Katherine E. Poruk

Screening for Pancreatic Cancer: Why, How, and Who?

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth most common cause of cancer mortality in the United States, with 5-year survival rates for patients with resectable tumors ranging from 15% to 20%. However, most patients presenting with distant metastases, are not resectable, and have a 5-year survival rate of close to 0%. This demonstrates a need for improved screening to identify pancreatic cancer while the tumor is still localized and amenable to surgical resection. Studies of patients with pancreatic tumors incidentally diagnosed demonstrate longer median survival than tumors discovered only when the patient is symptomatic, suggesting that early detection may improve outcome. Recent evidence from genomic sequencing indicates a 15-year interval for genetic progression of pancreatic cancer from initiation to the metastatic stage, suggesting a sufficient window for early detection. Still, many challenges remain in implementing effective screening. Early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer relies on developing screening methodologies with highly sensitive and specific biomarkers and imaging modalities. It also depends on a better understanding of the risk factors and natural history of the disease to accurately identify high-risk groups that would be best served by screening. This review summarizes our current understanding of the biology of pancreatic cancer relevant to methods available for screening. At this time, given the lack of proven benefit in this disease, screening efforts should probably be undertaken in the context of prospective trials.

The Clinical Utility of CA 19-9 in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Diagnostic and Prognostic Updates

CA 19-9 and CEA are the most commonly used biomarkers for diagnosis and management of patients with pancreatic cancer. Since the original compendium by Steinberg in 1990, numerous studies have reported the use of CA 19-9 and, to a lesser extent, CEA in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Here we update an evaluation of the accuracy of CA 19-9 and CEA, and, unlike previous reviews, focus on discrimination between malignant and benign disease instead of normal controls. In 57 studies involving 3,285 pancreatic carcinoma cases, the combined sensitivity of CA 19-9 was 78.2% and in 37 studies involving 1,882 cases with benign pancreatic disease the specificity of CA 19-9 was 82.8%. From the combined analysis of studies reporting CEA, the sensitivity was 44.2% (1,324 cases) and the specificity was 84.8% (656 cases). These measurements more appropriately reflect the expected biomarker accuracy in the differential diagnosis of patients with periampullary diseases. We also present a summary of the use of CA 19-9 as a prognostic tool and evaluate CA 19-9 diagnostic and prognostic utility in a 10-year, single institution experience.

Serum Osteopontin and Tissue Inhibitor of Metalloproteinase 1 as Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Objectives Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a dismal 5-year survival rate of 5%. There is an urgent need for early detection while the tumors are small and surgically resectable. We assessed serum osteopontin (OPN) and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1 (TIMP-1) as possible diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in a novel cohort of patients with pancreatic cancer. Methods Osteopontin and TIMP-1 levels were determined in sera from 86 patients with PDAC, 86 healthy control subjects, and 48 patients with chronic pancreatitis. Regression models were used to relate OPN and TIMP-1 to sex, age, stage, class, and treatment. Survival analyses were performed using univariate and multivariate Cox models. Results The serum levels of both OPN and TIMP-1 distinguished PDAC from chronic pancreatitis (P ⩽ 0.0001) and healthy control subjects (P < 0.0001). The serum levels of both OPN and TIMP-1 also distinguished early-stage resectable PDAC cases from chronic pancreatitis (P < 0.04) and healthy control subjects (P < 0.01). High serum levels of OPN were significantly correlated with reduced patient survival. Conclusions Serum OPN and TIMP-1 have use as diagnostic biomarkers in PDAC. Our data suggest a potential benefit of using OPN, TIMP-1, and CA 19-9 in a panel to improve diagnostic accuracy in PDAC.

Circulating Tumor Cell Phenotype Predicts Recurrence and Survival in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Objective: We assessed circulating tumor cells (CTCs) with epithelial and mesenchymal phenotypes as a potential prognostic biomarker for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Background: PDAC is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in the United States. There is an urgent need to develop biomarkers that predict patient prognosis and allow for better treatment stratification. Methods: Peripheral and portal blood samples were obtained from 50 patients with PDAC before surgical resection and filtered using the Isolation by Size of Epithelial Tumor cells method. CTCs were identified by immunofluorescence using commercially available antibodies to cytokeratin, vimentin, and CD45. Results: Thirty-nine patients (78%) had epithelial CTCs that expressed cytokeratin but not CD45. Twenty-six (67%) of the 39 patients had CTCs which also expressed vimentin, a mesenchymal marker. No patients had cytokeratin-negative and vimentin-positive CTCs. The presence of cytokeratin-positive CTCs (P < 0.01), but not mesenchymal-like CTCs (P = 0.39), was associated with poorer survival. The presence of cytokeratin-positive CTCs remained a significant independent predictor of survival by multivariable analysis after accounting for other prognostic factors (P < 0.01). The detection of CTCs expressing both vimentin and cytokeratin was predictive of recurrence (P = 0.01). Among patients with cancer recurrence, those with vimentin-positive and cytokeratin-expressing CTCs had decreased median time to recurrence compared with patients without CTCs (P = 0.02). Conclusions: CTCs are an exciting potential strategy for understanding the biology of metastases, and provide prognostic utility for PDAC patients. CTCs exist as heterogeneous populations, and assessment should include phenotypic identification tailored to characterize cells based on epithelial and mesenchymal markers.

