Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Pancreatic Neoplasms: HELP
Articles by Shailesh V. Shrikhande
Based on 44 articles published since 2010
(Why 44 articles?)
||||

Between 2010 and 2020, S. Shrikhande wrote the following 44 articles about Pancreatic Neoplasms.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
Pages: 1 · 2
1 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 / Anonymous3060801. ·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.

2 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 / Anonymous1650795. ·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.

3 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 / Anonymous1640795. ·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.

4 Review Cutting-edge strategies for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. 2019

Shinde, Rajesh S / Bhandare, Manish / Chaudhari, Vikram / Shrikhande, Shailesh V. ·GI & HPB Service Department of Surgical Oncology Tata Memorial Hospital Mumbai Maharashtra India. ·Ann Gastroenterol Surg · Pubmed #31346575.

ABSTRACT: Worldwide, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) accounts for more than 400 000 deaths every year, being the 12th most common cancer and the seventh most frequent cause of death from cancer. Regardless of the advances in diagnosis and treatment, PDAC continues to have dismal outcomes and fewer than 25% of patients survive for 1 year. In the absence of metastatic disease, radical surgery remains the most important factor for improving survival and possibly offer cure. However, approximately 80% of patients cannot be offered surgery owing to locally advanced or metastatic disease at presentation. At presentation, only 10%-20% patients are eligible for resection, 30%-40% are unresectable/locally advanced and 50%-60% are metastatic. One promising development in recent years has been the inclusion of a new subgroup within the locally advanced tumors of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) comprising approximately 5%-10% of the total patient population. Although its exact definition has been refined over the past few years depending on the vascular involvement around the tumor, the term was initially proposed for tumors that are at a high risk of having margin positivity after resection. Various treatment approaches are still evolving for this entity. Herein, we reviewed the current status of different treatment modalities for BRPC.

5 Review Genetic Alterations of Periampullary and Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: An Overview. 2018

Sikdar, Nilabja / Saha, Gourab / Dutta, Ashmita / Ghosh, Shibajyoti / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Banerjee, Sudeep. ·1Human Genetics Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, 203 B.T. Road, Kolkata 700108, West Bengal, India; 2Medical College and Hospital, 88, College Street, Kolkata 700073, West Bengal, India; 3Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai400012, India; 4Tata Medical Center, Newtown, Rajarhat, 700156, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. ·Curr Genomics · Pubmed #30258276.

ABSTRACT: Pancreatic Ductal AdenoCarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal malignancies of all solid cancers. Precancerous lesions for PDAC include PanIN, IPMNs and MCNs. PDAC has a poor prognosis with a 5-year survival of approximately 6%. Whereas Periampulary AdenoCarcinoma (PAC) having four anatomic subtypes, pancreatic, Common Bile Duct (CBD), ampullary and duodenum shows relative better prognosis. The highest incidence of PDAC has been reported with black with respect to white population. Similarly, incidence rate of PAC also differs with different ethnic populations. Several lifestyle, environmental and occupational exposures including long-term diabetes, obesity, and smoking, have been linked to PDAC, however, for PAC the causal risk factors were poorly described. It is now clear that PDAC and PAC are a multi-stage process resulting from the accumulation of genomic alterations in the somatic DNA of normal cells as well as inherited mutations. Approximately 10% of PDAC have a familial inheritance. Germline mutations in CDKN2A, BRCA2, STK11, PALB2, PRSS1, etc., as well as certain syndromes have been well associated with predisposition to PDAC. KRAS, CDKN2A, TP53 and SMAD4 are the 4 "mountains" (high-frequency driver genes) which have been known to earliest somatic alterations for PDAC while relatively less frequent in PAC. Our understanding of the molecular carcinogenesis has improved in the last few years due to extensive research on PDAC which was not well explored in case of PAC. The genetic alterations that have been identified in PDAC and different subgroups of PAC are important implications for the development of genetic screening test, early diagnosis, and prognostic genetic markers. The present review will provide a brief overview of the incidence and prevalence of PDAC and PAC, mainly, increased risk in India, the several kinds of risk factors associated with the diseases as well as required genetic alterations for disease initiation and progression.

6 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 / Anonymous1010883. ·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.

7 Review PET-Based Molecular Imaging in Designing Personalized Management Strategy in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors. 2016

Basu, Sandip / Ranade, Rohit / Ostwal, Vikas / Shrikhande, Shailesh V. ·Radiation Medicine Centre, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital Annexe, Jerbai Wadia Road, Parel, Mumbai 400 012, India. Electronic address: drsanb@yahoo.com. · Radiation Medicine Centre, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital Annexe, Jerbai Wadia Road, Parel, Mumbai 400 012, India. · Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. ·PET Clin · Pubmed #27321028.

