Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Pancreatic Neoplasms: HELP
Articles by Derek A. O'Reilly
Based on 13 articles published since 2010
(Why 13 articles?)
||||

Between 2010 and 2020, Derek O'Reilly wrote the following 13 articles about Pancreatic Neoplasms.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Review The assessment of pancreatic exocrine function in patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer: In need of a new gold-standard. 2020

Carnie, Lindsay E / Lamarca, Angela / McNamara, Mairéad G / Bibby, Neil / O'Reilly, Derek A / Valle, Juan W. ·Nutrition & Dietetics, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. · Medical Oncology Department, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, UK. · Dietetics, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK. · HPB Surgery, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK. · Medical Oncology Department, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, UK. Electronic address: juan.valle@christie.nhs.uk. ·Pancreatology · Pubmed #32284260.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency is commonplace in patients with pancreatic cancer, adversely impacting on quality of life and survival. Whilst the management of exocrine insufficiency is well established, diagnosis remains challenging in clinical practice. A plethora of diagnostic tests exist. Nevertheless, a lack of consensus remains about the optimal diagnostic method, specifically in patients with pancreatic cancer. Research, to date, has primarily been undertaken in patients with chronic pancreatitis and cystic fibrosis. This manuscript will review the current literature and will examine the evidence around the diagnostic tests available for pancreatic exocrine insufficiency and whether any exists specifically for pancreatic cancer cohorts. FINDINGS: Evidence to recommend an individual test for the diagnosis of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency in clinical practice is lacking. Direct testing (by direct sampling of pancreatic secretions) has the highest specificity and sensitivity but is no longer routinely deployed or feasible in practice. Indirect testing, such as faecal elastase, is less accurate with high false-positive rates, but is routinely available in clinical practice. The 13C-mixed triglyceride breath test and the gold-standard 72-h faecal fat test have high specificity for indirect tests, but are not routinely available and cumbersome to undertake. A combination approach including nutritional markers and faecal elastase has more recently been proposed. CONCLUSION: Further research is required to identify the most optimal and accurate diagnostic tool to diagnose pancreatic exocrine insufficiency in patients with pancreatic cancer in clinical practice.

2 Review Diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer in adults: A summary of guidelines from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 2018

O'Reilly, Derek / Fou, Linyun / Hasler, Elise / Hawkins, James / O'Connell, Susan / Pelone, Ferruccio / Callaway, Mark / Campbell, Fiona / Capel, Margred / Charnley, Richard / Corrie, Pippa / Elliot, Dawn / Goodburn, Lesley / Jewell, Anna / Joharchi, Suzanne / McGeeney, Laura / Mukherjee, Somnath / Oppong, Kofi / Whelan, Phil / Primrose, John / Neoptolemos, John. ·Manchester Royal Infirmary, Central Manchester NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, United Kingdom. Electronic address: doreilly@doctors.org.uk. · National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, United Kingdom. · Bristol Royal Infirmary, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom. · University of Liverpool, The Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospital NHS Trust, United Kingdom. · George Thomas Hospice, United Kingdom. · Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. · Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and University of Cambridge, United Kingdom. · Northumbria Healthcare Foundation Trust, United Kingdom. · Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Germany. · CRUK/MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford & Churchill Hospital, United Kingdom. · University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, United Kingdom. · University of Heidelberg, Germany. ·Pancreatology · Pubmed #30292643.

ABSTRACT: To enable standardisation of care of pancreatic cancer patients and facilitate improvement in outcome, the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) developed a clinical guideline for the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer in adults. Systematic literature searches, systematic review and meta-analyses were undertaken. Recommendations were drafted on the basis of the group's interpretation of the best available evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness. There was patient involvement and public consultation. Recommendations were made on: diagnosis; staging; monitoring of inherited high risk; psychological support; pain; nutrition management; and the specific management of people with resectable-, borderline-resectable- and unresectable-pancreatic cancer. The guideline committee also made recommendations for future research into neoadjuvant therapy, cachexia interventions, minimally invasive pancreatectomy, pain management and psychological support needs. These NICE guidelines aim to promote best current practice and support and stimulate research and innovation in pancreatic cancer.