Serum Platelet Factor 4 is an Independent Predictor of Survival and Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Background: Improved diagnostic, predictive, and prognostic biomarkers for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are urgently needed. Platelet factor 4 (PF4) has been proposed as a diagnostic biomarker for PDAC. We assessed the diagnostic and prognostic potential of serum PF4 levels in PDAC patients. Methods: Serum PF4 levels were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in an initial cohort of 62 PDAC patients, 62 healthy control subjects, and 34 chronic pancreatitis patients. A second validation set consisted of 71 PDAC patients. Linear regression models were used to relate PF4 to class, gender, age, stage, platelet count, and diagnosis. Survival analyses were done using univariate and multivariate Cox models. Results: In the initial cohort, serum PF4 levels distinguished PDAC from chronic pancreatitis patients (P = 0.011), but not from healthy control subjects (P = 0.624). In PDAC patients, high serum PF4 level significantly predicted decreased survival independent of all covariates examined (P < 0.01). The prognostic relationship of serum PF4 levels remained significant in the validation set. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurred in 20% of the 133 PDAC patients. The VTE risk was higher in subjects with elevated PF4 levels (P = 0.009). Conclusions: Serum PF4 is shown for the first time to be prognostic for survival in PDAC patients. High PF4 is associated with an increased risk for the development of VTE. Impact: Serum PF4 levels may be useful for patient stratification and for directing treatment options in patients with pancreatic cancer including anticoagulation prophylaxis. The relationship between high PF4 levels and poorer outcomes requires further study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(10); 2605–10. ©2010 AACR.

Individualized Performance Feedback to Surgical Residents Improves Appropriate Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Prescription and Reduces Potentially Preventable VTE: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Objective: To investigate the effect of providing personal clinical effectiveness performance feedback to general surgery residents regarding prescription of appropriate venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Background: Residents are frequently charged with prescribing medications for patients, including VTE prophylaxis, but rarely receive individual performance feedback regarding these practice habits. Methods: This prospective cohort study at the Johns Hopkins Hospital compared outcomes across 3 study periods: (1) baseline, (2) scorecard alone, and (3) scorecard plus coaching. All general surgery residents (n = 49) and surgical patients (n = 2420) for whom residents wrote admission orders during the first 9 months of the 2013–2014 academic year were included. Outcomes included the proportions of patients prescribed appropriate VTE prophylaxis, patients with preventable VTE, and residents prescribing appropriate VTE prophylaxis for every patient, and results from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education resident survey. Results: At baseline, 89.4% of patients were prescribed appropriate VTE prophylaxis and only 45% of residents prescribed appropriate prophylaxis for every patient. During the scorecard period, appropriate VTE prophylaxis prescription significantly increased to 95.4% (P < 0.001). For the scorecard plus coaching period, significantly more residents prescribed appropriate prophylaxis for every patient (78% vs 45%, P = 0.0017). Preventable VTE was eliminated in both intervention periods (0% vs 0.35%, P = 0.046). After providing feedback, significantly more residents reported receiving data about practice habits on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education resident survey (87% vs 38%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Providing personal clinical effectiveness feedback including data and peer-to-peer coaching improves resident performance, and results in a significant reduction in harm for patients.

Perioperative Management of Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma

BackgroundCholangiocarcinoma is the most common primary tumor of the biliary tract although it accounts for only 2 % of all human malignancies. We herein review hilar cholangiocarcinoma including its risk factors, the main classification systems for tumors, current surgical management of the disease, and the role chemotherapy and liver transplantation may play in selected patients.MethodsWe performed a comprehensive literature search using PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane library for the period 1980–2015 using the following MeSH terms: “hilar cholangiocarcinoma”, “biliary cancer”, and “cholangiocarcinoma”. Only recent studies that were published in English and in peer reviewed journals were included.FindingsHilar cholangiocarcinoma is a disease of advanced age with an unclear etiology, most frequently found in Southeast Asia and relatively rare in Western countries. The best chance of long-term survival and potential cure is surgical resection with negative surgical margins, but many patients are unresectable due to locally advanced or metastatic disease at diagnosis. As a result of recent efforts, new methods of management have been identified for these patients, including preoperative portal vein embolism and biliary drainage, neoadjuvant chemotherapy with subsequent transplantation, and chemoradiation therapy.ConclusionCurrent management of hilar cholangiocarcinoma depends on extent of the tumor at presentation and includes surgical resection, liver transplantation, portal vein embolization, and chemoradiation therapy. Our understanding of hilar cholangiocarcinoma has improved in recent years and further research offers hope to improve the outcome in patients with these rare tumors.