ABSTRACT: In recent years, PET-based molecular functional imaging has been increasingly used in neuroendocrine tumors for tailoring of treatment strategies to the individual characteristics of each patient. For each particular patient, the relative tracer uptake by the dual-tracer PET imaging approach (with 68Ga-DOTANOC/TATE and 18F-FDG) frequently plays an important role along with the histopathologic tumor grades for selecting the optimal treatment approach for advanced/metastatic cases. Various tumor-specific parameters have resulted in development of such precision-medicine type model in this biologically heterogeneous group of tumors. The traditional advantages of PET/computed tomography in terms of disease staging are also applicable for personalization of management. From the medical oncologist's standpoint, multitracer PET-based information and staging is of significant importance (in addition to the histologic grades) in selecting the appropriate chemotherapy regimen and monitoring response on an individual basis in the course of treatment.

8 Review Advances in chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer. 2015

Sirohi, Bhawna / Singh, Ashish / Dawood, Shaheenah / Shrikhande, Shailesh V. ·Department of Medical Oncology, Mazumdar Shaw Cancer Centre, Narayana Health, Bangalore, India. · Department of Medical Oncology, CMC, Vellore, India. · Dubai Hospital, Dubai, UAE. · Department of GI and HPB Surgery, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. ·Indian J Surg Oncol · Pubmed #25937764.

ABSTRACT: Pancreatic cancer remains challenging to treat. Over the past decade, there have been some major improvements in systemic therapy. Gemcitabine remains the key drug for both early and advanced cancer but combination chemotherapy is emerging as a new paradigm for patients with good performance status. This review focuses on current chemotherapy status for patients with pancreatic cancer.

9 Review Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. 2013

Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Sirohi, Bhawna / Goel, Mahesh / Barreto, Savio G. ·Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Ernest Borges Marg, Parel, Mumbai, India. shailushrikhande@hotmail.com ·Indian J Gastroenterol · Pubmed #23054950.

ABSTRACT: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pancreatic NETs) are rare, low- to intermediate-grade neoplasms thought to arise from the pancreatic islets. Recent advances in pathology and our understanding of the biological behavior of this group of tumors has resulted in changes in their nomenclature and how we treat them. This review puts into perspective our current understanding of pancreatic NETs in terms of their incidence, pathology, and management.

10 Review Multimodality imaging of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a review of the literature. 2012

Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Barreto, Savio George / Goel, Mahesh / Arya, Supreeta. ·Departments of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgical Oncology Radiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. shailushrikhande@hotmail.com ·HPB (Oxford) · Pubmed #22954001.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Accurate pre-operative imaging in pancreatic cancer helps avoid unsuccessful surgical explorations and forewarns surgeons regarding aberrant anatomy. This review aimed to determine the role of current imaging modalities in the diagnosis and determination of resectability of pancreatic and peri-ampullary adenocarcinomas. METHODS: A systematic search of the scientific literature was carried out using EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for the years 1990 to 2011 to obtain access to all publications, especially randomized controlled trials, reporting on the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography, multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) or positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (CT) and the evaluation of resectability of pancreatic and peri-ampullary adenocarcinomas. RESULTS: Based on 66 articles analysed in the review, MDCT and MRI/MRCP have comparable sensitivity and specificity rates for diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancers. EUS offers the best sensitivity and specificity rates for lesions <2 cm. Improved staging has been noted when PET-CT scans are added to pre-operative evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: MDCT with angiography or MRI/MRCP should constitute the first imaging modality in suspected pancreatic adenocarcinomas. EUS is recommended for assessing lesions not clearly detected, but suspected, on CT/MRI and in tumours considered 'borderline resectable' on MDCT to assess vascular involvement. PET-CT in locally advanced lesions will help rule out distant metastases.

11 Review 'Artery-first' approaches to pancreatoduodenectomy. 2012

Sanjay, P / Takaori, K / Govil, S / Shrikhande, S V / Windsor, J A. ·Hepatopancreatobiliary/Upper Gastrointestinal Unit, Department of General Surgery, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand. ·Br J Surg · Pubmed #22569924.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The technique of pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) has evolved. Previously, non-resectability was determined by involvement of the portal vein-superior mesenteric vein. Because venous resection can be achieved safely and with greater awareness of the prognostic significance of the status of the posteromedial resection margin, non-resectability is now determined by involvement of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA). This change, with a need for early determination of resectability before an irreversible step, has promoted the development of an 'artery-first' approach. The aim of this study was to review, and illustrate, this approach. METHODS: An electronic search was performed on MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed databases from 1960 to 2011 using both medical subject headings and truncated word searches to identify all published articles that related to this topic. RESULTS: The search revealed six different surgical approaches that can be considered as 'artery first'. These involved approaching the SMA from the retroperitoneum (posterior approach), the uncinate process (medial uncinate approach), the infracolic region medial to the duodenojejunal flexure (inferior infracolic or mesenteric approach), the infracolic retroperitoneum lateral to the duodenojenunal flexure (left posterior approach), the supracolic region (inferior supracolic approach) and through the lesser sac (superior approach). CONCLUSION: The six approaches described provide a range of options for the early determination of arterial involvement, depending on the location and size of the tumour, and before the 'point of no return'. Whether these approaches will achieve an increase in the proportion of patients with negative margins, improve locoregional control and increase long-term survival has yet to be determined.

