Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis
Quan-Bo Zhou1,2, Zhi-Guo Li1,2, Hui-Lin Ye1,2, Lu-Sheng Wei1,2, Shang-You Zheng1,2, Cheng-rui Zhong1,2, Guo-Lin Li1,2, Qing Lin1,2, Zhi-qiang Fu1,2, Ru-Fu Chen1,2*
1Department of Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and
Gene Regulation, Sun Ya t-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University,
Guangzhou, China
2Department of Biliary-pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
*Corresponding author: Ru-Fu Chen, Department of Pancreato-biliary Surgery and Department of Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and Gene Regulation, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangdong Province, China. Tel: +86-02081332020; Fax: +86-02081332020; Email: chenrf63@163.com
Received Date:
26 December, 2018; Accepted Date: 03
January 2019, 2018; Published Date: 23
January, 2019
Citation: Zhou QB, Li ZG, Ye HL, Wei LS, Zheng SY, et al. (2019) Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis. J Surg 10: 1188. DOI: 10.29011/2575-9760.001188
1. Abstract
To evaluate the feasibility and effect of intraoperative radiotherapy on patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, Seventy-two consecutive patients who had undergone resection with/without the addition of intraoperative radiotherapy between 2013 and 2017 at our single institution were included and analyzed. Thirty-four patients (47.2%) received additive low-energy photon IORT with 17.4 Gy median radiation dose. With a median follow-up of 20.0 months (range, 6.0-40.0), the media overall survival time and the media progression-free survival time of all patients was 18.1 months and 11.2 months, respectively. Univariate analyses showed that not receiving IORT retained significance with regard to both PFS (HR, 1.74; p=0.02) and OS (HR, 1.79; p=0.02). In the multivariate analysis, not receiving IORT was associated with a lower probability of PFS (HR, 2.13; p<0.01) and OS (HR, 2.05; p<0.01). After resection combined with intraoperative radiotherapy, 20 (86%) of patients treated with surgery with intraoperative radiotherapy completely relieved the abdominal/waist pain, while 11 (44%) of patients of the control group relieved the pain (p=0.01). Thus, IORT can prolong survival and also improve the quality of life, and it can provide an adjunct to resection in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.
2. Keywords: Pain; Pancreatic Cancer; Radiotherapy; Survival
3. Abbreviations
IORT :
Intraoperative Radiotherapy
BRPC :
Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer
PDAC :
Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma
PC :
Pancreatic Cancer
OS : Overall Survival
PFS : Progression-Free Survival
Pancreatic Cancer (PC) is the fourth leading
cause of cancer-related deaths in America with an overall 5-year survival rate
of 7% [1], and is likely to be the second cancer cause of death by 2030 [2].
Surgery still remains the most effective treatment at present. However,
only 15-20% of the patients were diagnosed in potentially resectable stages,
and the rest were locally advanced or metastatic. There is a distinct subset of
pancreatic cancer patients named as “Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer (BRPC)”,
which was characterized by reconstructable venous involvement of the superior
mesenteric vein or portal vein, along with abutment but not encasement of arterial
structures or removable retroperitoneal structures [3].
Different with resectable PC, patients with
BRPC act as the imprecise continuum between straightforwardly resectable and
technically unresectable stage, for some degree of vascular involvement that
may jeopardize a margin- negative (R0) resection [4]. For this reason, part of
the BRPC patients choose to downstage by neoadjuvant therapy. However, some
research show that only 24%-46% BRPC patients obtain the opportunity to
curative surgical treatment after neoadjuvant therapy [5,6]. In China, the
conversion of successful resection rate was lower due to the fact that most of
chinese patients could not tolerate the side effects of neoadjuvant therapy,
and many patients tend to choose the traditional Chinese medicine rather than
chemotherapy when a tumor cannot be removed surgically. In this case, a
surgery-first strategy was very common in China and the final determination of
whether a tumor is able to be resected with negative margins has customarily been
made by the surgeon undertaking a trial dissection. So, combined a new
technology to help achieving a margin-negative (R0) resection is essential.
