Comparison of neoadjuvant therapy and upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review
Authors Ren X, Wei X, Ding Y, Qi F, Zhang Y, Hu X, Qin C, Li X
Received 13 October 2018
Accepted for publication 21 December 2018
Published 22 January 2019 Volume 2019:12 Pages 733—744
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Dr Andrew Yee
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Takuya Aoki
Xiaohan Ren,1 Xiyi Wei,1,* Yichao Ding,1,* Feng Qi,2,* Yundi Zhang,1 Xin Hu,1 Chao Qin,2 Xiao Li3
1Department of First Clinical Medical College of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210009, China; 2Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210009, China; 3Department of Urology, Jiangsu Institute of Cancer Research, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210009, China
*These authors contributed equally to this work
Objective: The role of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) remains controversial. Therefore, this meta-analysis was performed to compare the clinical differences between NAT and upfront surgery in RPC.
Materials and methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only patients with RPC who underwent tumor resection and received adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment were enrolled. The OR or HR and 95% CIs were calculated employing fixed-effects or random-effects models. The HR and its 95% CI were extracted from each article that provided survival curve. Publication bias was estimated using funnel plots and Egger’s regression test.
Results: In total, eleven studies were included with 9,386 patients. Of these patients, 2,508 (26.7%) received NAT. For patients with RPC, NAT resulted in an increased R0 resection rate (OR=1.89; 95% CI=1.26–2.83) and a reduced positive lymph node rate (OR=0.34; 95% CI=0.31–0.37) compared with upfront surgery. Nevertheless, patients receiving NAT did not exhibit a significantly increased overall survival (OS) time (HR=0.91; 95% CI=0.79–1.05).
Conclusion: In patients with RPC, R0 resection rate and positive lymph node rate after NAT were superior to those of patients with upfront surgery. The NAT group exhibited no significant effect on OS time when compared with the upfront surgery group. However, this conclusion requires more clinical evidence to improve its credibility.
Keywords: neoadjuvant therapy, resectable, pancreatic, neoplasm, prognosis, meta-analysis
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]