Neoadjuvant treatment versus upfront surgery in borderline resectable and resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: meta-analysis.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
BJS Open Pub Date : 2025-03-04 DOI:10.1093/bjsopen/zrae172
Luke D Dickerson, Jayden Gittens, Chris Brunning, Richard Jackson, Michael C Schmid, Ainhoa Mielgo, Daniel Palmer, Christopher M Halloran, Paula Ghaneh
{"title":"Neoadjuvant treatment versus upfront surgery in borderline resectable and resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: meta-analysis.","authors":"Luke D Dickerson, Jayden Gittens, Chris Brunning, Richard Jackson, Michael C Schmid, Ainhoa Mielgo, Daniel Palmer, Christopher M Halloran, Paula Ghaneh","doi":"10.1093/bjsopen/zrae172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pancreatic cancer prognosis remains poor despite advances in adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant treatment may improve survival and disease-free survival. This meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes for patients with borderline-resectable (borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer) or resectable disease (resectable pancreatic cancer) in randomized trials of neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review was performed according to PRISMA guidance. Articles were included from the start of the database until 1 May 2024. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival, resection rate, R0 rate, N0 rate, vascular resection rate, surgical complications, significant adverse events and rates of adjuvant therapy. Data was collected from study manuscripts or through individual patient-level data extraction. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model with subgroup comparisons for resectability status (resectable pancreatic cancer versus borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer) and treatment modality (chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine trials were included representing 1194 patients. Four trials recruited borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer, four resectable pancreatic cancer and one both. Four trials reported chemotherapy, four chemoradiotherapy and one both treatments. Neoadjuvant treatment improved overall survival (HR 0.73, 95% c.i. 0.55 to 0.98; P = 0.001) and progression-free survival (HR 0.80, 95% c.i. 0.65 to 0.99; P = 0.041). Subgroup analysis demonstrated neoadjuvant treatment improved overall survival for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer (HR 0.60, 95% c.i. 0.38 to 0.96) but not resectable pancreatic cancer (HR 0.90, 95% c.i. 0.63 to 1.28). The overall resection rate was lower in neoadjuvant treatment (72.6% versus 80.6%, RR 0.94, 95% c.i. 0.89 to 0.99; P = 0.020). R0 rate (43.8% versus 23.0%, RR 1.35, 95% c.i. 1.16 to 1.57; P = 0.002) and N0 rate (30.9% versus 15.0%, RR 2.03, 95% c.i. 1.50 to 2.74; P = 0.001) was improved in neoadjuvant treatment. Significant adverse events occurred more frequently in neoadjuvant treatment (56.1% versus 27.0%, RR 1.92, 95% c.i. 1.28 to 1.89; P = 0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Neoadjuvant treatment significantly improves survival in borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer but not resectable pancreatic cancer. It should be regarded as standard of care for these patients. Further work is needed to identify the optimum neoadjuvant regimen and a possible role in the treatment of resectable pancreatic cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":9028,"journal":{"name":"BJS Open","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11932015/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJS Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrae172","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pancreatic cancer prognosis remains poor despite advances in adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant treatment may improve survival and disease-free survival. This meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes for patients with borderline-resectable (borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer) or resectable disease (resectable pancreatic cancer) in randomized trials of neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery.

Methods: The review was performed according to PRISMA guidance. Articles were included from the start of the database until 1 May 2024. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival, resection rate, R0 rate, N0 rate, vascular resection rate, surgical complications, significant adverse events and rates of adjuvant therapy. Data was collected from study manuscripts or through individual patient-level data extraction. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model with subgroup comparisons for resectability status (resectable pancreatic cancer versus borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer) and treatment modality (chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy).