12 Review Preoperative assessment and optimization in periampullary and pancreatic cancer. 2011

Myatra, S / Divatia, J V / Jibhkate, B / Barreto, G S / Shrikhande, S V. ·Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Pain, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. ·Indian J Cancer · Pubmed #21248439.

ABSTRACT: Perioperative management of pancreatic and periampullary cancer poses a considerable challenge to the pancreatic surgeon, anesthesiologist, and the intensive care team. The preoperative surgical evaluation of a pancreatic lesion aims to define the nature of the lesion (malignant or benign), stage the tumor, and to determine resectability or other non-surgical treatment options. Patients are often elderly and may have significant comorbidities and malnutrition. Obstructive jaundice may lead to coagulopathy, infection, renal dysfunction, and adverse outcomes. Routine preoperative biliary drainage can result in higher complication rates, and metal stents may be preferred over plastic stents in selected patients with resectable disease. Judicious use of antibiotics and maintaining fluid volume preoperatively can reduce the incidence of infection and renal dysfunction, respectively. Perioperative fluid therapy with hemodynamic optimization using minimally invasive monitoring may help improve outcomes. Careful patient selection, appropriate preoperative evaluation and optimization can greatly contribute to a favorable outcome after major pancreatic resections.

13 Article Dose escalated concurrent chemo-radiation in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancers with tomotherapy based intensity modulated radiotherapy: a phase II study. 2019

Lewis, Shirley / Sastri, Supriya Chopra / Arya, Supreeta / Mehta, Shaesta / Patil, Prachi / Shrivastava, Shyamkishore / Phurailatpam, Reena / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Engineer, Reena. ·Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Kasturba Medical College, MAHE, Manipal, India. · Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. · Department of Radiology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. · Department of Gastroenterology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. · Department of Radiation Oncology, Apollo Hospitals, Navi Mumbai, India. · Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. ·J Gastrointest Oncol · Pubmed #31183197.

ABSTRACT: Background: We report the response and outcomes of borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (BRPC & LAPC) patients treated with dose escalated neoadjuvant intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Methods: Thirty newly diagnosed patients with BRPC (n=18) and LAPC (n=12) (NCCN criteria V 2.2.12) were accrued in this prospective study from 2008-2011. All patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACRT) using Helical Tomotherapy (dose of 57 Gy over 25 fractions to the gross tumor volume (GTV) and 45 Gy over 25 fractions to suspected microscopic extension) along with weekly gemcitabine. Results: Fifteen patients (50%) had a partial response. A complete metabolic response (CMR) on PET was seen in 9 patients (30%). Among BRPC, 9 patients (50%) were surgically explored and 7 underwent R0 resection (39%). The median follow up of surviving patients was 85 [interquartile range (IQR): 64.5-85.8] months. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 13 months for BRPC and 8.8 months for LAPC. The median overall survival (OS) was 17.3 months for BRPC and 11.8 months for LAPC. Among patients undergoing R0 resection, the median PFS and OS was 27 and 35.5 months respectively. Conclusions: Dose escalated radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy is feasible and can downsize some tumors resulting in surgery in about 39% of the BRPC.

14 Article Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for all pancreatic body and tail tumors: rationale and results. 2019

Sivasanker, Masillamany / Desouza, Ashwin / Bhandare, Manish / Chaudhari, Vikram / Goel, Mahesh / Shrikhande, Shailesh V. ·Department of Surgical Oncology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Pondicherry, India. · Department of Gastrointestinal and HPB Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Ernest Borges Marg, Parel, Mumbai, 400012, India. · Department of Gastrointestinal and HPB Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Ernest Borges Marg, Parel, Mumbai, 400012, India. shailushrikhande@hotmail.com. · Division of Cancer Surgery, Department of Gastrointestinal and HPB Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Ernest Borges Marg, Parel, Mumbai, 400012, India. shailushrikhande@hotmail.com. ·Langenbecks Arch Surg · Pubmed #30790046.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) has been propagated as the standard of care for pancreatic cancers involving the body and tail of the pancreas. This procedure has been shown to have promising results in enhancing the microscopically negative tangential resection margins as well as the lymph node yield. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained database on the resections performed for all pancreatic body and tail tumors at Tata Memorial Centre. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients underwent RAMPS without any perioperative mortality. The various pathologies comprised of adenocarcinoma (41.5%), neuroendocrine tumors (12.3%), solid pseudopapillary epithelial neoplasm (15.3%), cystic neoplasms (15.2%), etc. The R0 resection rate was 87.7%. Among this cohort, 27 patients had pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The 3-year OS and DFS for distal pancreatic cancers were 56% and 38%, respectively, but 3-year OS and DFS for other distal pancreatic tumors were 97% and 73%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, R0 resection significantly improved disease-free survival (p = 0.023) for pancreatic cancer. CONCLUSION: RAMPS procedure aids to achieve high negative tangential margins for all tumors involving the body and tail of the pancreas and not just pancreatic cancer in isolation. Since preoperative histologic diagnosis is not routinely indicated and also a number of other distal pancreatic tumors carry a relatively better prognosis compared with pancreatic cancer, our results provide further evidence that RAMPS should be considered as the procedure of choice for all operable tumors involving body and tail of the pancreas.

