2015
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4649-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Non-metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Resectable, Borderline Resectable, and Locally Advanced-Definitions of Increasing Importance for the Optimal Delivery of Multimodality Therapy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
43
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 82 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
43
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Considerable heterogeneity across studies in the percentage of resection is explained by lack of consensus in the literature on selecting patients for resection after FOLFIRINOX. (49) No significant correlation was found across studies between the percentage of resection and OS. However, this analysis was not performed at the patient level.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Considerable heterogeneity across studies in the percentage of resection is explained by lack of consensus in the literature on selecting patients for resection after FOLFIRINOX. (49) No significant correlation was found across studies between the percentage of resection and OS. However, this analysis was not performed at the patient level.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database which included consecutive patients with resectable and BLR PC who received neoadjuvant therapy and surgery for pancreatic adenocarcinoma at a single academic institution from 2009 to 2018. Clinical stage at the time of diagnosis was determined using objective radiographic criteria based on computed tomography (CT) imaging, as previously described (14,15). This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Medical College of Wisconsin.…”
Section: Study Subjectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent study (17) has shown that a standardized pathological protocol R0-resection based on 1 mm clearance was rarely achieved after upfront venous resection due to microscopic involvement of the SMV-groove (LE 4). It is important to note that patients considered to be at high risk of R1 resection and/or those with an unfavorable clinical and/or "biological" status are now candidates for neoadjuvant therapy (18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26) (LE 3). In one North American study (27) the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy were found to be significant in the presence of "unilateral" venous involvement (Ishikawa II-III) (LE 3).…”
Section: Introduction-resectability Of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinomentioning
confidence: 99%