Total Pancreatectomy with Islet Autologous Transplantation: The Cure for Chronic Pancreatitis?

Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a debilitating disease that leads to varying degrees of pancreatic endocrine and exocrine dysfunction. One of the most difficult symptoms of CP is severe abdominal pain, which is often challenging to control with available analgesics and therapies. In the last decade, total pancreatectomy with autologous islet cell transplantation has emerged as a promising treatment for the refractory pain of CP and is currently performed at approximately a dozen centers in the United States. While total pancreatectomy is not a new procedure, the endocrine function-preserving autologous islet cell isolation and re-implantation have made the prospect of total pancreatectomy more acceptable to patients and clinicians. This review will focus on the current status of total pancreatectomy with autologous islet cell transplant including patient selection, technical considerations, and outcomes. As the procedure is performed at an increasing number of centers, this review will highlight opportunities for quality improvement and outcome optimization

Surgical outcomes after neoadjuvant ablative dose radiation among patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreas cancer from the multi-institutional phase 2 Stereotactic MR-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy (SMART) trial

Background: Acute grade 3+ toxicity was rare in the multi-institutional phase 2 stereotactic MR-guided on-table adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) trial (NCT03621644) for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC/BRPC). Surgery may be considered after ablative SMART although the feasibility and safety of this is not well understood. Postoperative outcomes of the subset of patients in the SMART trial are examined here. Methods: Trial eligibility included BRPC or LAPC without metastases after a minimum of 3 months of induction chemotherapy. All patients received SMART prescribed to 50 Gy in 5 fractions using an integrated 0.35T MR-radiation therapy device equipped with cutting edge soft tissue tracking, automatic beam gating, and on-table adaptive replanning. Surgery was permitted after SMART, often after multi-disciplinary review. Perioperative details and postoperative outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, and overall survival (OS), were analyzed. Results: 136 patients across 13 sites were enrolled between 2019-2022. 44 patients (32.4%) had surgery after SMART (33 BRPC, 11 LAPC). Surgical procedures included pancreaticoduodenectomy (81.8%), distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (9.1%), total pancreatectomy (6.8%), and distal pancreatectomy with celiac axis resection (2.3%). 52.3% required vascular resection/reconstruction, a majority of which were venous resections (65.2%), with a smaller proportion needing both venous/ arterial (21.7%), or arterial (13%). Surgery was performed after a mean 51.4 ± 52.8 days from SMART. Postoperative hospitalization was 10.5 ± 8.9 days. Nine patients (20.5%) had Clavien-Dindo complications of grade III or higher; 3 deaths resulted from post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage in patients who had portal vein resection. One-year OS in patients who had surgery versus no surgery after SMART was 66% vs. 43%, respectively. Conclusions: These are the first prospectively evaluated surgical outcomes after 5-fraction ablative SMART for BRPC/LAPC. The rate of surgery for BRPC compares favorably to radiated patients on the Alliance A021501 trial. Despite the use of ablative radiation dose and frequent need for vascular resection, the incidence of serious surgical complications was similar to what is reported after non-ablative radiation therapy. However, several deaths occurred after surgery and we therefore we urge caution when considering surgery after ablative radiation therapy. Further analysis of other variables such as the time between SMART and surgery, approaches to vascular resections, and discrete events such as delayed gastric emptying, operative duration, and post-operative pancreatic fistula are needed to better understand the surgical morbidity seen in these patients

The NEF4 Complex Regulates Rad4 Levels and Utilizes Snf2/Swi2-Related ATPase Activity for Nucleotide Excision Repair

Nucleotide excision repair factor 4 (NEF4) is required for repair of nontranscribed DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Rad7 and the Snf2/Swi2-related ATPase Rad16 are NEF4 subunits. We report previously unrecognized similarity between Rad7 and F-box proteins. Rad16 contains a RING domain embedded within its ATPase domain, and the presence of these motifs in NEF4 suggested that NEF4 functions as both an ATPase and an E3 ubiquitin ligase. Mutational analysis provides strong support for this model. The Rad16 ATPase is important for NEF4 function in vivo, and genetic analysis uncovered new interactions between NEF4 and Rad23, a repair factor that links repair to proteasome function. Elc1 is the yeast homologue of a mammalian E3 subunit, and it is a novel component of NEF4. Moreover, the E2s Ubc9 and Ubc13 were linked to the NEF4 repair pathway by genetic criteria. Mutations in NEF4 or Ubc13 result in elevated levels of the DNA damage recognition protein Rad4 and an increase in ubiquitylated species of Rad23. As Rad23 also controls Rad4 levels, these results suggest a complex system for globally regulating repair activity in vivo by controlling turnover of Rad4

