to establish a consensus on the definition and the role of extended pancreatectomy in pancreatic cancer. RESULTS: Macroscopic (R1) and microscopic (R0) complete tumor resection can be achieved in patients with locally advanced disease by extended pancreatectomy. Operative time, blood loss, need for blood transfusions, duration of stay in the intensive care unit, and hospital morbidity, and possibly also perioperative mortality are increased with extended resections. Long-term survival is similar compared with standard resections but appears to be better compared with bypass surgery or nonsurgical palliative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. It was not possible to identify any clear prognostic criteria based on the specific additional organ resected. CONCLUSION: Despite increased perioperative morbidity, extended pancreatectomy is warranted in locally advanced disease to achieve long-term survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma if macroscopic clearance can be achieved. Definitions of extended pancreatectomies for locally advanced disease (and not distant metastatic disease) are established that are crucial for comparison of results of future trials across different practices and countries, in particular for those using neoadjuvant therapy.

4 Guideline Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a consensus statement by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). 2014

Bockhorn, Maximilian / Uzunoglu, Faik G / Adham, Mustapha / Imrie, Clem / Milicevic, Miroslav / Sandberg, Aken A / Asbun, Horacio J / Bassi, Claudio / Büchler, Markus / Charnley, Richard M / Conlon, Kevin / Cruz, Laureano Fernandez / Dervenis, Christos / Fingerhutt, Abe / Friess, Helmut / Gouma, Dirk J / Hartwig, Werner / Lillemoe, Keith D / Montorsi, Marco / Neoptolemos, John P / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Takaori, Kyoichi / Traverso, William / Vashist, Yogesh K / Vollmer, Charles / Yeo, Charles J / Izbicki, Jakob R / Anonymous1510795. ·Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. · Department of HPB Surgery, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France. · Academic Unit of Surgery, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. · First Surgical Clinic, Clinical Center of Serbia, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia. · Department of Surgery, Karolinska Institutet at Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden. · Department of General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. · Department of Surgery and Oncology, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. · Department of HPB & Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · Professorial Surgical Unit, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. · Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · First Department of Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Digestive Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal, Poissy, France. · Department of Surgery, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. · Department of General Surgery, Instituto Clinico Humanitas IRCCS, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. · Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Liverpool Cancer Research-UK Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Gastrointestinal and HPB Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. · Department of Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan. · St. Luke's Clinic - Center For Pancreatic and Liver Diseases, Boise, ID. · Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Penn Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. · Department of Surgery, Jefferson Pancreas, Biliary and Related Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA. · Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. Electronic address: izbicki@uke.de. ·Surgery · Pubmed #24856119.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: This position statement was developed to expedite a consensus on definition and treatment for borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BRPC) that would have worldwide acceptability. METHODS: An international panel of pancreatic surgeons from well-established, high-volume centers collaborated on a literature review and development of consensus on issues related to borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. RESULTS: The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) supports the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria for the definition of BRPC. Current evidence supports operative exploration and resection in the case of involvement of the mesentericoportal venous axis; in addition, a new classification of extrahepatic mesentericoportal venous resections is proposed by the ISGPS. Suspicion of arterial involvement should lead to exploration to confirm the imaging-based findings. Formal arterial resections are not recommended; however, in exceptional circumstances, individual therapeutic approaches may be evaluated under experimental protocols. The ISGPS endorses the recommendations for specimen examination and the definition of an R1 resection (tumor within 1 mm from the margin) used by the British Royal College of Pathologists. Standard preoperative diagnostics for BRPC may include: (1) serum levels of CA19-9, because CA19-9 levels predict survival in large retrospective series; and also (2) the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score and the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio because of the prognostic relevance of the systemic inflammatory response. Various regimens of neoadjuvant therapy are recommended only in the setting of prospective trials at high-volume centers. CONCLUSION: Current evidence justifies portomesenteric venous resection in patients with BRPC. Basic definitions were identified, that are currently lacking but that are needed to obtain further evidence and improvement for this important patient subgroup. A consensus for each topic is given.

5 Review Definition and classification of chyle leak after pancreatic operation: A consensus statement by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery. 2017

Besselink, Marc G / van Rijssen, L Bengt / Bassi, Claudio / Dervenis, Christos / Montorsi, Marco / Adham, Mustapha / Asbun, Horacio J / Bockhorn, Maximillian / Strobel, Oliver / Büchler, Markus W / Busch, Olivier R / Charnley, Richard M / Conlon, Kevin C / Fernández-Cruz, Laureano / Fingerhut, Abe / Friess, Helmut / Izbicki, Jakob R / Lillemoe, Keith D / Neoptolemos, John P / Sarr, Michael G / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Sitarz, Robert / Vollmer, Charles M / Yeo, Charles J / Hartwig, Werner / Wolfgang, Christopher L / Gouma, Dirk J / Anonymous2270883. ·Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: m.g.besselink@amc.nl. · Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Department of Surgery and Oncology, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of First Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Surgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and University, Milan, Italy. · Department of HPB Surgery, Hopital Edouard Herriot, HCL, UCBL1, Lyon, France. · Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. · Department of General-, Visceral-, and Thoracic-Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. · Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. · Department of HPB & Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · Professorial Surgical Unit, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. · Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · First Department of Digestive Surgery, Hippokrateon Hospital, University of Athens, Athens, Greece; Section for Surgical Research, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. · Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and the Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. · Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Division of Subspecialty General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. · Department of GI and HPB Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Department of Surgical Oncology, Medical University in Lublin, Poland. · Department of Surgery, Penn Medicine, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. · Department of Surgery, Jefferson Pancreas, Biliary and Related Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA. · Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Ludwig Maximilians University, University of Munich, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD. ·Surgery · Pubmed #27692778.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Recent literature suggests that chyle leak may complicate up to 10% of pancreatic resections. Treatment depends on its severity, which may include chylous ascites. No international consensus definition or grading system of chyle leak currently is available. METHODS: The International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery, an international panel of pancreatic surgeons working in well-known, high-volume centers, reviewed the literature and worked together to establish a consensus on the definition and classification of chyle leak after pancreatic operation. RESULTS: Chyle leak was defined as output of milky-colored fluid from a drain, drain site, or wound on or after postoperative day 3, with a triglyceride content ≥110 mg/dL (≥1.2 mmol/L). Three different grades of severity were defined according to the management needed: grade A, no specific intervention other than oral dietary restrictions; grade B, prolongation of hospital stay, nasoenteral nutrition with dietary restriction, total parenteral nutrition, octreotide, maintenance of surgical drains, or placement of new percutaneous drains; and grade C, need for other more invasive in-hospital treatment, intensive care unit admission, or mortality. CONCLUSION: This classification and grading system for chyle leak after pancreatic resection allows for comparison of outcomes between series. As with the other the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery consensus statements, this classification should facilitate communication and evaluation of different approaches to the prevention and treatment of this complication.