The development of Intraoperative Radiotherapy (IORT)
offers a hope to transform the R1 margin to R0 margin through killing the
residual cancer cells in positive surgical margin with a high-dose radiation.
INTRABEAM® PRS500 system (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany) is the
most widely used mobile intraoperative radiotherapy device to date, and the
effect in resectable and locally advanced or unresectable pancreatic cancer has
been reported. However, the researches focusing on the role of INTRABEAM IORT
for BRPC patients, are unclear. In the current study, we reviewed a
retrospective single-institutional series of BRPC patients who received
surgical resection combining with/without sequential IORT. To determine the
role of IORT in patient with BRPC, clinicopathological characteristics and
survival information from 72 patients with BRPC matching the condition were
collected and analyzed.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Patients
We retrospectively collected all of cases of patients
with pancreatic cancer since January 1, 2013 to June 30, 2017 at the Sun
Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University matching the following
standards: 1). BRPC was defined to include one or
more of the after radiographic findings: Tumor abutment (>180° of
the circumference of the vessel) of the Superior Mesenteric Artery (SMA) or
celiac axis; tumor abutment or encasement (>180° of the circumference
of the vessel) of a short segment of the hepatic artery, short-segment
occlusion of the Superior Mesen-Teric Vein (SMV), Portal Vein (PV), or SMV–PV
confluence amenable to vascular resection and reconstruction [7]; 2). Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma was
pathologically identified; 3). All patients postoperatively received
gemcitabine-based combination chemotherapy. Exclusion criteria was those
combining with other types of tumor like islet cell tumor and mucinous
cystadenocainoma or metastasis. Finally, we sorted out 72 patients to further
analyze the survival and the quality of life, in which 34 patients treated with
surgery combined with IORT, while 38 patients treated with surgery only. The
study protocol was approved by the institutional ethic committee. Written
informed consent on intra-operative radiotherapy was obtained from patients
treated with IORT prior to operation.
2.2. Procedures
Among of IORT group/non-IORT group, 25/26 patients
with tumor in the head of pancreas received pancreatoduoenectomy, and 9/12
patients with tumor in the body or tail of pancreas received distal
pancreatectomy combined with splenectomy, respectively. In IORT group, the
operations were carried out at an operating room equipped with an
intraoperative low-energy photon applicator (Carl Zeiss Intrabeam, X-ray source
50 kV, German) (Figure 1A). Patients immediately received the intraoperative
radiation after tumor removal (Figure 1B) and before digestive anastomosis (Figure
1C). The protocol using the intra-operative radiotherapy method in this study
was described in previous reports [8]. The target area was 5 mm away from
source applicator with a 5cm efficient diameter. The radial field included the
tumor bed with approximate 1-cm to 3-cm margin, comprising the retroperitoneum,
vascular structures, and tumor bed extending from the transected bile duct
superiorly to the right kidney laterally and to the pancreatic remnant
medially. Prior to irradiation, lead shielding was used to cover the
surrounding radiosensitive organs like small bowel in order to avoid
unnecessary damage. The IORT dose was prescribed to 90% isodose and the media
dose was 17.4 Gy (range 10 to 20 Gy). The radiation dose depended on the vessel
number of tumor involvement, the vessel range of tumor encasement and the
possibility and extent of tumor residue after resection. The dose would be
reduced to 10 Gy for R0 margins confirmed by frozen section. For larger tumors
or tumors involving with main vessels, 20 Gy was preferred. After IORT,
surgeons continued to rebuild the digestive tract and finished the operation.
All of patients postoperatively received six courses of gemcitabine monotherapy
after rest for 4-6 weeks.
3.
