Objective Resection can potentially cure resectable pancreatic cancer (PaC) and significantly prolong survival in some patients. This large-scale international study aimed to investigate variations in resection for PaC in Europe and USA and determinants for its utilisation. Design Data from six European population-based cancer registries and the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database during 2003–2016 were analysed. Age-standardised resection rates for overall and stage I–II PaCs were computed. Associations between resection and demographic and clinical parameters were assessed using multivariable logistic regression models. Results A total of 153 698 records were analysed. In population-based registries in 2012–2014, resection rates ranged from 13.2% (Estonia) to 21.2% (Slovenia) overall and from 34.8% (Norway) to 68.7% (Denmark) for stage I–II tumours, with great international variations. During 2003–2014, resection rates only increased in USA, the Netherlands and Denmark. Resection was significantly less frequently performed with more advanced tumour stage (ORs for stage III and IV versus stage I–II tumours: 0.05–0.18 and 0.01–0.06 across countries) and increasing age (ORs for patients 70–79 and ≥80 versus those <60 years: 0.37–0.63 and 0.03–0.16 across countries). Patients with advanced-stage tumours (stage III–IV: 63.8%–81.2%) and at older ages (≥70 years: 52.6%–59.5%) receiving less frequently resection comprised the majority of diagnosed cases. Patient performance status, tumour location and size were also associated with resection application. Conclusion Rates of PaC resection remain low in Europe and USA with great international variations. Further studies are warranted to explore reasons for these variations.

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is the most aggressive type of common cancers, and in 2014, nearly 40000 patients died from the disease in the United States. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, which accounts for the majority of PC cases, is characterized by an intense stromal desmoplastic reaction surrounding the cancer cells. Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) are the main effector cells in the desmoplastic reaction, and pancreatic stellate cells are the most important source of CAFs. However, other important components of the PC stroma are inflammatory cells and endothelial cells. The aim of this review is to describe the complex interplay between PC cells and the cellular and non-cellular components of the tumour stroma. Published data have indicated that the desmoplastic stroma protects PC cells against chemotherapy and radiation therapy and that it might promote the proliferation and migration of PC cells. However, in animal studies, experimental depletion of the desmoplastic stroma and CAFs has led to more aggressive cancers. Hence, the precise role of the tumour stroma in PC remains to be elucidated. However, it is likely that a context-dependent therapeutic modification, rather than pure depletion, of the PC stroma holds potential for the development of new treatment strategies for PC patients.

Importance The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of pancreatic cancer following neoadjuvant combination treatment with folinic acid, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) is unclear. Objective To assess the association of adjuvant chemotherapy with overall survival (OS) in patients after pancreatic cancer resection and neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018. An existing cohort of patients undergoing resection of pancreatic cancer after FOLFIRINOX was updated and expanded for the purpose of this study. All consecutive patients who underwent pancreatic surgery after at least 2 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy for nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer were retrospectively identified from institutional databases. Patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer were eligible for this study. Patients with in-hospital mortality or who died within 3 months after surgery were excluded. Exposures The association of adjuvant chemotherapy with OS was evaluated in different subgroups including interaction terms for clinicopathological parameters with adjuvant treatment in a multivariable Cox model. Overall survival was defined as the time starting from surgery plus 3 months (moment eligible for adjuvant therapy), unless mentioned otherwise. Results We included 520 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 61 [53-66] years; 279 [53.7%] men) from 31 centers in 19 countries. The median number of neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRINOX was 6 (interquartile range, 5-8). Overall, 343 patients (66.0%) received adjuvant chemotherapy, of whom 68 (19.8%) received FOLFIRINOX, 201 (58.6%) received gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, 14 (4.1%) received capecitabine, 45 (13.1%) received a combination or other agents, and 15 (4.4%) received an unknown type of adjuvant chemotherapy. Median OS was 38 months (95% CI, 36-46 months) after diagnosis and 31 months (95% CI, 29-37 months) after surgery. No survival difference was found for patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy vs those who did not (median OS, 29 vs 29 months, univariable hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.77-1.28;P = .93). In multivariable analysis, only the interaction term for lymph node stage with adjuvant therapy was statistically significant: In patients with pathology-proven node-positive disease, adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved survival (median OS, 26 vs 13 months; multivariable HR, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.22-0.75];P = .004). In patients with node-negative disease, adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with improved survival (median OS, 38 vs 54 months; multivariable HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.35-2.10;P = .73). Conclusions and Relevance These results suggest that adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and resection of pancreatic cancer was associated with improved survival only in patients with pathology-proven node-positive disease. Future randomized studies should be conducted to confirm this finding.

