2020
DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.844
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Neoadjuvant gemcitabine and nab‐paclitaxel for borderline resectable pancreatic cancers: Intention‐to‐treat analysis compared with upfront surgery

Abstract: Invasive pancreatic cancer (PC) is a devastating disease with only limited patients undergoing curative-intent therapy. Although recent innovations in multidisciplinary treatments have gradually improved survival in resectable PCs, 1,2 the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of patients with PC remains under 10%. 3 Borderline resectable (BR) PC describes tumors with a high risk of surgical margin positivity after curative-intent resection. 4 A recent consensus on BR-PC treatment recommended neoadjuvant therapy (… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
40
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
2
40
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We thank Dr. Jonas and colleagues for their insightful comments and suggestions on our article. 1 Based on the findings in our article, and the results of their network meta-analysis published recently, 2 Dr. Jonas and colleagues hypothesized neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) would be beneficial for all nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer (PC) regardless of tumor extent, and proposed a further study to determine whether NAT can improve the long-term outcomes for patients with resectable PC (RPC) compared to the traditional upfront resection (UFR) approach. Although we agreed with their comments in terms of the need for a study to test the efficacy of NAT for RPC, we would like to pose some cautions for NAT approach for this group of patients.…”
Section: Anatomical Classification Alone Is Not Sufficient For Optimamentioning
confidence: 85%
“…We thank Dr. Jonas and colleagues for their insightful comments and suggestions on our article. 1 Based on the findings in our article, and the results of their network meta-analysis published recently, 2 Dr. Jonas and colleagues hypothesized neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) would be beneficial for all nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer (PC) regardless of tumor extent, and proposed a further study to determine whether NAT can improve the long-term outcomes for patients with resectable PC (RPC) compared to the traditional upfront resection (UFR) approach. Although we agreed with their comments in terms of the need for a study to test the efficacy of NAT for RPC, we would like to pose some cautions for NAT approach for this group of patients.…”
Section: Anatomical Classification Alone Is Not Sufficient For Optimamentioning
confidence: 85%
“…The incidence of Clavien-Dindo ! grade IIIa complications ranged from 11% to 14% in the NAC-GnP group and 15% to 18% in the upfront surgery group (24,25). In a phase I trial of NAC-GnP in patients with BRPC, 2 of 8 (25%) patients had grade !…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A multicenter trial showed that neoadjuvant S-1 therapy in combination with radiotherapy followed by surgery achieved an R0 resection rate of 63%[ 24 ]. Inoue et al [ 25 ] reported that NAT with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel improved downstaging of the tumor and allowed patient selection. Anger et al [ 26 ] investigated the role of NAT in different types of borderline PDAC according to international consensus criteria.…”
Section: Nat For Borderline and Unresectable Pdacmentioning
confidence: 99%