6 Review Positive para-aortic lymph nodes following pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer. Systematic review and meta-analysis of impact on short term survival and association with clinicopathologic features. 2016

Agalianos, Christos / Gouvas, Nikolaos / Papaparaskeva, Kleo / Dervenis, Christos. ·Athens Naval and Veterans Hospital, Department of Surgery, Athens, Greece. Electronic address: xagali@gmail.com. · "Konstantopouleio" Hospital of Athens, Department of Surgery, Athens, Greece. · "Konstantopouleio" Hospital of Athens, Department of Pathology, Athens, Greece. ·HPB (Oxford) · Pubmed #27485057.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The relation between para-aortic lymph nodes (PALN) involvement and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) survival, along with the optimal handling of this particular lymph node station remain unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess this. METHODS: A search of Medline, Embase, Ovid and Cochrane databases was performed until July 2015 to identify studies reporting on the relation of PALN involvement and PDAC outcomes and a meta-analysis was performed following data extraction. RESULTS: Ten retrospective studies and two prospective non randomized studies (2467 patients) were included. Patients with positive PALN had worse one (p < 0.00001) and two year (p < 0.00001) survival when compared with patients with negative PALN. Even when comparing only patients with positive lymph nodes (N1), patients with PALN involvement presented with a significant lower one (p = 0.03) and two (p = 0.002) year survival. PALN involvement was associated with an increased possibility of positive margin (R1) resection (p < 0.00001), stations' 12, 14 and 17 malignant infiltration (p < 0.00001), but not with tumour stage (p = 0.78). DISCUSSION: Involvement of PALN is associated with decreased survival in pancreatic cancer patients. However, existence of long term survivors among this subgroup of patients should be further evaluated, in order to identify factors associated with their favourable prognosis.

7 Review Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: current opinions on a rare, but potentially curable neoplasm. 2014

Karakaxas, Dimitrios / Gazouli, Maria / Liakakos, Theodoros / Vaiopoulou, Anna / Apessou, Dimitra / Papaparaskeva, Kleo / Patapis, Pavlos / Dervenis, Christos. ·aSurgical Department-HPB Surgical Unit, Konstantopouleion Agia Olga General Hospital bLaboratory of Biology, Department of Basic Medical Science, School of Medicine, University of Athens cThird Department of Surgery, University of Athens School of Medicine, Attikon University Hospital, Athens, Greece. ·Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol · Pubmed #24987821.

ABSTRACT: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) share a unique genetic identity, functional behavior, and clinical course. Compared with tumors of the exocrine pancreas, they are rare and show a different biologic behavior and prognosis. On the basis of data from recent studies, all PNETs, outside of small insulinomas, should be considered potentially malignant and treated accordingly. Untreated tumors have a high possibility to grow locally into adjacent structures or spread to distant organs. Although surgical excision irrespective of tumor functioning or nonfunctioning state remains the cornerstone of therapy, providing the best disease-free and survival rates to date, the understanding of the genetic nature of the disease yields new 'targets' to consider in drug development. The aim of this review is to summarize all recent advances of genetic research and new drug development in terms of PNETs, especially their genetic identity and subsequent alterations leading to the development of near or total malignant activity, and the new medical treatment strategies of this potentially curable disease on the basis of therapeutical agents acting, where possible, at the genetic level.

8 Clinical Trial Optimal duration and timing of adjuvant chemotherapy after definitive surgery for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas: ongoing lessons from the ESPAC-3 study. 2014