15 Article Analysis of 50 cases of solid pseudopapillary tumor of pancreas: Aggressive surgical resection provides excellent outcomes. 2019

Kumar, Naveena A N / Bhandare, Manish S / Chaudhari, Vikram / Sasi, Sajith P / Shrikhande, Shailesh V. ·Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India. Electronic address: nkoncol@gmail.com. · Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India. Electronic address: manishbhandare@gmail.com. · Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India. Electronic address: drvikramchaudhari@gmail.com. · Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India. · Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India. Electronic address: shailushrikhande@hotmail.com. ·Eur J Surg Oncol · Pubmed #30228023.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: This study reports the clinicopathological characteristics and the perioperative and long-term treatment outcomes after aggressive surgical resection in solid pseudopapillary tumor (SPT) of the pancreas performed at a high volume center for pancreatic surgery in India. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed a prospectively maintained database of the patients operated for SPT at Tata Memorial Hospital, India over a period of 11 years from February 2007 to February 2018. RESULTS: Fifty consecutive patients operated for SPT, during the study period were included. The median age at presentation was 24 years. Majority of the patients (43/50) were female (86%). Disease was predominantly localized in the head and uncinate process of pancreas (66%). Median tumor size was 7.7 cm (Range 1.6-15 cm). Tumor extent was radiologically defined as borderline resectable or locally advanced in 48% (n = 24) patients. Forty-six major pancreatic resections were performed, which included 10 (21%) vascular resections, 2 synchronous liver metastasectomies, 1 multi visceral resection and 5 total pancreaticosplenectomies. Five of these resections were reoperations in patients deemed inoperable on exploration at other centers. R0 resection was achieved in 47 patients (98%). Postoperative major morbidity was 19% and there was no mortality. At a median follow-up of 29 months (Range, 1-121 months), all patients were alive without any recurrence. CONCLUSION: Aggressive complete surgical resection of SPT achieves excellent long-term survival. Surgery, especially for large and borderline resectable tumors, can be potentially complex and should be performed at high-volume centers to provide the best chance of cure.

16 Article Re-Operative Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Challenges and Outcomes. 2019

Bhandare, Manish S / Mehta, Nikhil / Chaudhari, Vikram / Kumar, Naveena An / Pai, Esha / Goel, Mahesh / Shrikhande, Shailesh V. ·Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Sri Aurobindo Institute of Medical Sciences and PG institute, Indore, India. · Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India, shailushrikhande@hotmail.com. ·Dig Surg · Pubmed #29791900.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Tata Memorial Centre (TMC) is a high-volume centre for pancreatic tumour resections. We found a continually increasing referral of pancreatic tumours for re-evaluation for surgery, after an initial unsuccessful attempt at resection. AIM: To evaluate reasons of initial in-operability, the feasibility of re-operative pancreatico-duodenectomy (R-PD) and short- and long-term outcomes after R-PD. METHODS: Data was collected from a prospective database of GI and hepato-pancreato-biliary service, TMC, Mumbai from January 2008 to December 2016. RESULTS: Forty patients with periampullary/pancreatic head tumours were referred to us after exploration. Thirty were planned for re-exploration, of whom 25 patients underwent successful R-PD, either upfront (n = 12) or after neo-adjuvant therapy (n = 13). Twenty were adenocarcinomas, 5 had other histologies. Majority of the patients were deemed inoperable in view of suspected vascular involvement at the time of initial surgery (68%). R0 resection was achieved in 90% of adenocarcinoma cases (n = 18). Postoperative major morbidity was 20% and mortality was 4% (n = 1). The estimated 1-, 2- and 5-year survival for those with adenocarcinoma was 83, 71.2, and 29.9% respectively. CONCLUSION: R-PD is safe and should be performed in experienced centres and can achieve long-term outcomes, comparable to conventional PD. The most common reason for denying resection at initial surgery was suspected or perceived vascular involvement.