Data Collection
Patient demographics (age and gender), jaundice
status, pain, CA 19-9, tumor site, tumor stage (the pathological TNM staging
system issued by 8th edition of AJCC), Lymph Node (LN) invasion, vascular
invasion, perineural invasion,pathological differentiation was obtained. Margin resection status, Visual
Analogue Scale (VAS) at the preoperation and the first postoperative follow-up
and postoperation complication were collected. Acute and chronic toxicities
were evaluated using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization
for Research and Treatment of Cancer score.
4.
Follow-Up
The researchers would
follow up all of patients every month after operation for the initial 1 year and
every 3 months for the next year and every 6 months for 3 additional years
thereafter. Patients were restaged routinely every 3 to 6 months with blood
tests, ultrasound and Computed Tomography (CT) or Magnetic Resonance
Imaging (MRI) of the upper abdomen. Progression was defined as
identification of suspicious imaging finding or biopsy-proven tumor in the
tumor bed, regional LN area or distant area. Overall survival (OS) was defined as
the duration from the date of operation until death or the last follow-up. Progression-Free Survival (PFS) was defined as
the duration from the date of operation until the date when tumor progression
was diagnosed or the last follow-up. The last follow-up was completed on June
30 2018.
5.
Statistical Analysis
SPSS version 24 software (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA) was used to analyze
the data. The primary endpoints of the analysis were OS and PFS. Potential
associations were assessed in univariate and multivariate analyses using the
Cox proportional hazards model (2-tailed p test 0.05). As for the contrast of
pain. patients were divided into four subgroups: the mild group (VAS=1-3),
severe group (VAS=4-6), extreme severe group (VAS=7-10) and no-pain group
(VAS=0) and were analyzed with the nonparametric text.
6.
Results
6.1.
Patient characteristics
Median follow-up time
for the entire group of patients was 20.0 months (range: 6.0-40.0 months). No
patients were lost to follow-up. Baseline characteristics of patients are shown
in (Table 1). The median age of all patients was 57.9years (range: 28.0-82.0
years). Taken altogether, 48 (66.7%) patients had abdominal pain. 51 patients
(70.8%) had tumors located at the head of pancreas more than tumors in the body
or tail (29.2%) of pancreas. The mean tumor diameter was 3.2 cm ± 0.8 cm.
According to the pathological reports, 43 (59.7%) patients were in stage T3,
16(22.3%) patients in stage T4, 69(95.8%) patients in stage N1, and 17(23.6%)
patients were diagnosed with poor differentiation, 41(56.9%) with moderate
differentiation and 14 (19.4%) with well differentiation. In total, 55.6%
(n=40) of patients had R0 resection margin and 44.4% (n=32) had R1 resection
margin. There were no significant differences on patient characteristics
between the IORT group and non-IORT group.
6.2.
Contrast for overall survival
OS for all patients at
1 year, 2 years and 3 years was 54.2%, 27.8% and 11.1%, respectively (Figure
2A). The median overall survival of the IORT group is 22.0 mouths
(range: 7.9 to 40.1), while the median overall survival of the non-IORT group
is 14.8 mouths (range: 5.7 to 40.1) (p<0.01). Both the univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard
analyses showed that R0 resection (Table 2, p <0.01; Table 3, p <0.01) (Figure
2B) and IORT (Table 2, p =0.02; Table 3, p <0.01) (Figure 2C) were
associated with a higher probability of OS consistently
6.3.
Contrast for Progression-free survival
PFS for the study
population at 1 year, 2 years and 3 years was 34.7%, 11.1% and 0 (Figure 2D).
The median PFS of the IORT group/the non-IORT group is 11.7 months (range: 4.7
to 28.4)/8.9 months (range: 1.9 to 33.8) (p<0.01). Univariate analyses
revealed a significantly higher risk of R1 resectio (Table 2; p<0.01) (Figure
2E) and non-IORT (Table 2, p=0.02) (Figure 2F). The multivariate Cox proportional hazard
analyses showed R1 resection (Table 3; p<0.01) and IORT (Table 3; p<0.01)
retained significance with regard to PFS.
