More efficient clinical trials in pancreatic cancer: develop better treatment options, faster

Clinical development of new treatment options for patients with pancreatic cancer has been slow and expensive and resulted in few effective therapies. With a dismal five-year survival rate of 11% in the U.S., pancreatic cancer remains the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths and is poised to move to second by 2030. Standard clinical trials typically compare one investigational treatment to one standard of care, encompass one phase of clinical investigation at a time, and treat one patient population. Accrual and data analysis are often very slow, and unfortunately, the vast majority of clinical trials targeting pancreatic cancer patients are unsuccessful. More efficient clinical trial designs can include combining phases I and II or phases II and III, and trials that involve a master protocol approach can also answer multiple clinical questions simultaneously. These modern clinical trial designs can allow a faster, more efficient and cost-effective approach to testing investigational therapies in patients with pancreatic cancer and, most importantly, fewer patients may be required to determine the efficacy of treatment. Herein we summarize some of the recent innovative clinical trials in pancreatic cancer to provide meaningful data toward developing new treatment options to benefit patients with a dismal disease like pancreatic cancer

Frequency of Appropriate Use of Pancreatic Enzyme Replacement Therapy and Symptomatic Response in Pancreatic Cancer Patients

Pancreatic cancer (PC) and its treatments can result in pancreatic exocrine insufficiency that requires pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT). Appropriate PERT usage is during meals and snacks. The aim was to determine the frequency of appropriate use of PERT and its impact on symptom alleviation in PC through a patient-reported outcomes online platform. Users in the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network's Patient Registry were prompted to answer a standalone questionnaire about their experience with PERT. Two hundred sixty-two users completed the PERT questionnaire (January 2016-January 2018). Patients who reported taking PERT with meals had higher alleviation of symptoms compared with those taking PERT prior to or after meals. Specifically, "feeling of indigestion," "light-colored or orange stools," and "visible food particles in stool" were significantly decreased. Patients taking PERT with meals reported weight gain and less weight loss. Of the 89% of PC patients prescribed PERT, 65% were prescribed PERT appropriately with all meals and snacks. Overall compliance with PERT administration guidelines was low (50% [105/208]). Improvement in symptoms significantly correlated with appropriate use of PERT. Increase in PC patient and provider education about appropriate PERT usage and administration is warranted

Leveraging patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with pancreatic cancer: The Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (PanCAN) online patient registry experience.

BackgroundThe Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (PanCAN) Patient Registry is an online, pancreatic cancer-specific, global registry enabling patients to self-report sociodemographics, disease/management characteristics, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We sought to describe the creation, user experience, and research potential of the PanCAN Registry.MethodsWe obtained data to describe (1) the creation of the Registry (questionnaire development, marketing efforts, and regulatory considerations); (2) the user experience (user characteristics and interactions with the registry following inception); and (3) the research potential of the registry (comparing PROs and treatment patterns by age [±65 years] and treatment site [community or academic] for users with de novo metastatic disease).ResultsThe Registry was conceived as part of PanCAN's strategic plan for a personalized therapy initiative. PanCAN staff and disease expert consultants developed questionnaires hosted on an electronic PRO platform. Users had the option to include their data in research efforts, and the Registry platform received institutional review board approval. From 7/2015 to 12/2020, 2187 patients visited the registry and 1697 (77.6%) completed at least one survey (median age = 64 years [range: 24-90], 47.9% women, 88.7% White, 34.0% metastatic disease). Among patients with metastatic disease (N = 567), 46.0% were ≥65 years old and 67.5% received treatment at community sites. Patients ≥65 years reported feeling less hopeful about the treatment plan (12.4% vs. 24.3%, p = 0.003), and patients treated at community sites reported more frequent treatment breaks of >2 weeks (58.2% vs. 28.1%, p < 0.001).ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate the feasibility, usability, and research potential of an online PRO registry for patients with cancer. This description of the PanCAN Registry should inform future registry-building efforts to facilitate standardized PRO reporting and provide a valuable research database.Clinical trial registration numberNot applicable

The miami international evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection

Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019).Summary Background Data: MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. Methods: The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology. Results: After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety.Conclusion: The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery