TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical Impact of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Chemoradiotherapy in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer
T2 - Analysis of 884 Patients at Facilities Specializing in Pancreatic Surgery
AU - Nagakawa, Yuichi
AU - Sahara, Yatsuka
AU - Hosokawa, Yuichi
AU - Murakami, Yoshiaki
AU - Yamaue, Hiroki
AU - Satoi, Sohei
AU - Unno, Michiaki
AU - Isaji, Shuji
AU - Endo, Itaru
AU - Sho, Masayuki
AU - Fujii, Tsutomu
AU - Takishita, Chie
AU - Hijikata, Yosuke
AU - Suzuki, Shuji
AU - Kawachi, Shigeyuki
AU - Katsumata, Kenji
AU - Ohta, Tetsuo
AU - Nagakawa, Takukazu
AU - Tsuchida, Akihiko
N1 - Funding Information:
FUNDING This study was supported by the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery and Tokyo Medical University
PY - 2019/6/15
Y1 - 2019/6/15
N2 - Background: The efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), including neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (NACRT), for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) has not been elucidated. This study aimed to clarify the efficacy of NAC and NACRT for patients with BRPC. Methods: The study analyzed the treatment outcomes of 884 patients treated for BRPC from 2011 to 2013. Treatment results were compared between upfront surgery and NAT and between NAC and NACRT using propensity score-matching analysis. Overall survival (OS) was calculated via intention-to-treat analyses. Results: The overall resection rates for the patients who underwent NAT were significantly lower than for the patients who underwent upfront surgery (75.1% vs 93.3%; p < 0.001). However, the R0 resection rate was significantly higher for NAT than for upfront surgery (p < 0.001). Additionally, the OS for the patients who received NAT was significantly longer than for those who underwent upfront surgery (median survival time [MST], 25.7 vs 19.0 months; p = 0.015). The lymph node rate for the patients with NACRT was significantly lower than for those who underwent NAC (p < 0.001). However, the resection rate for the NACRT cases was significantly lower than for the NAC cases (p = 0.041). The local recurrence rate for the NACRT cases was significantly lower than for the NAC cases (p = 0.002). However, OS did not differ significantly between NAC and NACRT (MST, 29.2 vs 22.5 months; p = 0.130). Conclusions: The study showed that NAT has potential benefit for patients with BRPC. Compared with NAC, NACRT decreased the rates for lymph node metastasis and local recurrence but did not improve the prognosis.
AB - Background: The efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), including neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (NACRT), for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) has not been elucidated. This study aimed to clarify the efficacy of NAC and NACRT for patients with BRPC. Methods: The study analyzed the treatment outcomes of 884 patients treated for BRPC from 2011 to 2013. Treatment results were compared between upfront surgery and NAT and between NAC and NACRT using propensity score-matching analysis. Overall survival (OS) was calculated via intention-to-treat analyses. Results: The overall resection rates for the patients who underwent NAT were significantly lower than for the patients who underwent upfront surgery (75.1% vs 93.3%; p < 0.001). However, the R0 resection rate was significantly higher for NAT than for upfront surgery (p < 0.001). Additionally, the OS for the patients who received NAT was significantly longer than for those who underwent upfront surgery (median survival time [MST], 25.7 vs 19.0 months; p = 0.015). The lymph node rate for the patients with NACRT was significantly lower than for those who underwent NAC (p < 0.001). However, the resection rate for the NACRT cases was significantly lower than for the NAC cases (p = 0.041). The local recurrence rate for the NACRT cases was significantly lower than for the NAC cases (p = 0.002). However, OS did not differ significantly between NAC and NACRT (MST, 29.2 vs 22.5 months; p = 0.130). Conclusions: The study showed that NAT has potential benefit for patients with BRPC. Compared with NAC, NACRT decreased the rates for lymph node metastasis and local recurrence but did not improve the prognosis.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85059592905&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85059592905&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1245/s10434-018-07131-8
DO - 10.1245/s10434-018-07131-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 30879894
AN - SCOPUS:85059592905
SN - 1068-9265
VL - 26
SP - 1629
EP - 1636
JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology
JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology
IS - 6
ER -