Memis Bahar, Saka Burcu, Pehlivanoglu Burcin, Kim Grace, Balci Serdar, Tajiri Takuma, Ohike Nobuyuki, Bagci Pelin, Akar Kadriye Ebru, Muraki Takashi, Jang Kee-Taek, Maithel Shishir K, Sarmiento Juan, Kooby David A, Esmer Rohat, Tarcan Zeynep Cagla, Goodman Michael, Xue Yue, Krasinskas Alyssa, Reid Michelle, Basturk Olca, Adsay Volkan
Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, Turkey.
Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Koc University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2025 Mar;32(3):1858-1868. doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-16355-w. Epub 2024 Oct 14.
The information on the clinicopathologic/outcome differences between ampullary adenocarcinoma (AC) and pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC) has been conflicting to the extent that it still is questioned whether ACs need to be recognized separately from PCs.
The characteristics of 413 ACs were compared with those of 547 PCs.
The ACs had a better prognosis than the PCs (5-year survival, 57 % vs 23 %; p < 0.001). Even the pancreatobiliary (PB)-type ACs had a better prognosis (5-year survival, 46 % vs 23 %; p < 0.001). Several differences also were identified as contributing factors: (1) the preinvasive adenomatous component often constituted a significant proportion of the mass in ACs (>50 % of the tumor in 16 % vs 1.5 %; p < 0.001); (2) the mean size of the carcinoma was smaller in ACs (2.5 vs 3.2 cm; p < 0.001): when matched for invasion size, the survival advantage of AC was minimized, and when matched for invasion size larger than 2 cm, the survival advantage of AC lost its statistical significance; (3) lymph node (LN) metastases were less common in ACs (49 % vs 71 %; p < 0.001); (4) the definitive R1 rate was lower in ACs (4 % vs 23.5 %; p < 0.001); and (5) non-PB and non-tubular adenocarcinoma types were more common in ACs (17 % vs 3 %; p < 0.001).
Comparatively, ACs have better clinical survival than PCs. Potential contributing factors are the relative abundance of the preinvasive component, smaller invasion, lower LN metastasis rate, higher resectability, and common occurrence of less aggressive histologic phenotypes (intestinal, medullary, mucinous). However, this survival advantage is sustained even in PB-type ACs, highlighting the importance of accurately determining the site of origin.
壶腹腺癌(AC)与胰腺腺癌(PC)之间临床病理/预后差异的信息存在矛盾,以至于AC是否需要与PC分开识别仍受到质疑。
比较了413例AC与547例PC的特征。
AC的预后优于PC(5年生存率,57%对23%;p<0.001)。即使是胰胆管(PB)型AC的预后也更好(5年生存率,46%对23%;p<0.001)。还确定了几个差异作为促成因素:(1)浸润前腺瘤成分在AC中通常占肿块的很大比例(16%的肿瘤>50%,而PC为1.5%;p<0.001);(2)AC中癌的平均大小较小(2.5对3.2 cm;p<0.001):当根据浸润大小匹配时,AC的生存优势最小化,当根据大于2 cm的浸润大小匹配时,AC的生存优势失去统计学意义;(3)AC中淋巴结(LN)转移较少见(49%对71%;p<0.001);(4)AC中确定性R1切除率较低(4%对23.5%;p<0.001);(5)非PB和非管状腺癌类型在AC中更常见(17%对3%;p<0.001)。
相比之下,AC的临床生存率优于PC。潜在的促成因素是浸润前成分相对丰富、浸润较小、LN转移率较低、可切除性较高以及侵袭性较小的组织学表型(肠型、髓样、黏液型)常见。然而,即使在PB型AC中这种生存优势也持续存在,突出了准确确定起源部位的重要性。