Valle, Juan W / Palmer, Daniel / Jackson, Richard / Cox, Trevor / Neoptolemos, John P / Ghaneh, Paula / Rawcliffe, Charlotte L / Bassi, Claudio / Stocken, Deborah D / Cunningham, David / O'Reilly, Derek / Goldstein, David / Robinson, Bridget A / Karapetis, Christos / Scarfe, Andrew / Lacaine, Francois / Sand, Juhani / Izbicki, Jakob R / Mayerle, Julia / Dervenis, Christos / Oláh, Attila / Butturini, Giovanni / Lind, Pehr A / Middleton, Mark R / Anthoney, Alan / Sumpter, Kate / Carter, Ross / Büchler, Markus W. ·Juan W. Valle, Derek O'Reilly, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Christie Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester · Richard Jackson, Trevor Cox, John P. Neoptolemos, Paula Ghaneh, Charlotte L. Rawcliffe, Liverpool Cancer Research UK Centre and the National Institute for Health Research Pancreas Biomedical Research Unit, University of Liverpool, Liverpool · Daniel Palmer, the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · Deborah D. Stocken, the Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham · David Cunningham, Royal Marsden Hospital Foundation Trust, Sutton · Mark R. Middleton, Churchill Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford · Alan Anthoney, The Leeds Teaching Hospital Trust, Leeds · Kate Sumpter, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne · Ross Carter, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, United Kingdom · Claudio Bassi, Giovanni Butturini, University of Verona, Verona, Italy · David Goldstein, Bridget A. Robinson, Christos Karapetis, the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group, Camperdown, Australia · Andrew Scarfe, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada · Francois Lacaine, Hôpital TENON, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Universite Pierre Et Marie Curie, Paris, France · Juhani Sand, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland · Jakob R. Izbicki, University of Hamburg, Hamburg · Julia Mayerle, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald, Greifswald · Markus W. Büchler, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany · Christos Dervenis, the Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece · Attila Oláh, the Petz Aladar Hospital, Gyor, Hungary · Pehr A. Lind, Karolinska-Stockholm Söder Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #24419109.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Adjuvant chemotherapy improves patient survival rates after resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but the optimal duration and time to initiate chemotherapy is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treated within the international, phase III, European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer-3 (version 2) study were included if they had been randomly assigned to chemotherapy. Overall survival analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis, retaining patients in their randomized groups, and adjusting the overall treatment effect by known prognostic variables as well as the start time of chemotherapy. RESULTS: There were 985 patients, of whom 486 (49%) received gemcitabine and 499 (51%) received fluorouracil; 675 patients (68%) completed all six cycles of chemotherapy (full course) and 293 patients (30%) completed one to five cycles. Lymph node involvement, resection margins status, tumor differentiation, and completion of therapy were all shown by multivariable Cox regression to be independent survival factors. Overall survival favored patients who completed the full six courses of treatment versus those who did not (hazard ratio [HR], 0.516; 95% CI, 0.443 to 0.601; P < .001). Time to starting chemotherapy did not influence overall survival rates for the full study population (HR, 0.985; 95% CI, 0.956 to 1.015). Chemotherapy start time was an important survival factor only for the subgroup of patients who did not complete therapy, in favor of later treatment (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Completion of all six cycles of planned adjuvant chemotherapy rather than early initiation was an independent prognostic factor after resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. There seems to be no difference in outcome if chemotherapy is delayed up to 12 weeks, thus allowing adequate time for postoperative recovery.

9 Clinical Trial Adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus folinic acid vs gemcitabine following pancreatic cancer resection: a randomized controlled trial. 2010

Neoptolemos, John P / Stocken, Deborah D / Bassi, Claudio / Ghaneh, Paula / Cunningham, David / Goldstein, David / Padbury, Robert / Moore, Malcolm J / Gallinger, Steven / Mariette, Christophe / Wente, Moritz N / Izbicki, Jakob R / Friess, Helmut / Lerch, Markus M / Dervenis, Christos / Oláh, Attila / Butturini, Giovanni / Doi, Ryuichiro / Lind, Pehr A / Smith, David / Valle, Juan W / Palmer, Daniel H / Buckels, John A / Thompson, Joyce / McKay, Colin J / Rawcliffe, Charlotte L / Büchler, Markus W / Anonymous9620671. ·Liverpool Cancer Research UK Cancer Trials Unit, Cancer Research UK Centre, University of Liverpool, Fifth Floor, UCD Bldg, Daulby Street, Liverpool, L69 3GA, United Kingdom. j.p.neoptolemos@liverpool.ac.uk ·JAMA · Pubmed #20823433.

ABSTRACT: CONTEXT: Adjuvant fluorouracil has been shown to be of benefit for patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Gemcitabine is known to be the most effective agent in advanced disease as well as an effective agent in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether fluorouracil or gemcitabine is superior in terms of overall survival as adjuvant treatment following resection of pancreatic cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: The European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 trial, an open-label, phase 3, randomized controlled trial conducted in 159 pancreatic cancer centers in Europe, Australasia, Japan, and Canada. Included in ESPAC-3 version 2 were 1088 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who had undergone cancer resection; patients were randomized between July 2000 and January 2007 and underwent at least 2 years of follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received either fluorouracil plus folinic acid (folinic acid, 20 mg/m(2), intravenous bolus injection, followed by fluorouracil, 425 mg/m(2) intravenous bolus injection given 1-5 days every 28 days) (n = 551) or gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion once a week for 3 of every 4 weeks) (n = 537) for 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was overall survival; secondary measures were toxicity, progression-free survival, and quality of life. RESULTS: Final analysis was carried out on an intention-to-treat basis after a median of 34.2 (interquartile range, 27.1-43.4) months' follow-up after 753 deaths (69%). Median survival was 23.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.1-25.0) months for patients treated with fluorouracil plus folinic acid and 23.6 (95% CI, 21.4-26.4) months for those treated with gemcitabine (chi(1)(2) = 0.7; P = .39; hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.81-1.08]). Seventy-seven patients (14%) receiving fluorouracil plus folinic acid had 97 treatment-related serious adverse events, compared with 40 patients (7.5%) receiving gemcitabine, who had 52 events (P < .001). There were no significant differences in either progression-free survival or global quality-of-life scores between the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Compared with the use of fluorouracil plus folinic acid, gemcitabine did not result in improved overall survival in patients with completely resected pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00058201.

10 Article Intratumoural expression of deoxycytidylate deaminase or ribonuceotide reductase subunit M1 expression are not related to survival in patients with resected pancreatic cancer given adjuvant chemotherapy. 2018

Elander, N O / Aughton, K / Ghaneh, P / Neoptolemos, J P / Palmer, D H / Cox, T F / Campbell, F / Costello, E / Halloran, C M / Mackey, J R / Scarfe, A G / Valle, J W / McDonald, A C / Carter, R / Tebbutt, N C / Goldstein, D / Shannon, J / Dervenis, C / Glimelius, B / Deakin, M / Charnley, R M / Anthoney, A / Lerch, M M / Mayerle, J / Oláh, A / Büchler, M W / Greenhalf, W / Anonymous1351258. ·Cancer Research U.K. Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Cross Cancer Institute and University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. · University of Manchester/The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. · The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK. · Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK. · Austin Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. · Prince of Wales hospital and Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia. · Nepean Cancer Centre and University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia. · The Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. · University Hospital, North Staffordshire, Staffordshire, UK. · Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK. · Department of Medicine A, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. · Department of Medicine II, University Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany. · The Petz Aladar Hospital, Gyor, Hungary. · Department of Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. · Cancer Research U.K. Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. greenhaf@liv.ac.uk. ·Br J Cancer · Pubmed #29523831.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Deoxycytidylate deaminase (DCTD) and ribonucleotide reductase subunit M1 (RRM1) are potential prognostic and predictive biomarkers for pyrimidine-based chemotherapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Immunohistochemical staining of DCTD and RRM1 was performed on tissue microarrays representing tumour samples from 303 patients in European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-randomised adjuvant trials following pancreatic resection, 272 of whom had received gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil with folinic acid in ESPAC-3(v2), and 31 patients from the combined ESPAC-3(v1) and ESPAC-1 post-operative pure observational groups. RESULTS: Neither log-rank testing on dichotomised strata or Cox proportional hazard regression showed any relationship of DCTD or RRM1 expression levels to survival overall or by treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Expression of either DCTD or RRM1 was not prognostic or predictive in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma who had had post-operative chemotherapy with either gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil with folinic acid.