Pancreatic cancer surgery: past, present, and future

The history of pancreatic cancer surgery, though fraught with failure and setbacks, is punctuated by periods of incremental progress dependent upon the state of the art and the mettle of the surgeons daring enough to attempt it. Surgical anesthesia and the aseptic techniques developed during the latter half of the 19(th) century were instrumental in establishing a viable setting for pancreatic surgery to develop. Together, they allowed for bolder interventions and improved survival through the post-operative period. Surgical management began with palliative procedures to address biliary obstruction in advanced disease. By the turn of the century, surgical pioneers such as Alessandro Codivilla and Walther Kausch were demonstrating the technical feasibility of pancreatic head resections and applying principles learned from palliation to perform complicated anatomical reconstructions. Allen O. Whipple, the namesake of the pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), was the first to take a systematic approach to refining the procedure. Perhaps his greatest contribution was sparking a renewed interest in the surgical management of periampullary cancers and engendering a community of surgeons who advanced the field through their collective efforts. Though the work of Whipple and his contemporaries legitimized PD as an accepted surgical option, it was the establishment of high-volume centers of excellence and a multidisciplinary approach in the later decades of the 20(th) century that made it a viable surgical option. Today, pancreatic surgeons are experimenting with minimally invasive surgical techniques, expanding indications for resection, and investigating new methods for screening and early detection. In the future, the effective management of pancreatic cancer will depend upon our ability to reliably detect the earliest cancers and precursor lesions to allow for truly curative resections.

Circulating tumor cells expressing markers of tumor-initiating cells predict poor survival and cancer recurrence in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Purpose: Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have been identified in the blood of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but little is known about the exact phenotype of these cells. We assessed expression of aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH), CD133, and CD44 as markers of CTCs with a tumor-initiating cell (TIC) phenotype in patients with PDAC and the relationship of this expression to patient outcomes. Experimental Design: Peripheral blood from 60 consecutive patients with PDAC undergoing surgical resection was obtained and processed using the Isolation by Size of Epithelial Tumor (ISET) method. Immunofluorescence was used to identify CTCs expressing cytokeratin, CD133, CD44, and ALDH. Results: Forty-seven patients (78%) had epithelial CTCs staining positive for pan-cytokeratin and at least one TIC marker. Forty-six patients (77%) had epithelial CTCs that labeled with antibodies to cytokeratin and ALDH. By separate analysis, 34 (57%) had cytokeratin-positive, CD133-positive, and CD44-positive (triple-positive) CTCs, whereas 40 (67%) had cytokeratin-positive, CD133-positive, CD44-negative CTCs. The remaining 13 patients did not have CTCs, as defined by cytokeratin expression. ALDH-positive CTCs and triple-positive CTCs were significantly associated with worse survival by univariate analysis, even when accounting for other significant prognostic factors (all, P ≤ 0.01). ALDH-positive CTCs, triple-positive CTCs, and dual cytokeratin- and CD133-positive CTCs were independent predictors of tumor recurrence by logistic regression analysis and associated with decreased disease-free survival (all, P ≤ 0.03). Conclusions: CTCs labeling with one or more markers of TICs are found in a majority of patients with PDAC and are independently predictive of decreased disease-free and overall survival. Clin Cancer Res; 23(11); 2681–90. ©2016 AACR.

Surgery for oligometastasis of pancreatic cancer

The incidence of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has steadily increased over the past several decades. The majority of PDAC patients will present with distant metastases, limiting surgical management in this population. Hepatectomy and pulmonary metastasectomy (PM) has been well established for colorectal cancer patients with isolated, resectable hepatic or pulmonary metastatic disease. Recent advancements in effective systemic therapy for PDAC have led to the selection of certain patients where metastectomy may be potentially indicated. However, the indication for resection of oligometastases in PDAC is not well defined. This review will discuss the current literature on the surgical management of metastatic disease for PDAC with a specific focus on surgical resection for isolated hepatic and pulmonary metastases.