17 Article Core Set of Patient-reported Outcomes in Pancreatic Cancer (COPRAC): An International Delphi Study Among Patients and Health Care Providers. 2019

van Rijssen, Lennart B / Gerritsen, Arja / Henselmans, Inge / Sprangers, Mirjam A / Jacobs, Marc / Bassi, Claudio / Busch, Olivier R / Fernández-Del Castillo, Carlos / Fong, Zhi Ven / He, Jin / Jang, Jin-Young / Javed, Ammar A / Kim, Sun-Whe / Maggino, Laura / Mitra, Abhishek / Ostwal, Vikas / Pellegrini, Silvia / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Wilmink, Johanna W / Wolfgang, Christopher L / van Laarhoven, Hanneke W / Besselink, Marc G / Anonymous531066. ·Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Gelre Hospital, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands. · Department of Medical Psychology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. · Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD. · Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea. · GI and HPB Service, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Department of Medical Psychology, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. · Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. ·Ann Surg · Pubmed #29261524.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To establish an international core set of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) selected by both patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) from the United States (US), Europe, and Asia. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: PROs are increasingly recognized in pancreatic cancer studies. There is no consensus on which of the many available PROs are most important. METHODS: A multicenter Delphi study among patients with pancreatic cancer (curative- and palliative-setting) and HCPs in 6 pancreatic centers in the US (Baltimore, Boston), Europe (Amsterdam, Verona), and Asia (Mumbai, Seoul) was performed. In round 1, participants rated the importance of 56 PROs on a 1 to 9 Likert scale. PROs rated as very important (scores 7-9) by the majority (≥80%) of curative- and/or palliative-patients as well as HCPs were included in the core set. PROs not fulfilling these criteria were presented again in round 2, together with feedback on individual and group ratings. Remaining PROs were ranked based on the importance ratings. RESULTS: In total 731 patients and HCPs were invited, 501 completed round 1, and 420 completed both rounds. This included 204 patients in curative-setting, 74 patients in palliative-setting, and 142 HCPs. After 2 rounds, 8 PROs were included in the core set: general quality of life, general health, physical ability, ability to work/do usual activities, fear of recurrence, satisfaction with services/care organization, abdominal complaints, and relationship with partner/family. CONCLUSIONS: This international Delphi study among patients and HCPs established a core set of PROs in pancreatic cancer, which should facilitate the design of future pancreatic cancer trials and outcomes research.

18 Article Treatment practices for metastatic pancreatic cancer: Can we deliver an appropriately efficacious and safe regimen in Indian patients? 2018

Ramaswamy, Anant / Ostwal, Vikas / Goel, Alok / Bhargava, Prabhat / Srinivas, Sujay / Dsouza, Sanyo / Shrikhande, Shailesh V. ·Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. · Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. ·Indian J Cancer · Pubmed #30604724.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: The median overall survival (mOS) in metastatic pancreatic cancers (PCs) hovers between 6 months to 11 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study is a retrospective analysis of metastatic PC patients who were evaluated from August 2013 to August 2016 in the Department of Gastrointestinal (GI) Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital (TMH). RESULTS: Out of 218 patients, 24 patients (11%) were not planned for chemotherapy and referred to the Department of Palliative Care for further supportive care. One hundred and fifty-three patients received palliative chemotherapy in TMH with median age of 56 years (range: 23-79), male (60.1%), and nonresident in Maharashtra (60.1%). Regimens used most commonly were gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel in 60 patients (39.2%), gemcitabine-erlotinib in 25 patients (16.3%), and modified FOLFIRINOX in 21 patients (13.7%). A total of 58 patients (43%; n = 135) had Grade 3/4 toxicities. As of cutoff date for the analysis of outcomes, 139 patients (90.8%) patients had ceased first-line chemotherapy, due to radiologically proven progressive disease (PD) in 89 patients (64%), repeated Grades 3 and 4 adverse events in 26 patients (18.7%), and clinically PD in 18 patients (12.9%). With a median follow-up of 278 days, the mOS was 217 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: 175-258), and the median event-free survival was 125 days (95% CI: 107-122). CONCLUSION: Dose modifications for chemotherapy are required commonly when treating metastatic PC, with common reasons for dose reduction being toxicities, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >=2, and low albumin levels. Studies evaluating logistic and financial aspects of treating metastatic PC with chemotherapy in India are warranted.

19 Article Experience with non-cremophor-based paclitaxel-gemcitabine regimen in advanced pancreatic cancer: Results from a single tertiary cancer centre. 2018

Ostwal, Vikas / Sahu, Arvind / Zanwar, Saurabh / Nayak, Lingaraj / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Shetty, Nitin / Gupta, Sudeep / Ramaswamy, Anant. ·Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Department of Medicine, H. M. Patel Center for Medical Care & Education, Anand, India. · Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Department of Interventional Radiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. ·Indian J Med Res · Pubmed #30425218.