11 Article Expression of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) and hENT1 predicts survival in pancreatic cancer. 2018

Elander, N O / Aughton, K / Ghaneh, P / Neoptolemos, J P / Palmer, D H / Cox, T F / Campbell, F / Costello, E / Halloran, C M / Mackey, J R / Scarfe, A G / Valle, J W / McDonald, A C / Carter, R / Tebbutt, N C / Goldstein, D / Shannon, J / Dervenis, C / Glimelius, B / Deakin, M / Charnley, R M / Anthoney, Alan / Lerch, M M / Mayerle, J / Oláh, A / Büchler, M W / Greenhalf, W / Anonymous1151214. ·From the Cancer Research U.K. Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · The Department of Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. · Cross Cancer Institute and University of Alberta, Alberta, Canada. · University of Manchester/The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. · The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, Scotland, UK. · Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland, UK. · Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia. · Prince of Wales hospital and Clinical School University of New South Wales, New South Wales, Australia. · Nepean Cancer Centre and University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. · The Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. · University Hospital, North Staffordshire, UK. · Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK. · Department of Medicine A, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. · Department of Medicine II, University Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany. · The Petz Aladar Hospital, Gyor, Hungary. · From the Cancer Research U.K. Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. greenhaf@liv.ac.uk. ·Br J Cancer · Pubmed #29515256.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) tumour expression may provide added value to human equilibrative nucleoside transporter-1 (hENT1) tumour expression in predicting survival following pyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: DPD and hENT1 immunohistochemistry and scoring was completed on tumour cores from 238 patients with pancreatic cancer in the ESPAC-3(v2) trial, randomised to either postoperative gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5FU/FA). RESULTS: DPD tumour expression was associated with reduced overall survival (hazard ratio, HR = 1.73 [95% confidence interval, CI = 1.21-2.49], p = 0.003). This was significant in the 5FU/FA arm (HR = 2.07 [95% CI = 1.22-3.53], p = 0.007), but not in the gemcitabine arm (HR = 1.47 [0.91-3.37], p = 0.119). High hENT1 tumour expression was associated with increased survival in gemcitabine treated (HR = 0.56 [0.38-0.82], p = 0.003) but not in 5FU/FA treated patients (HR = 1.19 [0.80-1.78], p = 0.390). In patients with low hENT1 tumour expression, high DPD tumour expression was associated with a worse median [95% CI] survival in the 5FU/FA arm (9.7 [5.3-30.4] vs 29.2 [19.5-41.9] months, p = 0.002) but not in the gemcitabine arm (14.0 [9.1-15.7] vs. 18.0 [7.6-15.3] months, p = 1.000). The interaction of treatment arm and DPD expression was not significant (p = 0.303), but the interaction of treatment arm and hENT1 expression was (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: DPD tumour expression was a negative prognostic biomarker. Together with tumour expression of hENT1, DPD tumour expression defined patient subgroups that might benefit from either postoperative 5FU/FA or gemcitabine.

12 Article Common genetic variants associated with pancreatic adenocarcinoma may also modify risk of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. 2018

Obazee, Ofure / Capurso, Gabriele / Tavano, Francesca / Archibugi, Livia / De Bonis, Antonio / Greenhalf, William / Key, Tim / Pasquali, Claudio / Milanetto, Anna Caterina / Hackert, Thilo / Fogar, Paola / Liço, Valbona / Dervenis, Christos / Lawlor, Rita T / Landoni, Luca / Gazouli, Maria / Zambon, Carlo Federico / Funel, Niccola / Strobel, Oliver / Jamroziak, Krzysztof / Cantù, Cinzia / Malecka-Panas, Ewa / Landi, Stefano / Neoptolemos, John P / Basso, Daniela / Talar-Wojnarowska, Renata / Rinzivillo, Maria / Andriulli, Angelo / Canzian, Federico / Campa, Daniele. ·Digestive and Liver Disease Unit, S. Andrea Hospital, 'Sapienza' University of Rome, Rome, Italy. · Division of Gastroenterology and Research Laboratory, San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy. · Department of Surgery, IRCCS Scientific Institute and Regional General Hospital "Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza", San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy. · Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. · Pancreatic and Digestive Endocrine Surgery - Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology -DiSCOG, University of Padova, Padova, Italy. · Klinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral- und Transplantationschirurgie, Im Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany. · Department of Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital of Padova, Padova, Italy. · Department of Surgical Oncology and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Metropolitan General Hospital, Pireas, Greece. · ARC-NET Center for Applied Research on Cancer, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Laboratory of Biology, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece. · Department of Medicine - DIMED, University of Padova, Padova, Italy. · Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. · Department of Hematology, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland. · Department of Digestive Tract Diseases, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland. · Department of Biology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. · Genomic Epidemiology Group, German Cancer Research Centre (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany ·Carcinogenesis · Pubmed #29309705.

