Klaiber Ulla, Hackert Thilo
Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Front Oncol. 2020 Jan 14;9:1501. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2019.01501. eCollection 2019.
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has still a dismal prognosis, mainly because only 15-20% of all patients present with resectable tumor stages at the time of diagnosis. Due to locally extended tumor growth or distant metastases upfront resection is not reasonable in the majority of patients. Considerably, PDAC will be the 2nd most frequent cause of cancer-related deaths within the next 10 years for both men and women. While there is currently no convincing evidence for the use of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable PDAC, there are controversial results from studies investigating neoadjuvant treatment concepts in borderline resectable PDAC (BR-PDAC). However, the definition of BR-PDAC is a topic of debate. While BR-PDAC has originally been defined on merely anatomical criteria, the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) has recently suggested a broader definition based on a combination of anatomical (A) findings, biological (B) criteria (which reflect tumor aggressiveness), and conditional (C) aspects (which respect host-related condition). In case of BR-PDAC with venous invasion alone, upfront resection is generally recommended whenever technically possible in patients fit for surgery and without evidence for lymph node metastases. In contrast, in case of arterial invasion neoadjuvant therapy is regarded as the treatment of choice. The same accounts for high CA 19-9 levels, suspected or proven lymph node involvement and poor performance status. In locally advanced PDAC (LA-PDAC), neoadjuvant treatment represents the standard of care resulting in proportionally high rates of secondary resection. This "conversion" surgery offers the chance for improved survival times in an otherwise palliative situation. Herein, we summarize the current evidence of different treatment strategies for pancreatic cancer with a focus on conversion surgery and the impact of neoadjuvant treatment in this setting.
胰腺导管腺癌(PDAC)的预后仍然很差,主要原因是在所有患者中,只有15%-20%在诊断时呈现可切除的肿瘤分期。由于肿瘤局部广泛生长或远处转移,大多数患者不适合进行 upfront 切除。值得注意的是,在未来10年内,PDAC将成为男性和女性与癌症相关死亡的第二大常见原因。虽然目前尚无令人信服的证据支持在可切除的PDAC中使用新辅助治疗,但在研究边缘可切除PDAC(BR-PDAC)新辅助治疗概念的研究中,结果存在争议。然而,BR-PDAC的定义是一个有争议的话题。虽然BR-PDAC最初仅根据解剖学标准定义,但国际胰腺病学协会(IAP)最近建议基于解剖学(A)发现、生物学(B)标准(反映肿瘤侵袭性)和条件(C)方面(考虑宿主相关状况)的组合给出更广泛的定义。对于仅伴有静脉侵犯的BR-PDAC,只要技术上可行,对于适合手术且无淋巴结转移证据的患者,一般建议进行 upfront 切除。相反,对于伴有动脉侵犯的情况,新辅助治疗被视为首选治疗方法。高CA 19-9水平、怀疑或证实有淋巴结受累以及身体状况较差的情况也是如此。在局部晚期PDAC(LA-PDAC)中,新辅助治疗是标准治疗方法,二次切除率相对较高。这种“转化”手术为在原本姑息的情况下延长生存时间提供了机会。在此,我们总结了胰腺癌不同治疗策略的当前证据,重点是转化手术以及新辅助治疗在这种情况下的影响。