Background and Study Aims: Prospective data are lacking on the safety of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and on patient satisfaction with the procedure. We prospectively recorded complications related to EUS in order to establish morbidity and mortality. In addition the levels of patient satisfaction were evaluated, with regard to the tolerability of the procedure (pain, discomfort, and anxiety levels) and the provision of information. Patients and Methods: 3324 consecutive patients who underwent EUS were studied with regard to complications. During the study period 300 patients were interviewed and followed up in detail as part of the evaluation of patient satisfaction. Results: Ten patients (0.3 %) suffered from a complication related to the EUS procedure, and two patients died (0.06 %). There were no significant differences between the complication rates for EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and for EUS, but both fatal cases related to EUS-FNA/EUS-guided intervention. Nine of the ten patients with complications (90 %) had a diagnosis of malignancy, and esophageal perforation accounted for half of all complications. Although the majority of patients with nonlethal complications were managed well on conservative regimens, only one case, of self-limiting acute pancreatitis, could be classified as a mild complication. With regard to patient tolerability, only minor incidents occurred during the EUS procedure (tracheal suction 5 %, vomiting 0.3 %, aspiration 0.3 %) and no intervention was necessary. During the procedure, 80 % of the patients had no or only slight pain and more than 95 % experienced only slight or no anxiety, whereas more than half of the patients experienced moderate to severe discomfort. More than 90 % of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the information provided to them before and after the EUS, and the same number of patients were ready without hesitation to undergo an additional EUS examination if necessary. Conclusions: EUS, EUS-FNA and EUS-guided intervention are safe techniques, but severe and lethal complications do occur. The EUS procedures can be performed with a high level of patient satisfaction and with low levels of pain, discomfort and anxiety.

Background and Study Aims: Several studies have evaluated the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) in the upper gastrointestinal tract, but so far no studies have specifically evaluated the clinical impact of EUS-FNAB in upper gastrointestinal tract cancer patients. In this consecutive and prospective study, EUS-FNAB was only performed if a positive malignant finding would change the therapeutic strategy. Patients and Methods: Between 1997 and 1999, 307 consecutive patients were referred for EUS with a diagnosis or strong suspicion of esophageal, gastric or pancreatic cancer; 274 patients were potential candidates for surgical treatment and had EUS. According to predefined impact criteria, 27 % (75/274) of the patients had EUS-FNAB for staging or diagnostic reasons. Results: The overall clinical impact of EUS-FNAB was 13 %, 14 %, and 30 % in esophageal, gastric, and pancreatic cancer, respectively. The staging-related clinical impact was similar for all three types of cancer (11 - 12.5 %), whereas the diagnosis-related impact was highest in pancreatic cancer patients (86 %). EUS-FNAB was inadequate in 13 % and gave false-negative results in 5 %. The overall sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for EUS-FNAB were 80 %, 78 % and 80 %, respectively. No complications related to the biopsy procedure were seen. Conclusions: If EUS-FNAB was performed only in cases where a positive malignant result would change patient management, then approximately one out of four patients with upper gastrointestinal tract cancer would require a biopsy. With this approach the actual clinical impact of EUS-FNAB ranged from 13 % in esophageal cancer to 30 % in pancreatic cancer. EUS-FNAB plays a limited, but very important clinical role in the assessment of upper gastrointestinal tract cancer.