ABSTRACT: Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNEN) account for less than 5% of all pancreatic neoplasms and genetic association studies on susceptibility to the disease are limited. We sought to identify possible overlap of genetic susceptibility loci between pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and pNEN; therefore, PDAC susceptibility variants (n = 23) from Caucasian genome-wide association studies (GWAS) were genotyped in 369 pNEN cases and 3277 controls from the PANcreatic Disease ReseArch (PANDoRA) consortium to evaluate the odds associated with pNEN risk, disease onset and tumor characteristics. Main effect analyses showed four PDAC susceptibility variants-rs9854771, rs1561927, rs9543325 and rs10919791 to be associated with pNEN risk. Subsequently, only associations with rs9543325, rs10919791 and rs1561927 were noteworthy with false positive report probability (FPRP) tests. Stratified analyses considering age at onset (50-year threshold), showed rs2736098, rs16986825 and rs9854771 to be associated with risk of developing pNEN at a younger age. Stratified analyses also showed some single nucleotide polymorphisms to be associated with different degrees of tumor grade, metastatic potential and functionality. Our results identify known GWAS PDAC susceptibility loci, which may also be involved in sporadic pNEN etiology and suggest that some genetic mechanisms governing pathogenesis of these two entities may be similar, with few of these loci being more influential in younger cases or tumor subtypes.

13 Article Common germline variants within the CDKN2A/2B region affect risk of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. 2016

Campa, Daniele / Capurso, Gabriele / Pastore, Manuela / Talar-Wojnarowska, Renata / Milanetto, Anna Caterina / Landoni, Luca / Maiello, Evaristo / Lawlor, Rita T / Malecka-Panas, Ewa / Funel, Niccola / Gazouli, Maria / De Bonis, Antonio / Klüter, Harald / Rinzivillo, Maria / Delle Fave, Gianfranco / Hackert, Thilo / Landi, Stefano / Bugert, Peter / Bambi, Franco / Archibugi, Livia / Scarpa, Aldo / Katzke, Verena / Dervenis, Christos / Liço, Valbona / Furlanello, Sara / Strobel, Oliver / Tavano, Francesca / Basso, Daniela / Kaaks, Rudolf / Pasquali, Claudio / Gentiluomo, Manuel / Rizzato, Cosmeri / Canzian, Federico. ·Department of Biology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. · Digestive and Liver Disease Unit, S. Andrea Hospital, 'Sapienza' University of Rome, Rome, Italy. · Genomic Epidemiology Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. · Dept of Digestive Tract Diseases, Medical University of Lodz, Poland. · Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology (DISCOG), Pancreatic and Digestive Endocrine Surgery, University of Padova, Padova, Italy. · Department of Surgery, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of Oncology, IRCCS Scientific Institute and Regional General Hospital "Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza", San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy. · ARC-NET: Centre for Applied Research on Cancer, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. · Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Laboratory of Biology, Medical School National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece. · Department of Surgery, IRCCS Scientific Institute and Regional General Hospital "Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza", San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy. · Mannheim Institute of Transfusion Medicine and Immunology, Heidelberg University, Medical Faculty Mannheim, German Red Cross Blood Service Baden-Württemberg - Hessen, Mannheim, Germany. · Department of General Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. · Blood Transfusion Service, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Meyer, Florence, Italy. · Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Konstantopouleion General Hospital Nea Ionia, Greece. · Department of Medicine (DIMED), Laboratory Medicine, University of Padova, Padova, Italy. · Division of Gastroenterology and Research Laboratory, IRCCS Scientific Institute and Regional General Hospital "Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza", San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy. ·Sci Rep · Pubmed #28008994.

ABSTRACT: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are heterogeneous neoplasms which represent only 2% of all pancreatic neoplasms by incidence, but 10% by prevalence. Genetic risk factors could have an important role in the disease aetiology, however only a small number of case control studies have been performed yet. To further our knowledge, we genotyped 13 SNPs belonging to the pleiotropic CDKN2A/B gene region in 320 PNET cases and 4436 controls, the largest study on the disease so far. We observed a statistically significant association between the homozygotes for the minor allele of the rs2518719 SNP and an increased risk of developing PNET (OR

14 Article Expression Patterns of Growth and Survival Genes with Prognostic Implications in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. 2016

Pectasides, Dimitrios / Kotoula, Vasiliki / Papaxoinis, George / Alexopoulou, Zoi / Dervenis, Christos / Samantas, Epaminontas / Papaparaskeva, Kleo / Charalambous, Elpida / Gkakou, Chrysoula / Agalianos, Christos / Kalogeras, Konstantine T / Pentheroudakis, George / Fountzilas, George. ·Oncology Section, Second Department of Internal Medicine, Hippokration Hospital, Athens, Greece pectasid@otenet.gr hecogoff@otenet.gr. · Department of Pathology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki School of Medicine, Thessaloniki, Greece. · Laboratory of Molecular Oncology, Hellenic Foundation for Cancer Research, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki School of Medicine, Thessaloniki, Greece. · Oncology Section, Second Department of Internal Medicine, Hippokration Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Health Data Specialists Ltd., Athens, Greece. · First Department of Surgery, Konstantopoulio Agia Olga General Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Third Department of Medical Oncology, Agii Anargiri Cancer Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Pathology, Konstantopoulio Agia Olga General Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Translational Research Section, Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group, Data Office, Athens, Greece. · Department of Medical Oncology, Ioannina University Hospital, Ioannina, Greece. ·Anticancer Res · Pubmed #27919956.

ABSTRACT: AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the mRNA expression pattern of growth- and survival-related genes and assess their prognostic significance in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 98 patients were included in this retrospective translational research study and were evaluated for Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) mutational status, and v-akt murine thymoma viral oncogene homolog 1 (AKT1), AKT serine/threonine kinase 2 (AKT2), AKT serine/threonine kinase 3 (AKT3), cyclin D1 (CCND1), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), mitogen-activated protein kinase 1 (MAPK1), hepatocellular growth factor receptor (MET), avian myelomatosis viral oncogene homolog (MYC), nuclear factor kappa B subunit 1 (NFKb1), phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) and mechanistic target of rapamycin (FRAP1) genes mRNA expression. Among these patients, 73 received first-line gemcitabine combined with erlotinib (N=57) or gefitinib (N=16). RESULTS: KRAS mutation did not correlate with mRNA gene expression. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering according to mRNA gene expression successfully distinguished four prognostically distinct groups of tumors. Overexpression of all genes was associated with best prognosis, while suppression or heterogeneous expression patterns of the examined genes were associated with expression patterns of growth- and survival-related genes, classifying pancreatic tumors into distinct groups with possibly different outcomes.

