arrow
Return

Best Practices for Delivering Neoadjuvant Therapy in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

delete2025-02-01
delete0
PRE
AI
J
Jordan M. Cloyd *
A
Angela Sarna
M
Matthew J. Arango
S
Susan E. Bates
M
Manoop S. Bhutani
M
Mark Bloomston
V
Vincent Chung
E
Efrat Dotan
C
Cristina R. Ferrone
P
Patricia Gambino
A
Ajit H. Goenka
K
Karyn A. Goodman
W
William A. Hall
J
Jing He
M
Melissa E. Hogg
S
Shiva Jayaraman
A
Avinash Kambadakone
M
Matthew H. G. Katz
A
Alok A. Khorana
A
Andrew Ko
E
Eugene J. Koay
D
David A. Kooby
S
Somashekar G. Krishna
L
Liliana Larsson
R
Richard T. Lee
A
ArkingDan (Anirban Maitra)
N
Nader N. Massarweh
S
Sameh Mikhail
M
Mahvish Muzaffar
E
Eileen M. O’Reilly
M
Manisha Palta
M
Maria Q. B. Petzel
P
P. A. Philip
M
Marsha Reyngold
D
Daniel Santa Mina
D
Davendra Sohal
T
Tilak Sundaresan
S
Susan Tsai
K
Kea Turner
T
Timothy J. Vreeland
S
Steve Walston
M
M. Kay Washington
T
Terence M. Williams
J
Jennifer Y. Wo
R
Rebecca A. Snyder
DOI:10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5191delete
deleteOriginal
deleteOriginal request for help
deleteShare
deleteSave
Abstract

Abstract

En 中文
ImportanceNeoadjuvant therapy (NT) is an increasingly used treatment strategy for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Little research has been conducted on cancer care delivery during NT, and the standards for optimal delivery of NT have not been defined. ObjectiveTo develop consensus best practices for delivering NT to patients with localized PDAC. Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis study used a modified Delphi approach consisting of 2 rounds of voting, and a series of virtual conferences (from October to December 2023) to reach expert consensus on candidate best practice statements generated from a systematic review of the literature and expert opinion. An interdisciplinary panel was formed including 47 North American experts from surgical, medical, and radiation oncology, radiology, pathology, gastroenterology, integrative oncology, anesthesia, pharmacy, nursing, cancer care delivery research, and nutrition as well as patient and caregiver stakeholders. Main Outcome and MeasuresStatements that reached 75% agreement or greater were included in final consensus statements. ResultsOf the 47 participating panel members, 27 (57.64%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 47.6 (8.2) years. Physicians reported completing training a mean (SD) 14.6 (8.6) years prior and seeing a mean (SD) 110.6 (38.4) patients with PDAC annually; 35 (77.7%) were in academic practice. Final consensus was reached on 82 best practices for delivering NT. Of these, 38 statements focused on pre-NT practices, including diagnosis and staging (n = 15), evaluation and optimization (n = 20), and decision-making (n = 3); 29 statements defined best practices during NT, including initiation (n = 3), delivery of therapy (n = 8), restaging practices (n = 12), and management of complications during NT (n = 6); and 15 best practices were identified to guide treatment post-NT, focusing on surgery (n = 7), pathology (n = 4), and follow-up (n = 3). ConclusionsUsing a modified Delphi consensus technique, best practice guidelines were developed focusing on the optimal standards for delivering NT to patients with localized PDAC. Given the prognostic importance of completing multimodality therapy, efforts to standardize and optimize the delivery of NT represent an immediate opportunity to decrease care variation and improve outcomes for patients with PDAC. Future research should focus on validating and implementing best practice standards into clinical practice.

Journal

J
JAMA Surgery
IF:
14.9
Papers:
4.7K
Citations:
1.9W

Organization

U
utmd anderson cancer center
Scholars:
3.0W
Papers: 2.4W
Citations: 27
M
Massachusetts General Hospital
Scholars:
3.4W
Papers: 2.6W
Citations: 8.6W
U
University System of Ohio
Scholars:
15.2W
Papers: 12.9W
Citations: 200
C
Columbia University
Scholars:
7.1W
Papers: 6.4W
Citations: 263
D
Duke University
Scholars:
6.3W
Papers: 5.7W
Citations: 6.5W
U
university of california san francisco
Scholars:
5.2W
Papers: 4.0W
Citations: 67
H
Harvard University
Scholars:
26.2W
Papers: 21.9W
Citations: 28.7W
U
university of north carolina
Scholars:
7.4W
Papers: 6.5W
Citations: 93
U
university of pennsylvania
Scholars:
9.2W
Papers: 7.8W
Citations: 153
M
medical college of wisconsin
Scholars:
1.7W
Papers: 1.2W
Citations: 9
M
mayo clinic
Scholars:
8.1W
Papers: 6.5W
Citations: 85
C
Case Western Reserve University
Scholars:
2.1W
Papers: 1.6W
Citations: 3.4W
J
Johns Hopkins University
Scholars:
10.2W
Papers: 8.8W
Citations: 13.0W
U
university of texas system
Scholars:
18.3W
Papers: 15.5W
Citations: 210
I
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Scholars:
4.6W
Papers: 3.4W
Citations: 58
University of California System cover
University of California System
Scholars:
37.2W
Papers: 33.6W
Citations: 6.6K
C
cleveland clinic foundation
Scholars:
3.6W
Papers: 3.0W
Citations: 29
O
Ohio State University
Scholars:
4.0W
Papers: 3.2W
Citations: 80
E
east carolina university
Scholars:
4.0K
Papers: 3.1K
Citations: 23
S
saint joseph's health centre, toronto
Scholars:
94
Papers: 66
Citations: 0
E
Emory University
Scholars:
5.0W
Papers: 4.2W
Citations: 5.7W
M
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Scholars:
3.4W
Papers: 2.4W
Citations: 4.6W
C
City of Hope
Scholars:
9.2K
Papers: 6.5K
Citations: 8.8K
C
Cedars Sinai Medical Center
Scholars:
1.3W
Papers: 1.1W
Citations: 23
N
northshore university health system
Scholars:
2.6K
Papers: 2.1K
Citations: 4
F
Fox Chase Cancer Center
Scholars:
4.9K
Papers: 4.0K
Citations: 6.7K
N
newyork-presbyterian hospital
Scholars:
1.6W
Papers: 9.8K
Citations: 15
U
university of toronto
Scholars:
14.5W
Papers: 11.9W
Citations: 165
researcher View more organizations