ABSTRACT: Background & objectives: Gemcitabine combined with non-cremophor-based paclitaxel is one of the standards of care in advanced inoperable pancreatic cancer. This study was undertaken to retrospectively evaluate real world non-trial outcomes with this combination. Methods: Patients with histologically proven advanced inoperable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), treated with non-cremophor-based paclitaxel-gemcitabine combination (PG) (gemcitabine-nanoxel or gemcitabine-abraxane) between January 2012 and June 2015, were retrospectively analyzed. Response assessment was done every 8-12 wk with computed tomography scan and responses were measured as per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.1 criteria where feasible. Toxicity was recorded as per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4 criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: A total of 78 patients with PDAC were treated with the combination. Of these, 83.3 per cent of patients had metastatic disease. The median number of chemotherapy cycles administered was three. The objective response rate for the whole group was 30.8 per cent. Grade III/IV toxicities were seen in 35.9 per cent of patients. Median PFS was 5.6 months and median OS was 11.6 months. Interpretation & conclusions: Non-cremophor-based paclitaxel in combination with gemcitabine appeared efficacious for advanced pancreatic cancers in routine clinical practice. Within the confines of a single-centre retrospective analysis, gemcitabine-nanoxel and gemcitabine-abraxane appeared to have similar efficacy and toxicity in advanced pancreatic cancers.

20 Article Impact of preoperative sarcopenia on postoperative outcomes following pancreatic resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2018

Ratnayake, Chathura Bb / Loveday, Benjamin Pt / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Windsor, John A / Pandanaboyana, Sanjay. ·Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. · Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand; HPB Unit, Department of General Surgery, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand. · Department of GI and HPB Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. · Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand; HPB Unit, Department of General Surgery, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand. Electronic address: spandanaboyana@adhb.govt.nz. ·Pancreatology · Pubmed #30287167.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Morphometric analysis of sarcopenia has garnered interest due to its putative role in predicting outcomes following surgery for a variety of pathologies, including resection for pancreatic disease. However, there are no standard recommendations on whether sarcopenia is a clinically relevant predictor of outcomes in this setting. The aim of this study was to review the prognostic impact of preoperatively diagnosed sarcopenia on postoperative outcomes following pancreatic resection. METHODS: A systematic review of published literature was performed using PRISMA guidelines, and included a search of PubMed, MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases until May 2018. RESULTS: Thirteen studies, including 3608 patients, were included. There was a significant increase in the mean duration of post-operative hospital stay (mean difference of 0.73 days, CI: 0.06-1.40, P = 0.033), there was no difference in the postoperative outcomes, including: clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, post-operative bile leak, surgical site infection, significant morbidity and overall morbidity. CONCLUSION: Preoperative sarcopenia is associated with prolonged hospital stay after pancreatic surgery. However, sarcopenia does not appear to be a significant negative predictive factor in postoperative morbidity although study heterogeneity and risk of bias limit the strength of these conclusions.

21 Article Financial Impact of Complex Cancer Surgery in India: A Study of Pancreatic Cancer. 2018

Basavaiah, Guruchanna / Rent, Priyanka D / Rent, Eugene G / Sullivan, Richard / Towne, Margaret / Bak, Marieke / Sirohi, Bhawna / Goel, Mahesh / Shrikhande, Shailesh V. ·Guruchanna Basavaiah, Mahesh Goel, and Shailesh V. Shrikhande, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai; Priyanka D. Rent, K.S. Hegde Medical Academy, Mangalore; Eugene G. Rent, A.J. Hospital and Research Centre, Mangalore, India; Richard Sullivan, King's College London, Guys and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust; Margaret Towne, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine; Bhawna Sirohi, Barts Cancer Institute, London, United Kingdom; and Marieke Bak, VU University, Amsterdam, Netherlands. ·J Glob Oncol · Pubmed #30241272.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: The rapidly increasing burden of cancer in India has profound impacts on health care costs for patients and their families. High out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure, lack of insurance, and low government expenditure create a vicious cycle, leading to household impoverishment. Complex cancer surgery is now increasingly important for emerging countries; however, little is understood about the macro- and microeconomics of these procedures. After the Lancet Oncology Commission on Global Cancer Surgery, we evaluated the OOP expenditure for patients undergoing pancreatico-duodenectomy (PD) at a government tertiary cancer center in India. METHODS: Prospective data from 98 patients who underwent PD between January 2014 and June 2015 were collected and analyzed. The time frame for consideration of expenses, including all preoperative investigations, was from the first hospital visit to the day of discharge. Catastrophic expenditure was calculated by assessing the percentage of households in which OOP health payments exceeded 10% of the total household income. RESULTS: The mean expenditure for PD by patients was Rs.295,679.57 (US$74,420, purchasing power parity corrected). This amount was significantly higher among those admitted to a private ward and those with complications. Only 29.6% of the patients had insurance coverage. A total of 76.5% of the sample incurred catastrophic expenditure, and 38% of those with insurance underwent financial catastrophe compared with 93% of those without insurance. The percentage of patients facing catastrophic impact was highest among those in semiprivate wards, at 86.7%, followed by those in public and private wards. CONCLUSION: The cost of PD is high and is often unaffordable for a majority of India's population. A review of insurance coverage policies for better coverage must be considered.