15 Article Synchronous resections of hepatic oligometastatic pancreatic cancer: Disputing a principle in a time of safe pancreatic operations in a retrospective multicenter analysis. 2016

Tachezy, Michael / Gebauer, Florian / Janot, Monika / Uhl, Waldemar / Zerbi, Alessandro / Montorsi, Marco / Perinel, Julie / Adham, Mustapha / Dervenis, Christos / Agalianos, Christos / Malleo, Giuseppe / Maggino, Laura / Stein, Alexander / Izbicki, Jakob R / Bockhorn, Maximilian. ·Department of General, Visceral, and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. · Department of General, Visceral, and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. Electronic address: fgebauer@uke.de. · Department of General and Visceral Surgery, St. Josef-Hospital Bochum, Hospital of the Ruhr-University, Bochum, Germany. · Department of General Surgery, University of Milan, Instituto Clinico Humanitas IRCCS, Milan, Italy. · Department of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Edouard Herriot Hospital, HCL, Lyon Faculty of Medicine - UCBL1, Lyon, France. · Department of Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Surgery, Unit of Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. · Department of Oncology, Hematology, BMT with section Pneumology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. ·Surgery · Pubmed #27048934.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with liver metastasis is generally considered dismal, and combined resections of the primary tumor and metastasectomies are not recommended. In highly selected patients, however, resections are performed. The evidence for this indication is limited. The aim of the current study was to assess the operative and oncologic outcomes of patients with combined pancreatic and liver resections of synchronous liver metastases. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of 6 European pancreas centers, we identified 69 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and synchronous liver metastasis who underwent simultaneous pancreas and liver metastasis resections. Patients receiving exploration without tumor resection served as the control group. RESULTS: Overall survival (OS) appeared to be prolonged in the group of resected patients (median 14 vs 8 months, P < .001). Subgroup analysis revealed that the survival benefit of the resected patients was driven by pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas localized in the pancreatic head (median OS 13.6 vs 7 months, P < .001). Body/tail pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas showed no benefit of resection (median OS 14 vs 15 months, P = .312). In the multivariate analysis, tumor resection was the only independent prognosticator for OS (hazard ratio 2.044, 95% confidence interval 1.342-3.114). CONCLUSION: The data of this retrospective and selective patient cohort suggested a clear survival benefit for patients undergoing synchronous pancreas and liver resections for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, but due to the limitations of this retrospective study and very strong potential for selection bias, a strong conclusion for resection cannot be drawn. Prospective trials must validate these data and investigate the use of combined operative and systemic treatments in case of resectable metastatic pancreatic cancer. Is it time for a multicenter, prospective trial?

16 Article Microvessel Landscape Assessment in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Unclear Value of Targeting Endoglin (CD105) as Prognostic Factor of Clinical Outcome. 2015

Lytras, Dimitrios / Leontara, Vassileia / Kefala, Maria / Foukas, Periklis G / Giannakou, Niki / Pouliakis, Abraham / Dervenis, Christos / Panayiotides, Ioannis G / Karakitsos, Petros. ·From the *1st Department of Surgery, †2nd Department of Pathology, and ‡Department of Pathology, General Hospital "Konstantopouleio-Agia Olga" Hospital; and §Department of Cytopathology, University of Athens Medical School, "Attikon" University Hospital, Athens, Greece. ·Pancreas · Pubmed #25058886.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: Tumor angiogenesis based on microvessel density assessment has been associated with poor prognosis in several studies of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Expression of endoglin (CD105), a tumor-induced vascularization marker, has been found to represent a negative prognostic factor in many malignant tumors. The aim of our study was to assess the value of tumoral microvascularity both with pan-endothelial markers and endoglin as well, in correlation with the clinical outcome of patients with PDAC. METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with PDAC, 36 males and 22 females, with a mean (SD) age of 65.4 (10.0) years were included in the study. Deparaffinized sections from formalin-fixed areas both from the center and periphery (invasion front) of the tumors were immunostained for CD105 as well as for the endothelial markers CD31 and CD34. Tumoral angiogenesis was assessed on the basis of microvessel density (number of vessels per square millimeter) and on microvascular area (square micrometers) as well. RESULTS: High intratumoral microvascular area, in endoglin-stained sections, was found to be of marginal prognostic significance for recurrence (log rank, P 0.05). Survival was also marginally associated with CD31 intratumoral microvascular area (log rank, P 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Further studies are needed before endoglin replaces the conventional angiogenesis markers in PDCA.

17 Article Genetic polymorphisms of inflammatory response gene TNF-α and its influence on sporadic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors predisposition risk. 2014

Karakaxas, Dimitrios / Gazouli, Maria / Coker, Ahmet / Agalianos, Christos / Papanikolaou, Ioannis S / Patapis, Pavlos / Liakakos, Theodoros / Dervenis, Christos. ·Department of General Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. ·Med Oncol · Pubmed #25213764.