6.4.
Waist/abdominal
pain
In pre-operation, the number of the mild group, severe group, extreme severe group and no-pain group of the IORT group were 9(26.4%), 10(29.4%), 4(11.8%) and 11(32.4%). Correspondingly, the number of the non-IORT group were 11(28.9%), 9(23.7%), 5(13.2%), 13(34.2%), respectively. The Kruskal-Wallis Test analyses showed no difference between the two groups (Table 4; p =0.82). In postoperation, 20(86%)of the IORT group obtained complete remission of pain vs. 11(44%) of the non-IORT group obtained complete remission of pain. The Kruskal-Wallis Test analyses showed that the difference of pain control between the two groups of pain control makes sense (Table 4; p =0.01).
6.5.
Complication
In all patients, the
rate of operative complications was approximately 57%. The operative
complications include bile leakage (n=5), pancreatic leakage
(n=15) and abdominal infection (n=8), but no digestive tract bleeding,
intestinal fistula or digestive tract bleeding. After conservative therapy like
enhanced peritoneal lavage, all patients survived from the post-operative
complications. Of all patients, there were no long-term complications such as
radiation enteritis and pancreatitis. The short-term post-operative
complications like bile leakage and pancreatic leakage are quite common for
pancreaticoduodenectomy. And there were no significant differences between the
IORT group and non-IORT group.
7. Discussion
Our relevant research can be summarized as follows. First, we found that
patients who did not received IORT had a higher probability of disease
progression and poor outcomes. Second, we observed that IORT can effectively
alleviate cancerous pain. Finally, there was no significant increase in
additional complications in IORT patients.
Pancreatic cancer is characterized by the extremely malignant biological
characteristics. Even in nowadays, there is only 20% of tumors can be resected
at diagnosis, in which approximately 10-35% of patients may occur isolated
local recurrences [7-9], likely associated with positive microscopic resection
margins. Our research shows that R1 margin status leads to the increased
probability of overall progression and death. As Sugiura et. reported, R1
margins are indicative of biologically aggressive tumors [10]. Borderline
resectable pancreatic cancer is in betweenness from resectability to technical
unresectability, which is suffering with a higher recurrence rate for a fewer
R0 ratio. So, it is necessary to stress the importance of attempting to achieve
microscopically negative margins for curative intent. It should be mentioned that although several
definitions have been projected for BRPC for example ASCO, we still selecting
the NCCN CPG definition for its clearer criteria for tumor resection in
contrast with ASCO [11].
Available data in patients receiving IORT after pancreaticoduodenectomy
suggest an improvement in local control. Alfieri et al. noted IORT in
resectable pancreatic cancer increased local control and they found that local
control was 58% in the IORT group vs. 29% in the group that did not receive
IORT (p < 0.01) [12]. Reni et al reported that 127 patients of resectable
pancreatic cancer surgically treated with curative intent combined with IORT
was compared with 76 patients treated with surgery, in which median time to
local failure treated with surgery alone or with IORT were 11 months and 14 months,
respectively (p =0.02) [13]. In our research, the median PFS of IORT group is
13.7 months while the median PFS of IORT group is 8.9 months(p<0.01),
suggusted that IORT combimed with surgery improves local control not only in
resectable pancreatic cancer but also in borderline resectable pancreatic
cancer. What’s more, an Italian series evaluated 43 patients receiving IORT in
addition to surgical resection whereas 47 underwent resection alone. Results
revealed local recurrence in the group receiving IORT was 27% compared with 56%
in the group receiving surgical resection alone (P <0.01). However, 1-year,
2-year and 3-year survival rates were respectively 71%, 24%, and 7% in IORT
group and 49%, 16%, and 10% in non-IORT group (P was not significant), and
there are no differences in overall survival [14]. The National Cancer
Institute reported an experience evaluating 24 additional patients randomized
to receive IORT (20 Gy). Excluding 7 perioperative deaths, an improvement in
median survival was seen in the patients who received IORT (OS 18 vs. 12
months; P ¼ 0.01) [15]. Our research shows the OS in BRPC patients is 22.0
months in IORT group vs.14.8 months in non-IORT group (p<0.01). Whether the
IORT can benefit the survival of patients in pancreatic cancer need to be
further verified, but our study shows that IORT does improve the prognois of
BRPC patients.
