With recent advances in pancreatic imaging and surgical techniques, a distinct subset of pancreatic tumors is emerging that blurs the distinction between resectable and locally advanced disease: tumors of "borderline resectability." In our practice, patients with borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer include those whose tumors exhibit encasement of a short segment of the hepatic artery, without evidence of tumor extension to the celiac axis, that is amenable to resection and reconstruction; tumor abutment of the superior mesenteric artery involving <180 degrees of the circumference of the artery; or short-segment occlusion of the superior mesenteric vein, portal vein, or their confluence with a suitable option available for vascular reconstruction because the veins are normal above and below the area of tumor involvement. With currently available surgical techniques, patients with borderline-resectable pancreatic head cancer are at high risk for a margin-positive resection. Therefore, our approach to these patients is to use preoperative systemic therapy and local-regional chemoradiation to maximize the potential for an R0 resection and to avoid R2 resections. In our experience, patients with favorable responses to preoperative therapy (radiographical evidence of tumor regression and improvement in serum tumor marker levels) are the subset of patients who have the best chance for an R0 resection and a favorable long-term outcome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS The risk of pancreatic cancer is increased in patients with a strong family history of pancreatic cancer or a predisposing germline mutation. Screening can detect curable, non-invasive pancreatic neoplasms, but the optimal imaging approach is not known. We determined the baseline prevalence and characteristics of pancreatic abnormalities using 3 imaging tests to screen asymptomatic, high-risk individuals (HRI). METHODS We screened 225 asymptomatic adult HRI at 5 academic US medical centers once, using computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). We compared results in a blinded, independent fashion. RESULTS Ninety-two of 216 HRI (42%) were found to have at least 1 pancreatic mass (84 cystic, 3 solid) or a dilated pancreatic duct (n=5) by any of the imaging modalities. Fifty-one of the 84 HRI with a cyst (60.7%) had multiple lesions, typically small (mean 0.55 cm, range 2–39 mm), in multiple locations. The prevalence of pancreatic lesions increased with age; they were detected in 14% of subjects <50 years old, 34% of subjects 50–59 years old, and 53% of subjects 60–69 years old (P<.0001). CT, MRI, and EUS detected a pancreatic abnormality in 11%, 33.3%, and 42.6% of the HRI, respectively. Among these abnormalities, proven or suspected neoplasms were identified in 85 HRI (82 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms [IPMN] and 3 pancreatic endocrine tumors). Three of 5 HRI who underwent pancreatic resection had high-grade dysplasia in <3 cm IPMNs and in multiple intraepithelial neoplasias. CONCLUSIONS Screening of asymptomatic HRI frequently detects small pancreatic cysts, including curable, non-invasive high-grade neoplasms. EUS and MRI detect pancreatic lesions better than CT.

FDG PET is sensitive and specific for evaluating tumor response but cannot be used in patients whose baseline FDG PET results are negative for tumors. Although subjective evaluation was a better indicator of treatment response than was tumor density alone, the tumor density measurement is a good indicator and provides a reliable quantitative means of monitoring the tumor. RECIST, using only tumor size, was unreliable for monitoring GISTs during the early stage of imatinib mesylate treatment.

Preoperative Gem-Cis-XRT did not improve survival beyond that achieved with preoperative gemcitabine-based chemoradiation (Gem-XRT) alone. The longer preoperative interval required more durable biliary decompression (metal stents) but was not associated with local tumor progression. The gemcitabine-based chemoradiation platform is a reasonable foundation on which to build future phase II multimodality trials for stage I/II pancreatic cancer incorporating emerging systemic therapies.

BACKGROUND: Experience with preoperative therapy for other cancers has led to an assumption that borderline resectable pancreatic cancers can be converted to resectable cancers with preoperative therapy. In this study, the authors sought to determine the rate at which neoadjuvant therapy is associated with a reduction in the size or stage of borderline resectable tumors. METHODS: Patients who had borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and received neoadjuvant therapy before potentially undergoing surgery at the authors' institution between 2005 and 2010 were identified. The patients' pretreatment and post‐treatment pancreatic protocol computed tomography images were rereviewed to determine changes in tumor size or stage using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.1) and standardized anatomic criteria. RESULTS: The authors identified 129 patients who met inclusion criteria. Of the 122 patients who had their disease restaged after receiving preoperative therapy, 84 patients (69%) had stable disease, 15 patients (12%) had a partial response to therapy, and 23 patients (19%) had progressive disease. Although only 1 patient (0.8%) had their disease downstaged to resectable status after receiving neoadjuvant therapy, 85 patients (66%) underwent pancreatectomy. The median overall survival duration for all 129 patients was 22 months (95% confidence interval, 14‐30 months). The median overall survival duration for the patients who underwent pancreatectomy was 33 months (95% confidence interval, 25‐41 months) and was not associated with RECIST response (P = .78). CONCLUSIONS: Radiographic downstaging was rare after neoadjuvant therapy, and RECIST response was not an effective treatment endpoint for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. The authors concluded that these patients should undergo pancreatectomy after initial therapy in the absence of metastases. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.