3 Review Irreversible Electroporation in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Is there a role in conjunction with conventional treatment? 2018

de Liguori Carino, Nicola / O'Reilly, Derek A / Siriwardena, Ajith K / Valle, Juan W / Radhakrishna, Ganesh / Pihlak, Rille / McNamara, Mairéad G. ·Regional Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9WL, UK. Electronic address: nicola.deliguoricarino@mft.nhs.uk. · Regional Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9WL, UK. · Department of Medical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. · Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK. ·Eur J Surg Oncol · Pubmed #30146253.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The incidence of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is rapidly increasing. Up to 30% of patients present with locally advanced disease and therefore are not candidates for surgery. Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is an emerging entity lacking in level III evidence-based recommendations for its treatment. Currently, systemic chemotherapy is the main treatment for LAPC. However, due to lack of response or disease progression, downsizing of the tumour, making it resectable is successful in only a small proportion of patients. Radiotherapy is often advocated to improve local disease control if there is stability following chemotherapy. Recently, Irreversible Electroporation (IRE), a novel non-thermal ablation technique, has been proposed for the treatment of LAPC. AIMS AND METHODS: This narrative review aims to explore the potential role and timing for the use of IRE in patients with LAPC. RESULTS: To date, there is limited and inconsistent level I and II evidence available in the literature regarding the use of IRE for the treatment of PDAC. DISCUSSION: Although some of the preliminary experience of the use of IRE in patients with LAPC is encouraging, it should only be used after conventional evidence-based treatments and/or within the research context.

4 Review Review of the diagnosis, classification and management of autoimmune pancreatitis. 2014

O'Reilly, Derek A / Malde, Deep J / Duncan, Trish / Rao, Madhu / Filobbos, Rafik. ·Derek A O'Reilly, Deep J Malde, Trish Duncan, Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, North Manchester General Hospital, Manchester M8 5RB, United Kingdom. ·World J Gastrointest Pathophysiol · Pubmed #24891978.

ABSTRACT: Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a rare form of chronic pancreatitis, with as yet undetermined incidence and prevalence in the general population. Our understanding of it continues to evolve. In the last few years, 2 separate subtypes have been identified: type 1 AIP has been recognised as the pancreatic manifestation of a multiorgan disease, named immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4)-related disease while type 2 AIP is a pancreas specific disorder not associated with IgG4. International criteria for the diagnosis of AIP have been defined: the HISORt criteria from the Mayo clinic, the Japan consensus criteria and, most recently, the international association of pancreatology "International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria". Despite this, in clinical practice it can still be very difficult to confirm the diagnosis and differentiate AIP from a pancreatic cancer. There are no large studies into the long-term prognosis and management of relapses of AIP, and there is even less information at present regarding the Type 2 AIP subtype. Further studies are necessary to clarify the pathogenesis, treatment and long-term outcomes of this disease. Critically for clinicians, making the correct diagnosis and differentiating the disease from pancreatic cancer is of the utmost importance and the greatest challenge.

5 Clinical Trial Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. 2017

Neoptolemos, John P / Palmer, Daniel H / Ghaneh, Paula / Psarelli, Eftychia E / Valle, Juan W / Halloran, Christopher M / Faluyi, Olusola / O'Reilly, Derek A / Cunningham, David / Wadsley, Jonathan / Darby, Suzanne / Meyer, Tim / Gillmore, Roopinder / Anthoney, Alan / Lind, Pehr / Glimelius, Bengt / Falk, Stephen / Izbicki, Jakob R / Middleton, Gary William / Cummins, Sebastian / Ross, Paul J / Wasan, Harpreet / McDonald, Alec / Crosby, Tom / Ma, Yuk Ting / Patel, Kinnari / Sherriff, David / Soomal, Rubin / Borg, David / Sothi, Sharmila / Hammel, Pascal / Hackert, Thilo / Jackson, Richard / Büchler, Markus W / Anonymous3241111. ·University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK; The Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK. Electronic address: j.p.neoptolemos@liverpool.ac.uk. · University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK; The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, Wirral, UK. · The Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK. · University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · University of Manchester/The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. · University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK; The Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK. · The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, Wirral, UK. · Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK. · Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK. · Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK. · Royal Free Hospital, London, UK. · St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK. · Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; Clinical Research Sörmland, Eskilstuna, Sweden. · University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden. · Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre, Bristol, UK. · University of Hamburg Medical institutions UKE, Hamburg, Germany. · Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK. · Guy's Hospital, London, UK. · Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK. · The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK. · Velindre Hospital, Cardiff, UK. · Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK. · Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK. · Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK. · Ipswich Hospital, Ipswich, UK. · Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden. · University Hospital Coventry, Coventry, UK. · Hôpital Beaujon, Clichy, France. · University of Heidelberg, Germany. ·Lancet · Pubmed #28129987.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m FINDINGS: Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