Many studies have documented pain control with IORT in locally advanced or unresectable pancreatic cancer, resulting in complete pain resolution in 75%-90% of cases [16]. Another research from China evaluated 43 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who received IORT combined with EBRT. This approach was shown to alleviate pain, improve quality of life [12]. In our study, the rate of complete remission of pain in IORT group reaches to 86%, higher than the non-IORT group. The contrast showed IORT can control local pain in BRPC at same with locally advanced or unresectable pancreatic cancer. What is more, our research shows that no matter whether radical excision, patients improve the quality of life, away from the side-effects of opioid painkillers. In our study, patients accept IORT with the INTRABEAM® PRS500 system (Carl Zeiss Surgical, Oberkochen, Germany), which is a compact mobile X-ray source originally developed for intracranial stereotaxy in the early 1990s. is widely used in breast cancer nowadays. An analysis of 208 women who underwent IORT with INTRABEAM® during breast conserving surgery (BCS) shows rare postoperative complications and the low immediate toxicity low without any grade 3/4 acute toxicity [17]. In resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma, A larger series of 127 patients treated with potentially curative surgery and IORT comparing with a cohort of 76 patients who received surgery alone show no additional operative morbidity or mortality was seen with the addition of IORT [18]. In our study in borderline pancreatic adenocarcinoma, the application of radiotherapy with the Intrabeam® device in selected patients has not resulted in increased perioperative morbidity or mortality.
For patients who
present with border line resectable disease, neoadjuvant treatment strategies
would be a better choice to enhance the odds of cure by improving rates of R0
resection. Research notes that neoadjuvant therapy would potentially benefit
the BRPC patients [19]. Despite the encouraging clinical results of the
neoadjuvant treatment for BRPC, there are also some problems we need to face
with. On the one hand, it may cause radioactive enteritis and tissue edema
surrounding tumor, therefore increase the odd of combined vascular resection
and operation difficulty of some patients. On the other hand, part of patients
with poor sensitivity would be failing to control the progression and delay the
surgical treatment [20]. What is worth mentioning is, in order to exclude the
effect of chemotherapy on the prognosis postoperatively, we deliberately
selected patients receiving the gemcitabine-based combination chemotherapy.
In comparison with neoadjuvant treatment strategies aimed at borderline
resectable disease, the results from this study suggest that IORT affords
similar, if not better, outcomes. It is suitable for patients who are not
willing to accept neoadjuvant chemotherapy in China especially. For most of
patients with BRPC, surgical resection combined with IORT will help to achieve
progression-free survival benefit and improve their quality of life. The
addition of IORT after surgery did not increase rates of perioperative
mortality, postoperative complications and in-hospital deal significantly. In
our institution, the radiation dose was similar to the dose of most of IORT for
pancreatic cancer in the worldwide. The cost of the addition of IORT is much
cheaper than the cost of neoadjuvant therapy like neoadjuvant chemotherapy or
neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy [21-32].
8. Conclusion
In conclusion, receiving IORT after surgical pancreaticoduodenectomy shows
a high rate of R0 resection, improves local control and prolongs
survival. This modality was relatively safe and cost-effective. What is
more, it could relief the abdominal/waist pain of BRPC patients,
keep patients away from the by-effects of opioid painkillers and improve the
quality of life. This study supports the design of III prospective RCT trial
for borderline pancreatic cancer. In our institution, IORT has routinely been
used in the management of part of patients with BRPC.
