Klatte, Derk C.F.

INTRODUCTION: A deeper understanding of the factors influencing survival in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is essential for optimizing treatment strategies. This study investigates the independent association of body composition parameters with overall survival in patients with PDAC. METHODS: This retrospective multisite cohort study included patients diagnosed with PDAC. Diagnostic computed tomography scans were retrieved, and body composition was evaluated using a validated deep learning-based segmentation algorithm that measured tissue volume and density in a 20 cm vertical abdominal section. RESULTS: A total of 1,666 patients with PDAC were included, 938 male (56.3%) and median age 69 years (interquartile range 61–76). In the subgroup of patients who underwent surgical resection (n = 509), myosteatosis (intramuscular infiltration of adipose tissue; hazard ratio [HR] 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16–2.11, P = 0.004), sarcopenic obesity (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.06–2.91, P = 0.03), and less subcutaneous adipose tissue (HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03–1.16, P = 0.002) were associated with higher mortality. In patients receiving palliative systemic therapy (n = 439), lower skeletal muscle density (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.03–1.99, P = 0.03) was associated with higher mortality. In patients who did not undergo tumor-targeted treatment (n = 718), less visceral adipose tissue (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01–1.08, P = 0.02) was associated with higher mortality. DISCUSSION: Body composition parameters, derived from computed tomography scans at the time of PDAC diagnosis, particularly low skeletal muscle density, sarcopenic obesity, and low adipose tissue, are independently associated with overall survival in patients with PDAC. Evaluating body composition at diagnosis could enhance clinical decision-making and enable more personalized treatment strategies.

Objectives: New methods are needed to detect pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) earlier to improve outcomes. We previously reported that a panel of protein N-glycosylation traits (NGTs) discriminated PDAC from healthy controls with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.81–0.88. However, it remained unclear whether this panel accurately differentiates PDAC from other benign pancreatic disorders. Our study aims to evaluate the performance of the NGT panel in combination with CA19-9 in a diverse cohort, including PDAC cases, healthy controls, and controls with benign pancreatic disorders. Methods: Protein N-glycosylation profiles were determined in plasma samples using an in-house developed mass spectrometry assay. CA19-9 levels were measured using a routine immunoassay test. Results of total plasma NGTs and CA19-9 were evaluated separately as well as in combination. Logistic regression was performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs), AUC, sensitivity, and specificity to determine the performance of NGTs and CA19-9 in distinguishing PDAC from controls. Results: In total, 221 individuals were included: 45 (20.4%) with PDAC, and 176 (79.6%) controls (53 healthy and 123 with benign pancreatic disease). The AUC for differentiating PDAC from the total control cohort based on the combination of the NGT panel and CA19-9 was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.90–0.97), with a sensitivity of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78–0.98) and specificity of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.81–0.91). Comparison of PDAC cases with healthy controls only resulted in an AUC of 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93–0.99), with a sensitivity of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.73–0.93) and specificity of 0.98 (95% CI, 0.94–1.00). Conclusions: Both plasma NGTs and CA19-9 distinguish PDAC from a diverse control cohort. The accuracy further improves when these readouts are combined, showing promise for future early detection methods.

ABSTRACTBackgroundIndividuals with a germline CDKN2A pathogenic variant (PV) have an increased lifetime risk of melanoma and pancreatic cancer. It is unknown whether the CDKN2A PV impacts quality of life (QoL). Therefore we aimed to assess QoL and psychological distress in families affected by the PV.MethodsThis cross‐sectional study included confirmed carriers and those with a 50% likelihood of carrying the PV (at‐risk carriers) under cancer surveillance who were invited to complete a one‐time questionnaire. Both confirmed and at‐risk carriers are offered skin surveillance, whereas only confirmed carriers aged 40 years or older can participate in pancreatic surveillance.ResultsIn total, 59/247 (24%) individuals under skin surveillance only (skin surveillance group) and 188/290 (65%) individuals under both skin and pancreatic cancer surveillance (pancreatic surveillance group) responded. In both surveillance groups, health‐related QoL and general distress levels were within the general population norms. However, more than 40% of all study participants reported melanoma‐related distress. Pancreatic cancer‐related distress was experienced by 45% of the pancreatic surveillance group. Determinants of cancer‐related distress were a first‐degree relative with melanoma or pancreatic cancer, increased cancer risk perception, and poor general health perception. Over 80% of the participants felt that the benefits of cancer surveillance outweigh the disadvantages.ConclusionIn conclusion, confirmed and at‐risk carriers of the CDKN2A PV under cancer surveillance experienced similar levels of QoL and general distress compared to the general population. However, cancer‐related worry was substantial in this population. These findings can help identify individuals who may benefit from psychological support.

