Search

Abstract Background Epidermoid cyst within an intrapancreatic accessory spleen (ECIAS) is a rare disease. While the detection of solid components relevant to an accessory spleen is a key diagnostic finding, the differential diagnosis between ECIAS and malignant tumors is difficult without resection in patients with no other findings of an accessory spleen. Case presentation A 73-year-old male was found to have an elevated carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 level (95 U/mL) at an annual checkup, and a cystic lesion in the pancreatic tail was located by abdominal ultrasound. Abdominal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a multicystic mass, 24 mm in diameter, which exhibited varying intensities on T2-weighted images. There were no findings suggesting solid components on contrast-enhanced computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Re-evaluation of serum CA 19-9 level revealed a rapid increase to 901 U/mL, which declined to 213 U/mL 3 weeks later. Ruling out the lesion’s malignant potential was difficult, and the patient underwent distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy. Histological findings revealed an ECIAS including multiple cysts, with the mucinous component of each cyst exhibiting different stages of biological reaction; one ruptured cyst exhibited inflammatory changes. Conclusions Careful observation for changes in serum CA 19-9 level and MRI findings might facilitate the diagnosis of ECIAS without a solid component by imaging studies.

Abstract Purpose  Although the outcome of surgery for locally advanced pancreatic cancer remains poor, it is improving, with 5-year survival up to about 10% in Japan. The preliminary results of our multi-institutional randomized controlled trial revealed better survival after surgery than after radiochemotherapy. We report the final results of this study after 5 years of follow-up. Methods  Patients with preoperative findings of pancreatic cancer invading the pancreatic capsule without involvement of the superior mesenteric or common hepatic arteries, or distant metastasis, were included in this randomized controlled trial, with their consent. If the laparotomy findings were consistent with these criteria, the patient was randomized to a surgery group or a radiochemotherapy group (5-fluorouracil 200 mg/m2/day and 5040 Gy radiotherapy). We compared the mean survival time, 3-and 5-year survival rates, and hazard ratio. Results  The surgery and radiochemotherapy groups comprised 20 and 22 patients, respectively. Patients were followed up for 5 years or longer, or until an event occurred to preclude this. The surgery group had significantly better survival than the radiochemotherapy group (P Conclusion  Locally invasive pancreatic cancer without distant metastases or major arterial invasion is treated most effectively by surgical resection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine is standard care for resected pancreatic cancer, S-1 has shown non-inferiority to gemcitabine for advanced disease. We aimed to investigate the non-inferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer in terms of overall survival.Methods: We did a randomised, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority phase 3 trial undertaken at 33 hospitals in Japan. Patients who had histologically proven invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas, pathologically documented stage I-III, and no local residual or microscopic residual tumour, and were aged 20 years or older were eligible. Patients with resected pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2), intravenously administered on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks [one cycle], for up to six cycles) or S-1 (40 mg, 50 mg, or 60 mg according to body-surface area, orally administered twice a day for 28 days followed by a 14 day rest, every 6 weeks [one cycle], for up to four cycles) at the data centre by a modified minimisation method, balancing residual tumour status, nodal status, and institutions. The primary outcome was overall survival in the two treatment groups, assessed in the per-protocol population, excluding ineligible patients and those not receiving the allocated treatment. The protocol prespecified that the superiority of S-1 with respect to overall survival was also to be assessed in the per-protocol population by a log-rank test, if the non-inferiority of S-1 was verified. We estimated overall and relapse-free survival using the Kaplan-Meier methods, and assessed non-inferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine using the Cox proportional hazard model. The expected hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was 0.87 with a non-inferiority margin of 1.25 (power 80%; one-sided type I error 2.5%). This trial is registered at UMIN CTR (UMIN000000655).Findings: 385 patients were randomly assigned to treatment between April 11, 2007, and June 29, 2010 (193 to the gemcitabine group and 192 to the S-1 group). Of these, three were exlcuded because of ineligibility and five did not receive chemotherapy. The per-protocol population therefore consisted of 190 patients in the gemcitabine group and 187 patients in the S-1 group. On Sept 15, 2012, following the recommendation from the independent data and safety monitoring committee, this study was discontinued because the prespecified criteria for early discontinuation were met at the interim analysis for efficacy, when all the protocol treatments had been finished. Analysis with the follow-up data on Jan 15, 2016, showed HR of mortality was 0.57 (95% CI 0.44-0.72, pnon-inferiority<0.0001, p<0.0001 for superiority), associated with 5-year overall survival of 24.4% (18.6-30.8) in the gemcitabine group and 44.1% (36.9-51.1) in the S-1 group. Grade 3 or 4 leucopenia, neutropenia, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase were observed more frequently in the gemcitabine group, whereas stomatitis and diarrhoea were more frequently experienced in the S-1 group.Interpretation: Adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 can be a new standard care for resected pancreatic cancer in Japanese patients. These results should be assessed in non-Asian patients.Funding: Pharma Valley Center, Shizuoka Industrial Foundation, Taiho Pharmaceutical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]