6 Clinical Trial PANasta Trial; Cattell Warren versus Blumgart techniques of panreatico-jejunostomy following pancreato-duodenectomy: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. 2016

Halloran, Christopher M / Platt, Kellie / Gerard, Abbie / Polydoros, Fotis / O'Reilly, Derek A / Gomez, Dhanwant / Smith, Andrew / Neoptolemos, John P / Soonwalla, Zahir / Taylor, Mark / Blazeby, Jane M / Ghaneh, Paula. ·National Institutes of Health Research Liverpool Pancreas Biomedical Research Unit and Clinical Directorate of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GA, UK. halloran@liverpool.ac.uk. · Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, The Duncan Building, Daulby Street, Liverpool, L69 3GA, UK. halloran@liverpool.ac.uk. · Cancer Research UK Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Block C Waterhouse Building, 1-3 Brownlow Street, Liverpool, L69 3GL, UK. kplatt@liverpool.ac.uk. · Cancer Research UK Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Block C Waterhouse Building, 1-3 Brownlow Street, Liverpool, L69 3GL, UK. agerard@liverpool.ac.uk. · Cancer Research UK Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Block C Waterhouse Building, 1-3 Brownlow Street, Liverpool, L69 3GL, UK. polydorf@liverpool.ac.uk. · Department of Surgery, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Rd, Manchester, M13 9WL, UK. Derek.O'Reilly@cmft.nhs.uk. · Queen's Medical Center, Derby Road, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK. Dhanny.Gomez@nuh.nhs.uk. · Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Abdominal Medicine and Surgery CSU, St James's University Hospital, 3rd Floor Bexley Wing, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK. AndrewM.Smith@leedsth.nhs.uk. · National Institutes of Health Research Liverpool Pancreas Biomedical Research Unit and Clinical Directorate of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GA, UK. johnyboy@liverpool.ac.uk. · Cancer Research UK Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Block C Waterhouse Building, 1-3 Brownlow Street, Liverpool, L69 3GL, UK. johnyboy@liverpool.ac.uk. · Churchill Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LJ, UK. Zahir.Soonawalla@ouh.nhs.uk. · Mater Hospital, Belfast Health and Social care Trust, Crumlin Rd, Belfast, BT12 6AB, UK. Mark.Taylor@belfasttrust.hscni.net. · Bristol Center for Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, BS8 2PS and University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, BS2 8HW, UK. J.M.Blazeby@bristol.ac.uk. · National Institutes of Health Research Liverpool Pancreas Biomedical Research Unit and Clinical Directorate of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GA, UK. paula@liverpool.ac.uk. · Cancer Research UK Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Block C Waterhouse Building, 1-3 Brownlow Street, Liverpool, L69 3GL, UK. paula@liverpool.ac.uk. ·Trials · Pubmed #26772736.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Failure of the pancreatic remnant anastomosis to heal following pancreato-duodenectomy is a major cause of significant and life-threatening complications, notably a post-operative pancreatic fistula. Recently, non-randomized trials have shown superiority of a most intuitive anastomosis (Blumgart technique), which involves both a duct-to-mucosa and a full-thickness pancreatic "U" stitch, in effect a mattress stitch, over a standard duct-mucosa technique (Cattell-Warren). The aim of this study is to examine if these findings remain within a randomized setting. METHODS/DESIGN: The PANasta trial is a randomized, double-blinded multi-center study, whose primary aim is to assess whether a Blumgart pancreatic anastomosis (trial intervention) is superior to a Cattell-Warren pancreatic anastomosis (control intervention), in terms of pancreatic fistula rates. Patients with suspected malignancy of the pancreatic head, in whom a pancreato-duodenectomy is recommended, would be recruited from several UK specialist regional centers. The hypothesis to be tested is that a Blumgart anastomosis will reduce fistula rate from 20 to 10 %. Subjects will be stratified by research site, pancreatic consistency and diameter of pancreatic duct; giving a sample size of 253 per group. The primary outcome measure is fistula rate at the pancreatico-jejunostomy. Secondary outcome measures are: entry into adjuvant therapy, mortality, surgical complications, non-surgical complications, hospital stay, cancer-specific quality of life and health economic assessments. Enrolled patients will undergo pancreatic resection and be randomized immediately prior to pancreatic reconstruction. The operation note will only record "anastomosis constructed as per PANasta trial randomization," thus the other members of the trial team and patient are blinded. An inbuilt internal pilot study will assess the ability to randomize patients, while the construction of an operative manual and review of operative photographs will maintain standardization of techniques. DISCUSSION: The PANasta trial will be the first multi-center randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing two types of duct-to-mucosa pancreatic anastomosis with surgical quality assurance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN52263879 . Date of registration 15 January 2015.

