Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy and Prognosis in Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Controversy regarding the effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) still exists. Here, we aimed to identify the potential benefits of neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery for resectable PDAC. METHODS: We reviewed radiologically r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yoon, Min Sung, Lee, Hee Seung, Kang, Chang Moo, Lee, Woo Jung, Keum, Jiyoung, Sung, Min Je, Kim, Seung-seob, Park, Mi-Suk, Jo, Jung Hyun, Chung, Moon Jae, Park, Jeong Youp, Park, Seung Woo, Song, Si Young, Hwang, Ho Kyoung, Bang, Seungmin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Editorial Office of Gut and Liver 2022
Materias:
Original Article
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8761915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34140428
http://dx.doi.org/10.5009/gnl20301
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND/AIMS: Controversy regarding the effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) still exists. Here, we aimed to identify the potential benefits of neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery for resectable PDAC. METHODS: We reviewed radiologically resectable PDAC patients who received resection with curative intent at a tertiary hospital in South Korea between January 2012 and August 2019. A total of 202 patients underwent curative resection for resectable PDAC 167 underwent surgical resection first during this period, and 35 received neoadjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiation therapy followed by surgery. Resectable PDAC patients were subdivided, and 13 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce selection bias. RESULTS: Compared with the group that received surgery first, the group that received neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgery had significantly smaller tumors (22.0 mm vs 27.0 mm, p=0.004), a smaller proportion of patients with postoperative pathologic T stage (p=0.026), a smaller proportion of patients with lymphovascular invasion (20.0% vs 40.7%, p=0.022), and a larger proportion of patients with negative resection margins (74.3% vs 51.5%, p=0.049). After PSM, the group that received neoadjuvant therapy had a significantly longer progression-free survival than those in the group that underwent surgery first (29.6 months vs 15.1 months, p=0.002). Overall survival was not significantly different between the two groups after PSM analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We observed significantly better surgical outcomes and progression-free survival with the addition of neoadjuvant therapy to the management of resectable PDAC. However, despite PSM, there was still selection bias due to the use of different regimens between the groups receiving surgery first and neoadjuvant therapy. Large homogeneous samples are needed in the future prospective studies.

Ejemplares similares