9. Acknowledgement
Not applicable
10. Funding
This
study has received funding by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(No. 81672807) and Foundation of ‘5010’ clinical project of Sun
Yat-sen University (No. 2012007).
11. Conflict of Interest
The authors
of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products
or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.
Figure 1: A: The low-energy photon intrabeam: The application was
movable and feasible to a proper position in different size and bevel angles.
The target area was 5mm away from source applicator with a 5cm efficient
diameter. A single dose was 10 to 20 Gy. B:
The condition after the removal of tumor C: The application of electron beam was
placed in the bed
Figure 2: Kaplan-Meier curves for all 72 patients A: overall survival B:OS according to the margin resection status C: OS according to the group D:
progression-free survival E: PFS according to the margin resection status F: PFS according to the group. (Abbreviations:OS: Overall survival; PFS: Progression-free survival.)
Characteristic |
|
IOERT group (n=34) |
Non-IOERT group (n=38) |
p value |
Age(years) |
Median |
59.85 |
56.18 |
|
Gender |
Male |
17 |
27 |
0.067 |
|
Female |
17 |
11 |
|
CA19-9 |
≥500 |
14 |
14 |
0.706 |
|
<500 |
20 |
24 |
|
Obstructive jaundice |
Yes |
14 |
17 |
0.686 |
|
No |
20 |
20 |
|
Pain |
Yes |
23 |
25 |
0.738 |
|
No |
11 |
13 |
|
Tumor site |
Head |
23 |
28 |
0.574 |
|
body or tail |
11 |
10 |
|
Clinical stage |
Ⅱb |
14 |
17 |
0.761 |
|
Ⅲ |
20 |
21 |
|
Staging cT |
cT2 |
5 |
8 |
0.627 |
|
cT3 |
20 |
23 |
|
|
cT4 |
9 |
7 |
|
Staging cN |
N0 |
1 |
2 |
0.829 |
|
N1 |
31 |
33 |
|
|
N2 |
2 |
3 |
|
Margin resection status |
R0 |
19 |
21 |
0.958 |
|
R1 |
15 |
17 |
|
Perineural invasion |
Yes |
13 |
16 |
0.738 |
|
No |
21 |
22 |
|
LN invasion |
Yes |
33 |
36 |
0.623 |
|
No |
1 |
2 |
|
Vascular invasion |
Yes |
9 |
10 |
0.958 |
|
No |
25 |
27 |
|
Differentiation |
Poorly differentiated |
8 |
9 |
0.081 |
|
Moderately differentiated |
23 |
18 |
|
|
Well differentiated |
3 |
11 |
|
Post-operation complication |
No complication |
20 |
24 |
0.875 |
|
Intestinal obstruction |
1 |
1 |
|
|
Intestinal fistula |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Digestive tract bleeding |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Pancreatic leakage |
7 |
8 |
|
|
Abdominal infection |
4 |
4 |
|
|
Bile leakage |
3 |
2 |
|
Vascular resection |
Yes |
10 |
12 |
0.842 |
|
No |
24 |
26 |
|
Table 1: Patient, tumor, and treatment
characteristics.