7 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.

8 Article The Impact of Positive Resection Margins on Survival and Recurrence Following Resection and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. 2019

Ghaneh, Paula / Kleeff, Jorg / Halloran, Christopher M / Raraty, Michael / Jackson, Richard / Melling, James / Jones, Owain / Palmer, Daniel H / Cox, Trevor F / Smith, Chloe J / O'Reilly, Derek A / Izbicki, Jakob R / Scarfe, Andrew G / Valle, Juan W / McDonald, Alexander C / Carter, Ross / Tebbutt, Niall C / Goldstein, David / Padbury, Robert / Shannon, Jennifer / Dervenis, Christos / Glimelius, Bengt / Deakin, Mark / Anthoney, Alan / Lerch, Markus M / Mayerle, Julia / Oláh, Attila / Rawcliffe, Charlotte L / Campbell, Fiona / Strobel, Oliver / Büchler, Markus W / Neoptolemos, John P / Anonymous11311124. ·Liverpool Cancer Research U.K. Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · The Department of Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Surgery, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK. · Department of Surgery, University of Hamburg Medical institutions UKE, Hamburg, Germany. · Department of Oncology Division of Medical Oncology 2228 Cross Cancer Institute and University of Alberta, Canada. · Department of Medical Oncology , The Christie, Manchester, UK. · Department of Medical Oncology, The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, Scotland, UK. · Department of Surgery, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland, UK. · Department of Medical Oncology, Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia. · Department of Medical Oncology, Prince of Wales hospital and Clinical School University of New South Wales, Australia. · Department of Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, South Australia. · Department of Medical Oncology, Nepean Cancer Centre and University of Sydney, Australia. · Department of Surgery, The Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Experimental and Clinical Oncology, Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala, Sweden. · Department of Surgery, University Hospital, North Staffordshire, UK. · Division of Oncology at the University of Leeds, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK. · Department of Medicine A, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. · Department of Surgery, The Petz Aladar Hospital, Gyor, Hungary. · Department of Pathology, The Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK. · The Department of Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. ·Ann Surg · Pubmed #29068800.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND: Local and distant disease recurrence are frequently observed following pancreatic cancer resection, but an improved understanding of resection margin assessment is required to aid tailored therapies. METHODS: Analyses were carried out to assess the association between clinical characteristics and margin involvement as well as the effects of individual margin involvement on site of recurrence and overall and recurrence-free survival using individual patient data from the European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: There were 1151 patients, of whom 505 (43.9%) had an R1 resection. The median and 95% confidence interval (CI) overall survival was 24.9 (22.9-27.2) months for 646 (56.1%) patients with resection margin negative (R0 >1 mm) tumors, 25.4 (21.6-30.4) months for 146 (12.7%) patients with R1<1 mm positive resection margins, and 18.7 (17.2-21.1) months for 359 (31.2%) patients with R1-direct positive margins (P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, overall R1-direct tumor margins, poor tumor differentiation, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status ≥1, maximum tumor size, and R1-direct posterior resection margin were all independently significantly associated with reduced overall and recurrence-free survival. Competing risks analysis showed that overall R1-direct positive resection margin status, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status 1, and R1-direct positive superior mesenteric/medial margin resection status were all significantly associated with local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: R1-direct resections were associated with significantly reduced overall and recurrence-free survival following pancreatic cancer resection. Resection margin involvement was also associated with an increased risk for local recurrence.

