| Title |
Treatment Sequencing for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Influence of Early Metastases and Surgical Complications on Multimodality Therapy Completion and Survival
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11605-013-2412-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ching-Wei D. Tzeng, Hop S. Tran Cao, Jeffrey E. Lee, Peter W.T. Pisters, Gauri R. Varadhachary, Robert A. Wolff, James L. Abbruzzese, Christopher H. Crane, Douglas B. Evans, Huamin Wang, Daniel E. Abbott, Jean-Nicolas Vauthey, Thomas A. Aloia, Jason B. Fleming, Matthew H.G. Katz |
| Abstract |
Barriers to multimodality therapy (MMT) completion among patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma include early cancer progression and postoperative major complications (PMC). We sought to evaluate the influence of these factors on MMT completion rates of patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy (NT) and surgery-first (SF) approaches. We evaluated all operable patients treated for clinically resectable pancreatic head adenocarcinoma at our institution from 2002 to 2007. Rates of MMT completion, 90-day PMC, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Ninety-five of 115 (83 %) NT and 29/50 (58 %) SF patients completed MMT. Patients who completed MMT lived longer than those who did not (36 vs. 11 months, p < 0.001). The most common reason that NT (11 %) and SF (26 %) patients failed to complete MMT was early disease progression. The rates of PMC among NT and SF patients were similar. Among SF patients, 69 % with no PMC completed MMT versus 29 % after PMC (p = 0.040). PMC were associated with decreased OS in SF patients but not in NT patients. The impact of early cancer progression and PMC upon completion of MMT is reduced by delivery of nonoperative therapies prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy. NT sequencing is a practical treatment strategy, particularly for patients at high biological or perioperative risk. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 71 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 25 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 52% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 29 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 February 2018.
All research outputs
#3,484,692
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#188
of 2,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,713
of 210,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#1
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,537 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 210,159 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.