FDG-PET Predicts Neoadjuvant Therapy Response and Survival in Borderline Resectable/Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

• DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2022.7041
• Publication Date: 2022-09-08T19:38:00Z
• Authors: Amro M. Abdelrahman; Ajit H. Goenka; Roberto Alva-Ruiz; Jennifer A. Yonkus; Jennifer L. Leiting; Rondell P. Graham; Kenneth W. Merrell; Cornelius A. Thiels; Christopher L. Ha...; Susanne G. Warner; Michael G. Haddock; Travis E. Grotz; Nguyen H. Tran; Rory L. Smoot; Wen Wee Ma; Sean P. Cleary; Robert R. McWilliams; David M. Nagorney; Thorvardur R. Hal...; Michael L. Kendrick; Mark J. Truty
• Keywords: Pancreatic Neoplasms; 03 medical and health sciences; 0302 clinical medicine; Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; Humans; Adenocarcinoma; Prognosis; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Retrospective Studies; 3. Good health

Background: Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is used in borderline resectable/locally advanced (BR/LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Anatomic imaging (CT/MRI) poorly predicts response, and biochemical (CA 19-9) markers are not useful (nonsecretors/nonelevated) in many patients. Pathologic response highly predicts survival post-NAT, but is only known postoperatively. Because metabolic imaging (FDG-PET) reveals primary tumor viability, this study aimed to evaluate our experience with preoperative FDG-PET in patients with BR/LA PDAC in predicting NAT response and survival. Methods: We reviewed all patients with resected BR/LA PDAC who underwent NAT with FDG-PET within 60 days of resection. Pre- and post-NAT metabolic (FDG-PET) and biochemical (CA 19-9) responses were dichotomized in addition to pathologic responses. We compared post-NAT metabolic and biochemical responses as preoperative predictors of pathologic responses and recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: We identified 202 eligible patients. Post-NAT, 58% of patients had optimization of CA 19-9 levels. Major metabolic and pathologic responses were present in 51% and 38% of patients, respectively. Median RFS and OS times were 21 and 48.7 months, respectively. Metabolic response was superior to biochemical response in predicting pathologic response (area under the curve, 0.86 vs 0.75; P<.001). Metabolic response was the only univariate preoperative predictor of OS (odds ratio, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.13–0.40), and was highly correlated (P=.001) with pathologic response as opposed to biochemical response alone. After multivariate adjustment, metabolic response was the single largest independent preoperative predictor (P<.001) for pathologic response (odds ratio, 43.2; 95% CI, 16.9–153.2), RFS (hazard ratio, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.2–0.6), and OS (hazard ratio, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.1–0.4). Conclusions: Among patients with post-NAT resected BR/LA PDAC, FDG-PET highly predicts pathologic response and survival, superior to biochemical responses alone. Given the poor ability of anatomic imaging or biochemical markers to assess NAT responses in these patients, FDG-PET is a preoperative metric of NAT efficacy, thereby allowing potential therapeutic alterations and surgical treatment decisions. We suggest that FDG-PET should be an adjunct and recommended modality during the NAT phase of care for these patients.