Scholarlink

Background <p>Microscopic residual disease (R1)and node-positive disease in resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are associated with worse survival. Some have suggested that obtaining an R0 resection is no longer relevant when patients have node-positive disease. A meta-analysis confirming this hypothesis is lacking.</p> Patients and Methods <p>A systematic review including studies with at least 50 patients with resected node-positive PDAC was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (inception to March 2025). Patients with node-negative disease were excluded. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS), comparing R0N+ and R1N+ resections. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) represented outcome measures. Subgroup analysis included: application of the Royal College of Pathology protocol (RCP: standardized margin inking, axial slicing, and “1-mm rule”) and receipt of neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy.</p> Results <p>Overall, 19,206 patients with resected node-positive PDAC from 16 retrospective studies were included. Most patients underwent upfront resection (96.3%), primarily pancreatoduodenectomy (84.2%). The overall R0N+ rate was 61.1%, differing significantly by application of RCP (yes [R1 = tumor within 1 mm of margin]: nine studies, 52.1%; unclear: four studies, 80.5%; no [R1 = tumor at margin ink only]: three studies, 61.5%; <i>p</i> = 0.0019). Overall, R1 negatively impacted OS (HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.21–1.59). RCP-only subgroup analysis confirmed worse OS in R1N+ resections (HR 1.25; 95% CI 1.10–1.42). Subgroup analysis by neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy was not feasible.</p> Conclusions <p>Among patients with node-positive PDAC treated with upfront surgery, R1 resection remains associated with worse survival. In these patients, R0 resection should not be dismissed as a viable treatment goal until stronger RCP-compliant evidence emerges.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Impact of R0/R1 Margin Status on Overall Survival in Node-Positive Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Meta-Analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月8日

查看全文
  • A. M. Bonomi,
  • S. Granieri,
  • R. M. Montorsi,
  • E. Gjoni,
  • O. R. Busch,
  • A. A. Vidal-Itriago,
  • J. I. Erdmann,
  • M. G. Besselink

摘要

Background

Microscopic residual disease (R1)and node-positive disease in resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are associated with worse survival. Some have suggested that obtaining an R0 resection is no longer relevant when patients have node-positive disease. A meta-analysis confirming this hypothesis is lacking.

Patients and Methods

A systematic review including studies with at least 50 patients with resected node-positive PDAC was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (inception to March 2025). Patients with node-negative disease were excluded. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS), comparing R0N+ and R1N+ resections. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) represented outcome measures. Subgroup analysis included: application of the Royal College of Pathology protocol (RCP: standardized margin inking, axial slicing, and “1-mm rule”) and receipt of neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy.

Results

Overall, 19,206 patients with resected node-positive PDAC from 16 retrospective studies were included. Most patients underwent upfront resection (96.3%), primarily pancreatoduodenectomy (84.2%). The overall R0N+ rate was 61.1%, differing significantly by application of RCP (yes [R1 = tumor within 1 mm of margin]: nine studies, 52.1%; unclear: four studies, 80.5%; no [R1 = tumor at margin ink only]: three studies, 61.5%; p = 0.0019). Overall, R1 negatively impacted OS (HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.21–1.59). RCP-only subgroup analysis confirmed worse OS in R1N+ resections (HR 1.25; 95% CI 1.10–1.42). Subgroup analysis by neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy was not feasible.

Conclusions

Among patients with node-positive PDAC treated with upfront surgery, R1 resection remains associated with worse survival. In these patients, R0 resection should not be dismissed as a viable treatment goal until stronger RCP-compliant evidence emerges.