PURPOSE Guidelines recommend germline genetic testing (GT) for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aims to evaluate the utilization and outcomes of multigene panel GT in patients with PDAC. METHODS This retrospective, multisite study included patients with PDAC diagnosed between May 2018 and August 2020 at Mayo Clinic Arizona, Florida, and Minnesota. Discussion, uptake, and outcomes of GT were compared before (May 1, 2018-May 1, 2019) and after (August 1, 2019-August 1, 2020) the guideline update, accounting for a transition period. RESULTS The study identified 533 patients with PDAC, with 321 (60.2%) preguideline and 212 (39.8%) postguideline. Patient characteristics did not differ between the preguideline and postguideline periods. GT was discussed in 34.3% (110 of 321) of preguideline and 39.6% (84 of 212) of postguideline patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.26 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.80]) and subsequently performed in 80.9% (89 of 110) of preguideline and 75.0% (63 of 84) of postguideline patients (OR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.61]). Of 152 tested patients, 26 (17.1%) had a pathogenic variant (PV), of whom 17 (11.2%; 17 of 152) were PDAC-associated. Over the entire study period, GT was more likely in younger patients (65 v 70 years; P < .001), those seen by a medical oncologist (82.9% v 69.0%; P < .001), and those surviving more than 12 months from diagnosis (70.4% v 43.4%; P < .001). Demographics and personal/family cancer history were comparable between patients with and without a PDAC PV. CONCLUSION GT remains underutilized despite National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline recommendations. Given the poor prognosis of PDAC and potential implications of GT, efforts to increase utilization are needed to provide surveillance and support to both patients with PDAC and at-risk family members.

688 Background: Guidelines recommend patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) undergo genetic testing for germline pathogenic variants (PV). The aim of this study was to evaluate compliance with recently updated guidelines (May 2019) and assess subsequent uptake and outcomes of genetic testing in PDAC patients. In addition, social and clinical factors associated with genetic testing were assessed. Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients diagnosed with PDAC between May 2018 and August 2020 was performed. Discussion and subsequent uptake of genetic testing was reviewed and compared between a 12-month period before (pre-guideline) and a 12-month period after (post-guideline) guidelines were updated, accounting for a three-month transition period. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to assess factors predictive of undergoing genetic testing. Results: In total, 534 patients with PDAC were identified; 321 (60.1%) in the pre-guideline period and 213 (39.9%) in the post-guideline period. The mean age at diagnosis was 68 years and 47% were female. Genetic testing was discussed in 34% (109/321) of pre-guideline and in 39% (84/213) of post-guideline patients ( P = .23). Of those, 82% (89/109) of patients in pre-guideline and 75% (63/84) in post-guideline groups underwent subsequent genetic testing ( P = .71). In 26 (17.1%) of 152 tested patients, a PV was identified, of which 17 (11.2%; 17/152) had a PDAC-associated PV. Age, cancer stage at diagnosis, length of survival, and having a first-degree relative with pancreatic cancer were significant predictors of genetic testing on multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Adherence to recently updated guidelines is poor and germline genetic testing in PDAC patients remains insufficient. Efforts to increase awareness of benefits of testing, which include personalized therapies for patients and cascade testing in family members for subsequent enrollment in pancreatic cancer surveillance programs, could improve future uptake.[Table: see text]