|
|
Disease-free survival |
Overall survival |
|
variable |
HR 95%CI P value |
HR 95%CI P value |
Patient variables |
|
|
|
Age(years) |
<=60 |
1.00 0.52-1.34 0.45 |
1.00 0.58-1.47 0.74 |
|
>60 |
0.83 |
0.92 |
Gender |
Male |
1.00 0.63-1.66 0.92 |
1.00 0.759-1.981 0.41 |
|
Female |
1.03 |
1.23 |
CA19-9 |
<500 |
1.00 0.61-1.63 0.99 |
1.00 0.78-2.05 0.34 |
|
≥500 |
1 |
1.26 |
Obstructive jaundice |
No |
1.00 0.81-2.14 0.27 |
1.00 0.87-2.26 0.17 |
|
Yes |
1.31 |
1.4 |
Pain |
No |
1.00 0.82-2.13 0.25 |
1.00 0.765-2.02 0.38 |
|
Yes |
1.32 |
1.24 |
Preoperative staging |
|
|
|
Tumor site |
Head |
1.00 0.70-1.97 0.55 |
1.00 0.63-1.77 0.83 |
|
Body or Tail |
1.17 |
1.06 |
Clinical stage |
Ⅱb |
1.00 0.62-1.60 0.98 |
1.00 0.61-1.59 0.96 |
|
Ⅲ |
1 |
1 |
Staging cT |
cT1-cT3 |
1.00 0.52-1.37 0.50 |
1.00 0.63-1.65 0.93 |
|
cT4 |
0.85 |
1.02 |
Staging cN |
N0-N1 |
1.00 0.24-2.45 0.65 |
1.00 0.19-1.91 0.38 |
|
N2 |
0.76 |
0.6 |
Vascular invasion |
No |
1.00 0.66-1.94 0.65 |
1.00 0.70-2.05 0.51 |
|
Yes |
1.13 |
1.2 |
Microscopic surgical specimen |
|
|
|
Differentiation |
III |
1.00 0.49-1.48 0.57 |
1.00 0.53-1.60 0.77 |
|
I-II |
0.85 |
0.92 |
Perineural invasion |
No |
1.00 0.90-2.39 0.17 |
1.00 0.81-2.13 0.27 |
|
Yes |
1.46 |
1.32 |
Margin resection status |
R0 |
1.00 1.48-4.00 <0.01 |
1.00 1.33-3.47 <0.01 |
|
R1 |
2.44 |
2.15 |
IORT |
No |
1.00 1.08-2.80 0.02 |
1.00 1.12-2.87 0.02 |
|
Yes |
1.74 |
1.79 |
Table 2: Univariate analysis of
associations between the patient, tumor and pathologic characteristics and
survival.
|
|
Disease-free survival |
Overall survival |
|
variable |
HR 95%CI P value |
HR 95%CI P value |
Clinical stage |
Ⅱb |
1.00 0.53-1.41 0.57 |
1.00 0.40-1.26 0.24 |
|
Ⅲ |
0.86 |
0.9 |
Margin resection status |
R0 |
1.00 1.71-4.78 <0.01 |
1.00 1.46-3.89 <0.01 |
|
R1 |
2.86 |
2.39 |
IOERT |
No |
1.00 1.29-3.52 <0.01 |
1.00 1.25-3.37 <0.01 |
|
Yes |
2.13 |
2.05 |
Differentiation |
III |
1.00 0.32-1.05 0.07 |
1.00 0.40-1.26 0.24 |
|
I-II |
0.58 |
0.71 |
Table 3: Factors associated with disease-free survival, and
overall survival in the multivariate analysis.
|
IOERT group (n=34) |
Non-IOERT group (n=38) |
p value |
preoperative VAS |
|
|
0.82 |
0 |
11 |
13 |
|
1 |
9 |
11 |
|
2 |
10 |
9 |
|
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
postoperative VAS |
|
|
0.01 |
0 |
31 |
24 |
|
1 |
2 |
10 |
|
2 |
1 |
4 |
|
3 |
0 |
0 |
|
Complete response |
20(86%) |
11(44%) |
|
Table 4: The Kruskal-Wallis Test analyses of the waist/abdominal pain.
3.
National
Comprehensive Cancer Network
2018.
16.
Valentini V, Balducci M,
Tortoreto F, Morganti AG, De Giorgi U, et al. (2002) Intraoperative
radiotherapy: current thinking. European journal of surgical oncology : the
journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British
Association of Surgical Oncology 28: 180-185.
20.
XU CB, LI F (2016) The research progress of neoadjuvant treatment strategies in borderline
resectable pancreatic cancer. The World Clinical Medicine 2: 117-118.