22 Article Tumour origin and R1 rates in pancreatic resections: towards consilience in pathology reporting. 2018

Bal, Munita / Rane, Swapnil / Talole, Sanjay / Ramadwar, Mukta / Deodhar, Kedar / Patil, Prachi / Goel, Mahesh / Shrikhande, Shailesh. ·Department of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, 400012, India. munitamenon@gmail.com. · Department of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, 400012, India. · Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. · Department of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. · Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. ·Virchows Arch · Pubmed #30091124.

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

23 Article Efficacy and Safety of Sunitinib in Patients with Well-Differentiated Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours. 2018

Raymond, Eric / Kulke, Matthew H / Qin, Shukui / Yu, Xianjun / Schenker, Michael / Cubillo, Antonio / Lou, Wenhui / Tomasek, Jiri / Thiis-Evensen, Espen / Xu, Jian-Ming / Croitoru, Adina E / Khasraw, Mustafa / Sedlackova, Eva / Borbath, Ivan / Ruff, Paul / Oberstein, Paul E / Ito, Tetsuhide / Jia, Liqun / Hammel, Pascal / Shen, Lin / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Shen, Yali / Sufliarsky, Jozef / Khan, Gazala N / Morizane, Chigusa / Galdy, Salvatore / Khosravan, Reza / Fernandez, Kathrine C / Rosbrook, Brad / Fazio, Nicola. ·Department of Medical Oncology, Paris Saint-Joseph Hospital Group, Paris, France. · Program in Neuroendocrine and Carcinoid Tumors, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · PLA Cancer Center, Nanjing Bayi Hospital, Nanjing, China. · Pancreatic and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China. · Centrul de Oncologie Sf. Nectarie, Oncologie Medicala, Craiova, Romania. · Hospital Universitario Madrid Sanchinarro, Centro Integral Oncológico Clara Campal, Madrid, Spain. · Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. · Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic. · Department of Gastroenterology, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway. · No. 307 Hospital, Academy of Military Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. · Department of Medical Oncology, Fundeni Clinical Institute, Bucharest, Romania. · Andrew Love Cancer Center, Geelong Hospital, Victoria, Victoria, Australia. · Všeobecné Fakultní Nemocnice v Praze Onkologická Klinika, Prague, Czech Republic. · Hepato-Gastroenterology Department, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium. · Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. · Division of Hematology/Oncology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA. · Department of Medicine and Bioregulatory Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan. · China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China. · Service d'Oncologie Digestive, Hôpital Beaujon, Clichy, France. · Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Department of GI Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, China. · GI and HPB Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. · 2nd Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia. · Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, USA. · National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan. · Division of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology and Neuroendocrine Tumors, European Institute of Oncology, IEO, Milan, Italy. · Pfizer Oncology, Pfizer Inc., San Diego, California, USA. · Pfizer Oncology, Pfizer Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. · Division of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology and Neuroendocrine Tumors, European Institute of Oncology, IEO, Milan, Italynicola.fazio@ieo.it. ·Neuroendocrinology · Pubmed #29991024.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: In a phase III study, sunitinib led to a significant increase in progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (panNETs). This study was a post-marketing commitment to support the phase III data. METHODS: In this ongoing, open-label, phase IV trial (NCT01525550), patients with progressive, advanced unresectable/metastatic, well-differentiated panNETs received continuous sunitinib 37.5 mg once daily. Eligibility criteria were similar to those of the phase III study. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours v1.0 (RECIST). Other endpoints included PFS per Choi criteria, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Sixty-one treatment-naive and 45 previously treated patients received sunitinib. By March 19, 2016, 82 (77%) patients had discontinued treatment, mainly due to disease progression. Median treatment duration was 11.7 months. Investigator-assessed median PFS per RECIST (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 13.2 months (10.9-16.7): 13.2 (7.4-16.8) and 13.0 (9.2-20.4) in treatment-naive and previously treated patients, respectively. ORR (95% CI) per RECIST was 24.5% (16.7-33.8) in the total population: 21.3% (11.9-33.7) in treatment-naive and 28.9% (16.4-44.3) in previously treated patients. Median OS, although not yet mature, was 37.8 months (95% CI, 33.0-not estimable). The most common treatment-related AEs were neutropenia (53.8%), diarrhoea (46.2%), and leukopenia (43.4%). CONCLUSIONS: This phase IV trial confirms sunitinib as an efficacious and safe treatment option in patients with advanced/metastatic, well-differentiated, unresectable panNETs, and supports the phase III study outcomes. AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of sunitinib.

