Background and aims: The prevalence and natural history of hereditary pancreatitis (HP) remain poorly documented. The aims of this study were to assess genetic, epidemiological, clinical and morphological characteristics of HP in an extensive national survey. Methods: A cohort comprising all HP patients was constituted by contacting all gastroenterologists and paediatricians (response rate 84%) and genetics laboratories (response rate 100%) in France (60 200 000 inhabitants). Inclusion criteria were the presence of mutation in the cationic trypsingen gene (PRSS1 gene), or chronic pancreatitis in at least two first-degree relatives, or three second-degree relatives, in the absence of precipitating factors for pancreatitis. Results: 78 families and 200 patients were included (181 alive, 6673 person-years, males 53%, alcoholism 5%, smoking 34%). The prevalence was 0.3/100 000 inhabitants. PRSS1 mutations were detected in 68% (R122H 78%, N29I 12%, others 10%). Penetrance was 93%. Median age at first symptom, diagnosis and date of last news, were 10 (range 1-73), 19 (1-80) and 30 (1-84) years, respectively. HP was responsible for pancreatic pain (83%), acute pancreatitis (69%), pseudocysts (23%), cholestasis (3%), pancreatic calcifications (61%), exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (34%, median age of occurrence 29 years), diabetes mellitus (26%, median age of occurrence 38 years) and pancreatic adenocarcinoma (5%, median age 55 years). No differences in clinical and morphological data according to genetic status were observed. 19 patients died, including 10 directly from HP (8 from pancreatic adenocarcinoma). Conclusion: The prevalence of HP in France is at least 0.3/100 000. PRSS1 gene mutations are found in 2/3 with a 93% penetrance. Mutation type is not correlated with clinical/morphological expression. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the cause of nearly half the deaths.

Background: Although the prognosis in malignant resectable intraductal papillary mucinous tumours of the pancreas (IPMT) is often considered more favourable than for ordinary pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, the long term outcome remains ill defined. Aims: To assess prognostic factors in patients with malignant IPMT after surgical resection, and to compare long term survival rates with those of patients surgically treated for ductal adenocarcinoma. Methods: Seventy three patients underwent surgery for malignant IPMT in four French centres. Clinical, biochemical, and pathological features and follow up after resection were recorded. Patients with invasive malignant IPMT were matched with patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, according to age and TNM stages; survival rates after resection were compared. Results: Surgical treatment for IPMT were pancreaticoduodenectomy (n=46), distal (n=14), total (n=11), or segmentary (n=2) pancreatectomy. The operative mortality rate was 4%. IPMT corresponded to in situ (n=22) or invasive carcinoma (n=51). In the latter group, 17 had lymph node metastases. Overall median survival was 47 months. Five year survival rates in patients with in situ and invasive carcinoma were 88% and 36%, respectively. On univariate analysis, abdominal pain, preoperative high serum carbohydrate antigen 19.9 concentrations, caudal localisation, invasive carcinoma, lymph node metastases, peripancreatic extension, and malignant relapse were associated with a fatal outcome. Using multivariate analysis, lymph node metastases were the only prognostic factor (OR 7.5; 95% CI: 3.4 to 16.4). Overall five year survival rate was higher in patients with malignant invasive IPMT compared with those with pancreatic ductal carcinoma (36 v 21%, p=0.03), but was similar in the subset of stage II/III tumours. Conclusions: The prognosis of patients with resected in situ/invasive stage I malignant IPMT is excellent. In contrast, prognosis of locally advanced forms is as poor as in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

In selected patients, nonoperative management of asymptomatic sporadic NF-PNETs smaller than 2 cm in size is safe. Larger and prospective multicentric studies with long-term follow-up are now needed to validate this wait-and-see policy.