ABSTRACT: The diagnosed incidence of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) is increasing; however, their etiology remains poorly understood. PNETs are a rare, heterogeneous group of tumors arising from the endocrine cells of the pancreas, and genetic risk factors for sporadic pNETs are inadequately understood. It is known that pNETs secrete biogenic amines, hormones and growth factors, tumor necrosis factor-a (TNF-α) being one of them. Furthermore, cytokines and other proinflammatory mediators have been implicated in inflammatory pancreatic diseases including pancreatitis and cancer. The aim of our study was to analyze TNF-α promoter gene polymorphisms as risk factors for pNETs using germline DNA collected in a population-based case-control study of pancreatic cancer [42 pNET cases, 78 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) cases, 17 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) and 98 healthy controls] conducted in the Athens, Greece and Izmir, Turkey areas. For subsequent analysis, we excluded cases and controls with known genetic syndromes. The CC genotype at the -1031 position was more frequent in pNET and IPMN patients (p=0.0002 and p=0.009, respectively), suggesting its possible role in pNET development. Furthermore, the AA genotype at the -308 position was overrepresented in IPMN cases (p=0.03), and AA genotype at the -238 position was more frequent in PDAC cases (p=0.03) compared to healthy individuals. With regard to tumor characteristics, no statistically significant association was detected. Our findings suggest the putative role of TNF-α -1031 polymorphism in the development of pNET and IPMN, whereas the -308 polymorphism seems to be overrepresented among IPMN cases and -238 polymorphism among PDAC cases.

18 Article When to perform a pancreatoduodenectomy in the absence of positive histology? A consensus statement by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery. 2014

Asbun, Horacio J / Conlon, Kevin / Fernandez-Cruz, Laureano / Friess, Helmut / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Adham, Mustapha / Bassi, Claudio / Bockhorn, Maximilian / Büchler, Markus / Charnley, Richard M / Dervenis, Christos / Fingerhutt, Abe / Gouma, Dirk J / Hartwig, Werner / Imrie, Clem / Izbicki, Jakob R / Lillemoe, Keith D / Milicevic, Miroslav / Montorsi, Marco / Neoptolemos, John P / Sandberg, Aken A / Sarr, Michael / Vollmer, Charles / Yeo, Charles J / Traverso, L William / Anonymous680789. ·Department of General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. Electronic address: Asbun.Horacio@mayo.edu. · Professorial Surgical Unit, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. · Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · Department of Surgery, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany. · Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. · Department of HPB Surgery, Hopital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France. · Department of Surgery and Oncology, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of General-, Visceral- and Thoracic-Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. · Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. · Department of HPB & Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · Department of First Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Digestive Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal, Poissy, France. · Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Acacdemic Unit of Surgery, Univesity of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. · Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. · First Surgical Clinic, Clinical Center of Serbia, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia. · Department of General Surgery, Instituto Clinico Humanitas IRCCS, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. · Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Liverpool Cancer Research-UK Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Surgery, Karolinska Institutet at Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden. · Department of Gastroenterologic and General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. · Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Penn Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. · Department of Surgery, Jefferson Pancreas, Biliary and Related Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA. · St. Luke's Clinic - Center For Pancreatic and Liver Diseases, Boise, ID. ·Surgery · Pubmed #24661765.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) provides the best chance for cure in the treatment of patients with localized pancreatic head cancer. In patients with a suspected, clinically resectable pancreatic head malignancy, the need for histologic confirmation before proceeding with PD has not historically been required, but remains controversial. METHODS: An international panel of pancreatic surgeons working in well-known, high-volume centers reviewed the literature and worked together to establish a consensus on when to perform a PD in the absence of positive histology. RESULTS: The incidence of benign disease after PD for a presumed malignancy is 5-13%. Diagnosis by endoscopic cholangiopancreatography brushings and percutaneous fine-needle aspiration are highly specific, but poorly sensitive. Aspiration biopsy guided by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has greater sensitivity, but it is highly operator dependent and increases expense. The incidence of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) in the benign resected specimens is 30-43%. EUS-guided Trucut biopsy, serum levels of immunoglobulin G4, and HISORt (Histology, Imaging, Serology, Other organ involvement, and Response to therapy) are used for diagnosis. If AIP is suspected but not confirmed, the response to a short course of steroids is helpful for diagnosis. CONCLUSION: In the presence of a solid mass suspicious for malignancy, consensus was reached that biopsy proof is not required before proceeding with resection. Confirmation of malignancy, however, is mandatory for patients with borderline resectable disease to be treated with neoadjuvant therapy before exploration for resection. When a diagnosis of AIP is highly suspected, a biopsy is recommended, and a short course of steroid treatment should be considered if the biopsy does not reveal features suspicious for malignancy.