Activated MEK Suppresses Activation of PKR and Enables Efficient Replication and In Vivo Oncolysis by Δγ(1)34.5 Mutants of Herpes Simplex Virus 1

Herpes simplex virus mutants lacking the γ(1)34.5 gene are not destructive to normal tissues but are potent cytolytic agents in human tumor cells in which the activation of double-stranded RNA-dependent protein kinase (PKR) is suppressed. Thus, replication of a Δγ(1)34.5 mutant (R3616) in 12 genetically defined cancer cell lines correlates with suppression of PKR but not with the genotype of RAS. Extensive analyses of two cell lines transduced with either dominant negative MEK (dnMEK) or constitutively active MEK (caMEK) indicated that in R3616 mutant-infected cells dnMEK enabled PKR activation and decreased virus yields, whereas caMEK suppressed PKR and enabled better viral replication and cell destruction in transduced cells in vitro or in mouse xenografts. The results indicate that activated MEK mediates the suppression of PKR and that the status of MEK predicts the ability of Δγ(1)34.5 mutant viruses to replicate in and destroy tumor cells

Surgical outcomes after neoadjuvant ablative dose radiation among patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreas cancer from the multi-institutional phase 2 Stereotactic MR-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy (SMART) trial

718 Background: Acute grade 3+ toxicity was rare in the multi-institutional phase 2 stereotactic MR-guided on-table adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) trial (NCT03621644) for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC/BRPC). Surgery may be considered after ablative SMART although the feasibility and safety of this is not well understood. Postoperative outcomes of the subset of patients in the SMART trial are examined here. Methods: Trial eligibility included BRPC or LAPC without metastases after a minimum of 3 months of induction chemotherapy. All patients received SMART prescribed to 50 Gy in 5 fractions using an integrated 0.35T MR-radiation therapy device equipped with cutting edge soft tissue tracking, automatic beam gating, and on-table adaptive replanning. Surgery was permitted after SMART, often after multi-disciplinary review. Perioperative details and postoperative outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, and overall survival (OS), were analyzed. Results: 136 patients across 13 sites were enrolled between 2019-2022. 44 patients (32.4%) had surgery after SMART (33 BRPC, 11 LAPC). Surgical procedures included pancreaticoduodenectomy (81.8%), distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (9.1%), total pancreatectomy (6.8%), and distal pancreatectomy with celiac axis resection (2.3%). 52.3% required vascular resection/reconstruction, a majority of which were venous resections (65.2%), with a smaller proportion needing both venous/arterial (21.7%), or arterial (13%). Surgery was performed after a mean 51.4 ± 52.8 days from SMART. Postoperative hospitalization was 10.5 ± 8.9 days. Nine patients (20.5%) had Clavien-Dindo complications of grade III or higher; 3 deaths resulted from post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage in patients who had portal vein resection. One-year OS in patients who had surgery versus no surgery after SMART was 66% vs. 43%, respectively. Conclusions: These are the first prospectively evaluated surgical outcomes after 5-fraction ablative SMART for BRPC/LAPC. The rate of surgery for BRPC compares favorably to radiated patients on the Alliance A021501 trial. Despite the use of ablative radiation dose and frequent need for vascular resection, the incidence of serious surgical complications was similar to what is reported after non-ablative radiation therapy. However, several deaths occurred after surgery and we therefore we urge caution when considering surgery after ablative radiation therapy. Further analysis of other variables such as the time between SMART and surgery, approaches to vascular resections, and discrete events such as delayed gastric emptying, operative duration, and post-operative pancreatic fistula are needed to better understand the surgical morbidity seen in these patients. Clinical trial information: NCT03621644