Utility of endoscopic ultrasound for assessment of locoregional recurrence of pancreatic adenocarcinoma after surgical resection

Abstract

Background and study aims Up to 80 % of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma develop locoregional recurrence after primary resection. However, the detection of recurrent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (RPDAC) after pancreatic surgery can be challenging because of difficulty distinguishing locoregional recurrence from normal postoperative or post-radiation changes. We sought to evaluate the utility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), in detecting pancreatic adenocarcinoma recurrence after surgical resection and its impact on the clinical management of patients.

Patients and methods This was a retrospective study of all pancreatic cancer patients who underwent EUS post-resection at two tertiary care centers between January 2004 and June 2019.

Results Sixty-seven patients were identified. Of these, 57 (85 %) were diagnosed with RPDAC, resulting in change in clinical management of 46 (72 %) patients. EUS identified masses not seen on computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or positron emission tomography in seven (14 %).
Conclusions EUS is useful in detecting RPDAC after pancreatic surgery and can lead to significant impact on clinical management.

• References

• 1 Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M. et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review (CSR), 1975-2016. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2019 https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2016/sections.html
• 2 Schnelldorfer T, Ware AL, Sarr MG. et al. Long-term survival after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: is cure possible?. Ann Surg 2008; 247: 456-462
• 3 Kim YI, Song KB, Lee YJ. et al. Management of isolated recurrence after surgery for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Br J Surg 2019; 106: 898-909
• 4 Tempero MA, Malafa MP, Al-Hawary M. et al. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines^®) Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. NCCN Evidence Blocks™. Version 2.2022 – December 6, 2022. https://www.nccn.org/guidelines/guidelines-detail?category=1&id=1455
• 5 Ko AH, Hwang J, Venook AP. et al. Serum CA 19-9 response as a surrogate for clinical outcome in patients receiving fixed-dose rate gemcitabine for advanced pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer 2005; 93: 195-199
• 6 Daamen LA, Groot VP, Heerkens HD. et al. Systematic review on the role of serum tumor markers in the detection of recurrent pancreatic cancer. HPB 2018; 20: 297-304
• 7 Krishna SG, Rao BB, Ugbarugba E. et al. Diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound for detection of pancreatic malignancy following an indeterminate multidetector CT scan: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 2017; 31: 4558-4567
• 8 Best LMJ, Rawji V, Pereira SP. et al. Imaging modalities for characterising focal pancreatic lesions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 4: 1-252
• 9 Ikemoto J, Hanada K, Minami T. et al. Prospective follow-up study of the recurrence of pancreatic cancer diagnosed at an early stage: the value of endoscopic ultrasonography for early diagnosis of recurrence in the remnant pancreas. Pancreas 2018; 47: 482-488
• 10 Matsumoto K, Kato H, Horiguchi S. et al. Utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of local recurrence of pancreaticobiliary cancer after surgical resection. Gut Liver 2019; 14: 652-658
• 11 Regine WF, Winter K, Abrams RA. et al. Postresection CA19-9 and margin status as predictors of recurrence after adjuvant treatment for pancreatic carcinoma: analysis of NRG oncology RTOG trial 9704. Adv Radiat Oncol 2018; 3: 154-162
• 12 Versteijne E, Van Dam JL, Suker M. et al. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus upfront surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: long-term results of the Dutch randomized PREOPANC Trial. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40: 1220-1230