19 Article Pancreatic cancer hENT1 expression and survival from gemcitabine in patients from the ESPAC-3 trial. 2014

Greenhalf, William / Ghaneh, Paula / Neoptolemos, John P / Palmer, Daniel H / Cox, Trevor F / Lamb, Richard F / Garner, Elizabeth / Campbell, Fiona / Mackey, John R / Costello, Eithne / Moore, Malcolm J / Valle, Juan W / McDonald, Alexander C / Carter, Ross / Tebbutt, Niall C / Goldstein, David / Shannon, Jennifer / Dervenis, Christos / Glimelius, Bengt / Deakin, Mark / Charnley, Richard M / Lacaine, François / Scarfe, Andrew G / Middleton, Mark R / Anthoney, Alan / Halloran, Christopher M / Mayerle, Julia / Oláh, Attila / Jackson, Richard / Rawcliffe, Charlotte L / Scarpa, Aldo / Bassi, Claudio / Büchler, Markus W / Anonymous5150777. ·Affiliations of authors: Liverpool Cancer Research UK Cancer Trials Unit, Liverpool Cancer Research UK Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK (WG, JPN, EG, TFC, PG, EC, CMH, CLR, FC, RJ) · the Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Canada (MJM) · Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Christie NHS Foundation Trust, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, University of Manchester, UK (JWV) · Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK (DHP) · Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK (ACM) · Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK (RC) · Hôpital Tenon, Université, Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France (FL) · Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia (NCT) · Prince of Wales Hospital and Clinical School University of New South Wales, New South Wales, Australia (DG) · Nepean Cancer Centre and University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia (JS) · Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece (CD) · Medical Oncology, Clatterbridge Centre for Oncology, Bebington, Merseyside, UK (DS) · Department of Oncology, Akademiska Sjukhuset, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden (BG) · University Hospital, North Staffordshire, UK (MD) · Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK (RMC) · Service de Chirurgie Digestive et Viscérale, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France (FL) · Cross Cancer Institute and University of Alberta, Alberta, Canada (JRM, AGS) · Churchill Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK (MRM) · St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK (AA) · Department of Medicine A, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany (JM) · Petz Aladar Hospital, Gyor, Hungary (AO) · Departments of Surgery and Pathology and ARC-NET Research Center, University of Verona, Italy (AS, CB) · Department of Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (MWB). ·J Natl Cancer Inst · Pubmed #24301456.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Human equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 (hENT1) levels in pancreatic adenocarcinoma may predict survival in patients who receive adjuvant gemcitabine after resection. METHODS: Microarrays from 434 patients randomized to chemotherapy in the ESPAC-3 trial (plus controls from ESPAC-1/3) were stained with the 10D7G2 anti-hENT1 antibody. Patients were classified as having high hENT1 expression if the mean H score for their cores was above the overall median H score (48). High and low hENT1-expressing groups were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional hazards models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty patients (87.6%) and 1808 cores were suitable and included in the final analysis. Median overall survival for gemcitabine-treated patients (n = 176) was 23.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 18.3 to 26.0) months vs 23.5 (95% CI = 19.8 to 27.3) months for 176 patients treated with 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (χ(2) 1=0.24; P = .62). Median survival for patients treated with gemcitabine was 17.1 (95% CI = 14.3 to 23.8) months for those with low hENT1 expression vs 26.2 (95% CI = 21.2 to 31.4) months for those with high hENT1 expression (χ(2)₁= 9.87; P = .002). For the 5-fluorouracil group, median survival was 25.6 (95% CI = 20.1 to 27.9) and 21.9 (95% CI = 16.0 to 28.3) months for those with low and high hENT1 expression, respectively (χ(2)₁ = 0.83; P = .36). hENT1 levels were not predictive of survival for the 28 patients of the observation group (χ(2)₁ = 0.37; P = .54). Multivariable analysis confirmed hENT1 expression as a predictive marker in gemcitabine-treated (Wald χ(2) = 9.16; P = .003) but not 5-fluorouracil-treated (Wald χ(2) = 1.22; P = .27) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Subject to prospective validation, gemcitabine should not be used for patients with low tumor hENT1 expression.

20 Article Ultrasonic dissection versus conventional dissection techniques in pancreatic surgery: a randomized multicentre study. 2012

Uzunoglu, Faik G / Stehr, Anne / Fink, Judith A / Vettorazzi, Eik / Koenig, Alexandra / Gawad, Karim A / Vashist, Yogesh K / Kutup, Asad / Mann, Oliver / Gavazzi, Francesca / Zerbi, Alessandro / Bassi, Claudio / Dervenis, Christos / Montorsi, Marco / Bockhorn, Maximilian / Izbicki, Jakob R. ·Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, Hamburg, Germany. ·Ann Surg · Pubmed #23095609.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: : This prospective randomized multicenter trial was performed to assess the potential benefits of ultrasonic energy dissection compared with conventional dissection techniques in pancreatic surgery. BACKGROUND: : Surgical procedures for tumors of the pancreatic head involve time-consuming manual dissection. The primary hypothesis was that use of ultrasonic tissue and vessel dissection would lead to substantial saving in operative time during pancreatic resection. METHODS: : Patients eligible for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or pylorus-preserving PD (PPPD) were randomized to group A (dissection with ultrasonic device) or group B (conventional dissection) from March 2009 to May 2011. The primary endpoint was overall duration of operation time. Secondary endpoints were time to end of resection phase, intraoperative blood loss, number of transfused units of blood, and postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: : Analysis of primary and secondary endpoints included 101 patients, who received either PD or PPPD. Demographical characteristics and clinical parameters were similar in both groups. The use of an ultrasonic dissection device did not significantly reduce overall operation time (median 316 minutes in group A and 319 minutes in group B, P = 0.95) and did not significantly increase the costs of surgery. Analysis of secondary endpoints revealed no difference in postoperative course. CONCLUSIONS: : Tissue dissection and vessel closure using an ultrasonic device is equivalent to dissection with conventional techniques in pancreatic surgery.

21 Article Longitudinal quality of life data can provide insights on the impact of adjuvant treatment for pancreatic cancer-Subset analysis of the ESPAC-1 data. 2009

Carter, Ross / Stocken, Deborah D / Ghaneh, Payla / Bramhall, Simon R / Olah, Attila / Kelemen, Deszo / Bassi, Claudio / Friess, Helmut / Dervenis, Christo / Spry, Nigel / Büchler, Markus W / Neoptolemos, John P / Anonymous39020625. ·Pancreatic Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, United Kingdom. ·Int J Cancer · Pubmed #19330830.

ABSTRACT: The European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC-1) study is the largest study of adjuvant treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to date and confirmed a survival advantage for adjuvant chemotherapy but not for chemoradiation. The importance of parallel evaluation of survival and quality of life (QoL) has been recognized as fundamental and the aim was to assess QoL and quality adjusted survival. A longitudinal QoL study on a subset of ESPAC-1 patients who prospectively completed the EORTC QLQ C-30 questionnaire during treatment and follow-up. An integrated quality-survival product method was used to adjust any treatment effect on survival by a function of measured QoL, calculated over a restricted 24-month-period (QALM-24). Three hundred and sixteen patients completed 1,201 questionnaires. There were no differences between treatment groups in dimension scores at baseline (randomization). For the chemotherapy group, the mean Quality Adjusted Life Months over 24 months (QALM-24) was 9.6 (95% CI: 8.7, 11.2) months compared with the mean QALM-24 of 8.6 (95% CI: 7.6, 10.5) months for the no chemotherapy group. For the chemoradiation group, the mean QALM-24 was 7.1 (95% CI: 6.0, 9.0) months compared with the mean QALM-24 of 8.1 (95% CI: 7.0, 10.0) months for the no chemoradiation group. The previously reported survival advantage supporting the use of adjuvant chemotherapy is maintained when adjusted using quality adjusted survival methodology. Chemotherapy provided on average an additional 1.0 quality-adjusted life months within a restricted 2-year time period from the time of resection.