24 Article Minimally invasive preservation versus splenectomy during distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2018

Nakata, Kohei / Shikata, Satoru / Ohtsuka, Takao / Ukai, Tomohiko / Miyasaka, Yoshihiro / Mori, Yasuhisa / Velasquez, Vittoria Vanessa D M / Gotoh, Yoshitaka / Ban, Daisuke / Nakamura, Yoshiharu / Nagakawa, Yuichi / Tanabe, Minoru / Sahara, Yatsuka / Takaori, Kyoichi / Honda, Goro / Misawa, Takeyuki / Kawai, Manabu / Yamaue, Hiroki / Morikawa, Takanori / Kuroki, Tamotsu / Mou, Yiping / Lee, Woo-Jung / Shrikhande, Shailesh V / Tang, Chung Ngai / Conrad, Claudius / Han, Ho-Seong / Chinnusamy, Palanivelu / Asbun, Horacio J / Kooby, David A / Wakabayashi, Go / Takada, Tadahiro / Yamamoto, Masakazu / Nakamura, Masafumi. ·Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan. · Mie Prefectural Ichishi Hospital, Tsu-Shi, Mie, Japan. · Department of Community Medicine, Mie University School of Medicine, Tsu, Mie, Japan. · Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan. · Department of Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan. · Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan. · Division of Hepatobiliary-Pancreatic Surgery and Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. · Department of Surgery, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. · Department of Surgery, Tokyo Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. · Second Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Wakayama Medical University, Wakayama, Japan. · Department of Surgery, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan. · Department of Surgery, National Hospital Nagasaki Medical Center, Nagasaki, Japan. · Department of Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, People's Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College, Zhejiang, China. · Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. · Department of Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. · Department of Surgery, Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital, Hong Kong, China. · Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. · Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, Korea. · Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Minimal Access Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Centre, Coimbatore, India. · Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA. · Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. · Department of Surgery, Ageo Central General Hospital, Ageo, Japan. · Department of Surgery, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. · Department of Surgery, Institute of Gastroenterology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Tokyo, Japan. ·J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci · Pubmed #29943909.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) has gained in popularity recently. However, there is no consensus on whether to preserve the spleen or not. In this study, we compared MIDP outcomes between spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS); as well as outcomes between splenic vessel preservation (SVP) and Warshaw's technique (WT). METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed (MEDLINE) and Cochrane Library was conducted and the reference lists of review articles were hand-searched. RESULTS: Fifteen relevant studies with 769 patients were selected for meta-analyses of DPS and SPDP, while another 15 studies with 841 patients were used for the analysis between SVP and WT. Compared with the DPS group, SPDP patients had significantly lower incidences of infectious complications (P = 0.006) and pancreatic fistula (P = 0.002), shorter operative time (P < 0.001), and less blood loss (P = 0.01). Compared with WT, SVP patients had significantly lower incidences of splenic infarction (P < 0.001) and secondary splenectomy (P = 0.003). Subanalysis for laparoscopic surgery alone had similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, SPDP has significantly superior outcomes compared to DPS. When a spleen is preserved, SVP has better outcomes over WT for reducing splenic complications.

25 Article Improved Outcomes in 394 Pancreatic Cancer Resections: the Impact of Enhanced Recovery Pathway. 2018

Agarwal, Vandana / Thomas, Martin Jose / Joshi, Riddhi / Chaudhari, Vikram / Bhandare, Manish / Mitra, Abhishek / deSouza, Ashwin / Ambulkar, Reshma / Shrikhande, Shailesh V. ·Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Pain, Tata Memorial Centre, HBNI, Dr Ernest Borges Marg, Parel, Mumbai, 400012, India. vandanachaukar@hotmail.com. · Westmead Hospital Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2145, Australia. · Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Pain, Tata Memorial Centre, HBNI, Dr Ernest Borges Marg, Parel, Mumbai, 400012, India. · Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tata Memorial Centre, HBNI, Dr Ernest Borges Marg, Parel, Mumbai, 400012, India. · National Cancer Institute, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India. ·J Gastrointest Surg · Pubmed #29777454.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery (ER) pathway reduces morbidity and accelerates recovery. It is associated with reduced postoperative stay, morbidity, and costs. Feasibility and safety of ER programme has not been studied in developing countries. The objectives were to assess compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) elements and to assess outcomes in pancreatic surgery. METHODS: Prospective study conducted from February 2014 to December 2016, following elective pancreatic cancer surgery. Team was educated prior to implementation of ERAS. Patients were followed up until 30 days postoperatively or discharge. Data was recorded regarding the compliance with the protocol, functional GI recovery, mobilisation, and postoperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 394 patients underwent surgery. Compliance with ER elements implemented was 84% (23-100%). Compliance > 80% with ER elements was observed in 278 patients (70.5%) and < 80% in 116 patients (29.5%). Patients with > 80% compliance have significantly lower major complications (28.7 vs. 44%, p = 0.001), mortality (2.1 vs. 6.8%, p = 0.021), and postoperative stay (11 (5-78) days vs. 15 (4-61) days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: ER programme is feasible and safe in resource and infrastructure limited lower middle-income country. Improved compliance was associated with reduced major complications, mortality, and shorter stay in patients undergoing pancreatic cancer surgery in high-volume centre. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI/2015/01/005393 ( www.ctri.nic.in ).

Next