9 Article Development of MR quantified pancreatic fat deposition as a cancer risk biomarker. 2018

Coe, Peter O / Williams, Steve R / Morris, David M / Parkin, Ed / Harvie, Michelle / Renehan, Andrew G / O'Reilly, Derek A. ·Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, and Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. Electronic address: petecoe@doctors.org.uk. · Centre for Imaging Science, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, and Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. · Centre for Imaging Science, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, and Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Edinburgh Imaging, University of Edinburgh, Queen's Medical Research Institute, Edinburgh, UK. · Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, and Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. · Prevent Breast Cancer Research Unit, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. · Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, and Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Department of HepatoPancreaticoBiliary Surgery, Manchester University Hospital Trust and Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Manchester, UK. ·Pancreatology · Pubmed #29655566.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Excess body adiposity is associated with increased risk of pancreatic cancer, and in animal models excess intra-pancreatic fat is a driver of pancreatic carcinogenesis. Within a programme to evaluate pancreatic fat and PC risk in humans, we assessed whether MR-quantified pancreatic fat fraction (PFF) was 'fit for purpose' as an imaging biomarker. METHODS: We determined PFF using MR spectroscopy (MRS) and MR chemical shift imaging (CS-MR), in two groups. In Group I, we determined accuracy of MR-derived PFF with histological digital fat quantification in 12 patients undergoing pancreatic resection. In a second study, we assessed reproducibility in 15 volunteers (Group IIa), and extended to 43 volunteers (Group IIa & IIb) to relate PFF with MR-derived hepatic fat fraction (HFF), body mass index (BMI), and waist circumference (WC) using linear regression models. We assessed intra- and inter-observer, and between imaging modality levels of agreement using Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: In Group I patients, we found strong levels of agreement between MRS and CS-MR derived PFF and digitally quantified fat on histology (rho: 0.781 and 0.672 respectively). In Group IIa, there was poor reproducibility in initial assessments. We refined our protocols to account for 3D dimensionality of the pancreas, and found substantially improved intra-observer agreements. In Group II, HFF and WC were significantly correlated with PFF (p values < 0.05). INTERPRETATION: Both CS-MR and MRS (after accounting for pancreatic 3D dimensionality) were 'fit for purpose' to determine PFF and might add information on cancer prediction independent from measures of general body adiposity.

10 Article Matched Case-Control Comparative Study of Laparoscopic Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Malignant Lesions. 2018

Khaled, Yazan S / Fatania, Kavi / Barrie, Jenifer / De Liguori, Nicola / Deshpande, Rahul / O'Reilly, Derek A / Ammori, Basil J. ·The Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, North Manchester General Hospital. · Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. ·Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech · Pubmed #28212257.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Advances in surgical technologies allowed safe laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). The aim of this study is to compare the oncologic outcomes of LPD to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in terms of safety and recurrence rate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cohort of 30 patients were matched for age, sex, American Society of Anaesthesiologists, tumor size, pancreatic duct diameter, and histopathologic diagnosis on a 1:1 basis (15 LPD, 15 OPD). Comparison between groups was performed on intention-to-treat basis. Survival following resection was compared using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS: The median operating time for LPD group was longer than for OPD group (470 vs. 310 min; P=0.184). However, estimated blood loss (300 vs. 620 mL; P=0.023), high dependency unit stay (2.0 vs. 6.0 d; P=0.013) and postoperative hospital stay (9.0 vs. 17.4 d; P=0.017) were significantly lower in the LPD group. There was no significant difference in postoperative rates of morbidity (40% vs. 67%; P=0.431) and mortality (0% vs. 6.7%; P=0.99). The surgical resection margins R0 status (87% vs. 73%; P=0.79) and the number of lymph nodes (18 vs. 20; P=0.99) in the resected specimens were comparable between the 2 groups. There was no significant difference in overall survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients, the laparoscopic approach to pancreaticoduodenectomy in the hands of the experienced offers advantages over open surgery without compromising the oncologic resection.