Results: Nine trials were included representing 1194 patients. Four trials recruited borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer, four resectable pancreatic cancer and one both. Four trials reported chemotherapy, four chemoradiotherapy and one both treatments. Neoadjuvant treatment improved overall survival (HR 0.73, 95% c.i. 0.55 to 0.98; P = 0.001) and progression-free survival (HR 0.80, 95% c.i. 0.65 to 0.99; P = 0.041). Subgroup analysis demonstrated neoadjuvant treatment improved overall survival for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer (HR 0.60, 95% c.i. 0.38 to 0.96) but not resectable pancreatic cancer (HR 0.90, 95% c.i. 0.63 to 1.28). The overall resection rate was lower in neoadjuvant treatment (72.6% versus 80.6%, RR 0.94, 95% c.i. 0.89 to 0.99; P = 0.020). R0 rate (43.8% versus 23.0%, RR 1.35, 95% c.i. 1.16 to 1.57; P = 0.002) and N0 rate (30.9% versus 15.0%, RR 2.03, 95% c.i. 1.50 to 2.74; P = 0.001) was improved in neoadjuvant treatment. Significant adverse events occurred more frequently in neoadjuvant treatment (56.1% versus 27.0%, RR 1.92, 95% c.i. 1.28 to 1.89; P = 0.007).

Conclusion: Neoadjuvant treatment significantly improves survival in borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer but not resectable pancreatic cancer. It should be regarded as standard of care for these patients. Further work is needed to identify the optimum neoadjuvant regimen and a possible role in the treatment of resectable pancreatic cancer.

边缘可切除和可切除胰腺导管腺癌的新辅助治疗与前期手术:荟萃分析。
背景:尽管辅助治疗取得了进展,但胰腺癌的预后仍然很差。新辅助治疗可提高生存率和无病生存率。本荟萃分析评估了新辅助治疗与前期手术的随机试验中边缘性可切除(边缘性可切除胰腺癌)或可切除疾病(可切除胰腺癌)患者的结果。方法:按照PRISMA指南进行回顾性研究。文章从数据库开始收录到2024年5月1日。主要终点是总生存期。次要结局为无进展生存期、切除率、R0率、N0率、血管切除率、手术并发症、显著不良事件和辅助治疗率。数据收集自研究手稿或通过个体患者水平的数据提取。采用随机效应模型进行meta分析,并对可切除状态(可切除胰腺癌与边缘可切除胰腺癌)和治疗方式(化疗与放化疗)进行亚组比较。结果:纳入9项试验,共1194例患者。四项试验招募边缘性可切除胰腺癌患者,四项可切除胰腺癌患者,一项两者都招募。四项试验报告了化疗,四项报告了放化疗,一项报告了两种治疗。新辅助治疗提高了总生存期(HR 0.73, 95% ci 0.55 ~ 0.98;P = 0.001)和无进展生存期(HR 0.80, 95% ci 0.65 ~ 0.99;P = 0.041)。亚组分析显示,新辅助治疗改善了边缘可切除胰腺癌的总生存率(HR 0.60, 95% ci . 0.38 ~ 0.96),但对可切除胰腺癌无效(HR 0.90, 95% ci . 0.63 ~ 1.28)。新辅助治疗的总切除率较低(72.6%比80.6%,RR 0.94, 95% ci 0.89 ~ 0.99;P = 0.020)。R0率(43.8%对23.0%,RR 1.35, 95% ci 1.16 ~ 1.57);P = 0.002)和N0率(30.9%对15.0%,RR 2.03, 95% ci 1.50 ~ 2.74;P = 0.001)在新辅助治疗中得到改善。新辅助治疗中显著不良事件的发生率更高(56.1%比27.0%,RR 1.92, 95% ci 1.28 ~ 1.89;P = 0.007)。结论:新辅助治疗可显著提高边缘可切除胰腺癌的生存率,但不能提高可切除胰腺癌的生存率。它应该被视为这些病人的标准护理。需要进一步的工作来确定最佳的新辅助方案和在可切除胰腺癌治疗中的可能作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BJS Open
BJS Open SURGERY-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
144
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信