The Role of HE4 in Ovarian Cancer Follow-up: A Review.

Objective: The aim of this review was to analyze the state of the art about HE4 and follow-up in patients treated for ovarian cancer. Methods: A literature search was conducted in the MEDLINE database using the key words "HE4" and "ovarian cancer" and "recurrence" or "relapse" or "follow up." Results: Seven of 28 clinical studies were selected. Four studies were prospective, and all of them were based on a small number of patients (8Y73 women). A failure of HE4 levels to normalize at completion of standard therapy may indicate a poor prognosis, thus suggesting the need of a closer follow-up. Moreover, HE4 showed better sensibility and specificity in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer recurrence with respect to CA-125, being also an earlier indicator of the relapse with a lead time of 5 to 8 months. HE4 showed a better performance in this setting if performed in association with other markers (CA-125, CA-72.4). HE4 seems to be an independent predictive factor for the surgical outcome at secondary cytoreductive surgery and to maintain its prognostic role even after the recurrence. Conclusions: These preliminary data start to suggest a superiority of HE4 over CA-125 in the detection of ovarian cancer recurrence. Moreover, the prognostic role of HE4 could help clinicians to personalize the follow-up program, whereas its predictive role could be useful to plan the treatment of the relapse. The role of HE4 in ovarian cancer follow-up deserves to be further investigated in prospective randomized multicentric studies

Serous cystic neoplasm of the pancreas: A multinational study of 2622 patients under the auspices of the International Association of Pancreatology and European Pancreatic Club (European Study Group on Cystic Tumors of the Pancreas)

OBJECTIVES: Serous cystic neoplasm (SCN) is a cystic neoplasm of the pancreas whose natural history is poorly known. The purpose of the study was to attempt to describe the natural history of SCN, including the specific mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective multinational study including SCN diagnosed between 1990 and 2014. RESULTS: 2622 patients were included. Seventy-four per cent were women, and median age at diagnosis was 58\u2005years (16-99). Patients presented with non-specific abdominal pain (27%), pancreaticobiliary symptoms (9%), diabetes mellitus (5%), other symptoms (4%) and/or were asymptomatic (61%). Fifty-two per cent of patients were operated on during the first year after diagnosis (median size: 40\u2005mm (2-200)), 9% had resection beyond 1\u2005year of follow-up (3\u2005years (1-20), size at diagnosis: 25\u2005mm (4-140)) and 39% had no surgery (3.6\u2005years (1-23), 25.5\u2005mm (1-200)). Surgical indications were (not exclusive) uncertain diagnosis (60%), symptoms (23%), size increase (12%), large size (6%) and adjacent organ compression (5%). In patients followed beyond 1\u2005year (n=1271), size increased in 37% (growth rate: 4\u2005mm/year), was stable in 57% and decreased in 6%. Three serous cystadenocarcinomas were recorded. Postoperative mortality was 0.6% (n=10), and SCN's related mortality was 0.1% (n=1). CONCLUSIONS: After a 3-year follow-up, clinical relevant symptoms occurred in a very small proportion of patients and size slowly increased in less than half. Surgical treatment should be proposed only for diagnosis remaining uncertain after complete workup, significant and related symptoms or exceptionally when exists concern with malignancy. This study supports an initial conservative management in the majority of patients with SCN

Body composition parameters, immunonutritional indexes, and surgical outcome of pancreatic cancer patients resected after neoadjuvant therapy: A retrospective, multicenter analysis

Background and aims: Body composition parameters and immunonutritional indexes provide useful information on the nutritional and inflammatory status of patients. We sought to investigate whether they predict the postoperative outcome in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) who received neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) and then pancreaticoduodenectomy. Methods: Data from locally advanced PC patients who underwent NAT followed by pancreaticoduodenectomy between January 2012 and December 2019 in four high-volume institutions were collected retrospectively. Only patients with two available CT scans (before and after NAT) and immunonutritional indexes (before surgery) available were included. Body composition was assessed and immunonutritional indexes collected were: VAT, SAT, SMI, SMA, PLR, NLR, LMR, and PNI. The postoperative outcomes evaluated were overall morbidity (any complication occurring), major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3), and length of stay. Results: One hundred twenty-one patients met the inclusion criteria and constituted the study population. The median age at the diagnosis was 64 years (IQR16), and the median BMI was 24 kg/m2 (IQR 4.1). The median time between the two CT-scan examined was 188 days (IQR 48). Skeletal muscle index (SMI) decreased after NAT, with a median delta of −7.8 cm2/m2 (p < 0.05). Major complications occurred more frequently in patients with a lower pre-NAT SMI (p = 0.035) and in those who gained in subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) compartment during NAT (p = 0.043). Patients with a gain in SMI experienced fewer major postoperative complications (p = 0.002). The presence of Low muscle mass after NAT was associated with a longer hospital stay [Beta 5.1, 95%CI (1.5, 8.7), p = 0.006]. An increase in SMI from 35 to 40 cm2/m2 was a protective factor with respect to overall postoperative complications [OR 0.43, 95% (CI 0.21, 0.86), p < 0.001]. None of the immunonutritional indexes investigated predicted the postoperative outcome. Conclusion: Body composition changes during NAT are associated with surgical outcome in PC patients who receive pancreaticoduodenectomy after NAT. An increase in SMI during NAT should be favored to ameliorate the postoperative outcome. Immunonutritional indexes did not show to be capable of predicting the surgical outcome

FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine-based Chemotherapy for Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multi-institutional, Patient-Level, Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND Pancreatic cancer often presents as locally advanced (LAPC) or borderline resectable (BRPC). Neoadjuvant systemic therapy is recommended as initial treatment. It is currently unclear what chemotherapy should be preferred for patients with BRPC or LAPC. METHODS We performed a systematic review and multi-institutional meta-analysis of patient-level data regarding the use of initial systemic therapy for BRPC and LAPC. Outcomes were reported separately for tumor entity and by chemotherapy regimen including FOLFIRINOX (FIO) or gemcitabine-based. RESULTS A total of 23 studies comprising 2930 patients were analyzed for overall survival (OS) calculated from the beginning of systemic treatment. OS for patients with BRPC was 22.0 months with FIO, 16.9 months with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Gem/nab), 21.6 months with gemcitabine/cisplatin or oxaliplatin or docetaxel or capecitabine (GemX), and 10 months with gemcitabine monotherapy (Gem-mono) (p < 0.0001). In patients with LAPC, OS also was higher with FIO (17.1 months) compared with Gem/nab (12.5 months), GemX (12.3 months), and Gem-mono (9.4 months; p < 0.0001). This difference was driven by the patients who did not undergo surgery, where FIO was superior to other regimens. The resection rates for patients with BRPC were 0.55 for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and 0.53 with FIO. In patients with LAPC, resection rates were 0.19 with Gemcitabine and 0.28 with FIO. In resected patients, OS for patients with BRPC was 32.9 months with FIO and not different compared to Gem/nab, (28.6 months, p = 0.285), GemX (38.8 months, p = 0.1), or Gem-mono (23.1 months, p = 0.083). A similar trend was observed in resected patients converted from LAPC. CONCLUSIONS In patients with BRPC or LAPC, primary treatment with FOLFIRINOX compared with Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to provide a survival benefit for patients that are ultimately unresectable. For patients that undergo surgical resection, outcomes are similar between GEM+ and FOLFIRINOX when delivered in the neoadjuvant setting

A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The lymph node status of a patient is a key determinate in staging, prognosis and adjuvant treatment of endometrial cancer. Despite this, the potential additional morbidity associated with lymphadenectomy makes its role controversial. This study systematically reviews the accuracy literature on sentinel node biopsy; ultra sound scanning, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computer tomography (CT) for determining lymph node status in endometrial cancer.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Relevant articles were identified form MEDLINE (1966–2006), EMBASE (1980–2006), MEDION, the Cochrane library, hand searching of reference lists from primary articles and reviews, conference abstracts and contact with experts in the field. The review included 18 relevant primary studies (693 women). Data was extracted for study characteristics and quality. Bivariate random-effect model meta-analysis was used to estimate diagnostic accuracy of the various index tests.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>MRI (pooled positive LR 26.7, 95% CI 10.6 – 67.6 and negative LR 0.29 95% CI 0.17 – 0.49) and successful sentinel node biopsy (pooled positive LR 18.9 95% CI 6.7 – 53.2 and negative LR 0.22, 95% CI 0.1 – 0.48) were the most accurate tests. CT was not as accurate a test (pooled positive LR 3.8, 95% CI 2.0 – 7.3 and negative LR of 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 – 0.86. There was only one study that reported the use of ultrasound scanning.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>MRI and sentinel node biopsy have shown similar diagnostic accuracy in confirming lymph node status among women with primary endometrial cancer than CT scanning, although the comparisons made are indirect and hence subject to bias. MRI should be used in preference, in light of the ASTEC trial, because of its non invasive nature.</p

ASO Visual Abstract: FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine Based Chemotherapy for Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multi-Institutional, Patient-Level Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

N/

FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine-based Chemotherapy for Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multi-institutional, Patient-Level, Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

BackgroundPancreatic cancer often presents as locally advanced (LAPC) or borderline resectable (BRPC). Neoadjuvant systemic therapy is recommended as initial treatment. It is currently unclear what chemotherapy should be preferred for patients with BRPC or LAPC.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and multi-institutional meta-analysis of patient-level data regarding the use of initial systemic therapy for BRPC and LAPC. Outcomes were reported separately for tumor entity and by chemotherapy regimen including FOLFIRINOX (FIO) or gemcitabine-based.ResultsA total of 23 studies comprising 2930 patients were analyzed for overall survival (OS) calculated from the beginning of systemic treatment. OS for patients with BRPC was 22.0 months with FIO, 16.9 months with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Gem/nab), 21.6 months with gemcitabine/cisplatin or oxaliplatin or docetaxel or capecitabine (GemX), and 10 months with gemcitabine monotherapy (Gem-mono) (p &lt; 0.0001). In patients with LAPC, OS also was higher with FIO (17.1 months) compared with Gem/nab (12.5 months), GemX (12.3 months), and Gem-mono (9.4 months; p &lt; 0.0001). This difference was driven by the patients who did not undergo surgery, where FIO was superior to other regimens. The resection rates for patients with BRPC were 0.55 for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and 0.53 with FIO. In patients with LAPC, resection rates were 0.19 with Gemcitabine and 0.28 with FIO. In resected patients, OS for patients with BRPC was 32.9 months with FIO and not different compared to Gem/nab, (28.6 months, p = 0.285), GemX (38.8 months, p = 0.1), or Gem-mono (23.1 months, p = 0.083). A similar trend was observed in resected patients converted from LAPC.ConclusionsIn patients with BRPC or LAPC, primary treatment with FOLFIRINOX compared with Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to provide a survival benefit for patients that are ultimately unresectable. For patients that undergo surgical resection, outcomes are similar between GEM+ and FOLFIRINOX when delivered in the neoadjuvant setting