11 Article A Case-matched Comparative Study of Laparoscopic Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy. 2015

Khaled, Yazan S / Malde, Deep J / Packer, Jessica / De Liguori Carino, Nicola / Deshpande, Rahul / O'Reilly, Derek A / Sherlock, David J / Ammori, Basil J. ·*The Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, North Manchester General Hospital †Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. ·Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech · Pubmed #26121539.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Although the laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant diseases is largely replacing open surgery in some centers, well-designed studies comparing these approaches are limited. We present a case-matched study that compares the outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). METHODS: Of 112 patients (51 female) who underwent surgery between January 2002 and December 2011, 44 patients were matched on a 1:1 basis (22 LDP, 22 ODP) according to age, sex, and tumor size. Outcomes were compared on an intention-to-treat basis. Data shown represent median where appropriate. RESULTS: The laparoscopic and open groups were comparable for age (57 vs. 59.9 y, P=0.980), sex distribution (P=1.000), tumor size (3 vs. 4 cm, P=0.904), and the frequency of benign versus malignant disease (P=0.920). LDP was associated with significantly lower blood loss (100 vs. 500 mL, P=0.001), higher spleen preservation rate (45% vs. 18%, P=0.029), as well as shorter high dependency unit stay (1 vs. 5 d, P=0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (5 vs. 14 d, P=0.017). There was no significant difference in operating time (245 vs. 240 min, P=0.602) and postoperative morbidity (13.6% vs. 27.2%, P=0.431). In patients with malignant disease, there were no differences in R0 resection margin status (90% vs. 85.7%, P=0.88), the numbers of lymph nodes retrieved (12.7 vs. 14.1, P=0.82), the 1- and 2-year survival rates (89% vs. 81%, P=0.54 and 74.2% vs. 71.5%, P=0.63, respectively), and the mean duration of survival (45 vs. 31 mo, P=0.157). CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy offers advantages over open surgery in terms of reductions in operative trauma and duration of postoperative recovery without compromising the oncologic resection.

12 Article Perioperative Enteral Immunonutrition Modulates Systemic and Mucosal Immunity and the Inflammatory Response in Patients With Periampullary Cancer Scheduled for Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. 2015

Hamza, Numan / Darwish, Ammar / O'Reilly, Derek A / Denton, John / Sheen, Aali J / Chang, David / Sherlock, David J / Ammori, Basil J. ·From the *Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, North Manchester General Hospital; †Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Manchester Royal Infirmary; ‡Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Royal Blackburn Hospital; §The University of Manchester; and ∥Department of Laboratory Medicine, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. ·Pancreas · Pubmed #25232714.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: Nutritional deficiencies and immune dysfunction in cancer patients may contribute to postoperative septic morbidity. This trial compared the effects of perioperative enteral immunonutrition (EIN) versus standard enteral nutrition (SEN) on systemic and mucosal immunity in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients were randomized (EIN, n = 17; SEN, n = 20) to receive feed for 14 days preoperatively and 7 days postoperatively. Mediators of systemic immunity (interleukin 1α, tumor necrosis factor α, lymphocytes subsets, and complement components) and of mucosal immunity in duodenal biopsies, nutritional markers and parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: The groups were comparable for demographics, the concentrations of mediators of systemic and mucosal immunity at time of recruitment, and for the duration and amount of feed received. Preoperative EIN rather than SEN was associated with significant reductions in plasma tumor necrosis factor α and total hemolytic complement. Enteral immunonutrition-fed patients had significantly higher total lymphocyte count on the third postoperative day and significantly greater rise in CD4/CD8 ratio from day 3 to day 7 postoperatively compared with SEN-fed patients. CONCLUSIONS: The perioperative administration of EIN rather than SEN is associated with a favorable modulation of the inflammatory response and enhancement of systemic immunity in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer.

13 Article A space occupying lesion masquerading as pancreatic carcinoma. 2013

Naisbitt, Christopher Jon / Filobbos, Rafik / Bonington, Alec / O'Reilly, Derek. ·Department of General Surgery, Pennine Acute Trust, Manchester, UK. cjnaisbitt@doctors.org.uk ·BMJ Case Rep · Pubmed #23704465.

ABSTRACT: The coexistence of painless jaundice and a space-occupying lesion in the head of the pancreas usually signifies a diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. We present a case, where the cause of a pancreatic mass turned out to be related to tuberculosis. Tuberculosis affecting abdominal organs in isolation is uncommon, and more often forms part of disseminated disease. Pancreatic tuberculosis is very rare, especially in immunocompetent individuals. While every effort should be made to ensure that potentially operable pancreatic cancers undergo prompt surgical excision, the challenge for the future will be to make a preoperative diagnosis of pancreatic conditions that require medical rather than surgical therapy.