Intra-tumour genetic heterogeneity and poor chemoradiotherapy response in cervical cancer

Background: Intra-tumour genetic heterogeneity has been reported in both leukaemias and solid tumours and is implicated in the development of drug resistance in CML and AML. The role of genetic heterogeneity in drug response in solid tumours is unknown. Methods: To investigate intra-tumour genetic heterogeneity and chemoradiation response in advanced cervical cancer, we analysed 10 cases treated on the CTCR-CE01 clinical study. Core biopsies for molecular profiling were taken from four quadrants of the cervix pre-treatment, and weeks 2 and 5 of treatment. Biopsies were scored for cellularity and profiled using Agilent 180k human whole genome CGH arrays. We compared genomic profiles from 69 cores from 10 patients to test for genetic heterogeneity and treatment effects at weeks 0, 2 and 5 of treatment. Results: Three patients had two or more distinct genetic subpopulations pre-treatment. Subpopulations within each tumour showed differential responses to chemoradiotherapy. In two cases, there was selection for a single intrinsically resistant subpopulation that persisted at detectable levels after 5 weeks of chemoradiotherapy. Phylogenetic analysis reconstructed the order in which genomic rearrangements occurred in the carcinogenesis of these tumours and confirmed gain of 3q and loss of 11q as early events in cervical cancer progression. Conclusion: Selection effects from chemoradiotherapy cause dynamic changes in genetic subpopulations in advanced cervical cancers, which may explain disease persistence and subsequent relapse. Significant genetic heterogeneity in advanced cervical cancers may therefore be predictive of poor outcome

Preoperative biliary drainage for periampullary tumors causing obstructive jaundice; DRainage vs. (direct) OPeration (DROP-trial)

BACKGROUND: Surgery in patients with obstructive jaundice caused by a periampullary (pancreas, papilla, distal bile duct) tumor is associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications than in non-jaundiced patients. Preoperative biliary drainage was introduced in an attempt to improve the general condition and thus reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality. Early studies showed a reduction in morbidity. However, more recently the focus has shifted towards the negative effects of drainage, such as an increase of infectious complications. Whether biliary drainage should always be performed in jaundiced patients remains controversial. The randomized controlled multicenter DROP-trial (DRainage vs. Operation) was conceived to compare the outcome of a 'preoperative biliary drainage strategy' (standard strategy) with that of an 'early-surgery' strategy, with respect to the incidence of severe complications (primary-outcome measure), hospital stay, number of invasive diagnostic tests, costs, and quality of life. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients with obstructive jaundice due to a periampullary tumor, eligible for exploration after staging with CT scan, and scheduled to undergo a "curative" resection, will be randomized to either "early surgical treatment" (within one week) or "preoperative biliary drainage" (for 4 weeks) and subsequent surgical treatment (standard treatment). Primary outcome measure is the percentage of severe complications up to 90 days after surgery. The sample size calculation is based on the equivalence design for the primary outcome measure. If equivalence is found, the comparison of the secondary outcomes will be essential in selecting the preferred strategy. Based on a 40% complication rate for early surgical treatment and 48% for preoperative drainage, equivalence is taken to be demonstrated if the percentage of severe complications with early surgical treatment is not more than 10% higher compared to standard treatment: preoperative biliary drainage. Accounting for a 10% dropout, 105 patients are needed in each arm resulting in a study population of 210 (alpha = 0.95, beta = 0.8). DISCUSSION: The DROP-trial is a randomized controlled multicenter trial that will provide evidence whether or not preoperative biliary drainage is to be performed in patients with obstructive jaundice due to a periampullary tumor

Surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with venous resection: an international survey among surgeons and pathologists

Background: The aim of this survey was to gain insights in the current surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with portal–superior mesenteric vein resection (VR). Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify international expert surgeons (N = 150) and pathologists (N = 40) who published relevant studies between 2009 and 2019. These experts and Dutch surgeons (N = 17) and pathologists (N = 20) were approached to complete an online survey. Results: Overall, 76 (46%) surgeons and 37 (62%) pathologists completed the survey. Most surgeons (71%) estimated that preoperative imaging corresponded correctly with intraoperative findings of venous involvement in 50–75% of patients. An increased complication risk following VR was expected by 55% of surgeons, mainly after Type 4 (segmental resection-venous conduit anastomosis). Most surgeons (61%) preferred Type 3 (segmental resection-primary anastomosis). Most surgeons (75%) always perform the VR themselves. Standard postoperative imaging for patency control was performed by 54% of surgeons and 39% adjusted thromboprophylaxis following VR. Most pathologists (76%) always assessed tumor infiltration in the resected vein and only 54% of pathologists always assess the resection margins of the vein itself. Variation in assessment of tumor infiltration depth was observed. Conclusion: This international survey showed variation in the surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with venous involvement. This highlights the lack of evidence and emphasizes the need for research on imaging modalities to improve patient selection for VR, surgical techniques, postoperative management and standardization of the pathological assessment

Antecolic Versus Retrocolic Route of the Gastroenteric Anastomosis After Pancreatoduodenectomy A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: To investigate the relationship between the route of gastroenteric (GE) reconstruction after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and the postoperative incidence of delayed gastric emptying (DGE). Background: DGE is one of the most common complications after PD. Recent studies suggest that an antecolic route of the GE reconstruction leads to a lower incidence of DGE, compared to a retrocolic route. In a nonrandomized comparison within our trial center, we found no difference in DGE after antecolic or retrocolic GE reconstruction. Methods: Ten middle- to high-volume centers participated in the patient inclusion. Patients scheduled for PD who gave written informed consent were included and randomized during surgery after resection. Standard operation was a pylorus-preserving PD. Primary endpoint was DGE. Secondary endpoints included other complications and length of hospital stay. Results: There were 125 patients in the retrocolic group, and 121 patients in the antecolic group. Baseline and treatment characteristics did not differ between the study groups. In the retrocolic group, 45 patients (36%) developed clinically relevant DGE compared with 41 (34%) in the antecolic group (absolute risk difference: 2.1%; 95% confidence interval: -9.8% to 14.0%). There were no differences in need for postoperative (par)enteral nutritional support, other complications, hospital mortality, and median length of hospital stay. Conclusions: The route of GE reconstruction after PD does not influence the postoperative incidence of DGE or other complications. The etiology and treatment of DGE, which occurs frequently after both procedures, need further investigation. The GE reconstruction after PD should be routed according to the surgeon's preference