Long-term survival after multidisciplinary management of resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Actual 5-year survival rates of 10-18% have been reported for patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC), but the use of multimodality therapy was uncommon in these series. We evaluated long-term survival and patterns of recurrence in patients treated for PC with contemporary staging and multimodality therapy. METHODS: We analyzed 329 consecutive patients with PC evaluated between 1990 and 2002 who underwent resection. Each received a multidisciplinary evaluation and a standard operative approach. Pre- or postoperative chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation were routine. Surgical specimens of 5-year survivors were re-reviewed. A multivariate model of factors associated with long-term survival was constructed. RESULTS: Patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (n = 302; 92%), distal (n = 20; 6%), or total pancreatectomy (n = 7; 2%). A total of 108 patients (33%) underwent vascular reconstruction, 301 patients (91%) received neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy, 157 specimens (48%) were node positive, and margins were microscopically positive in 52 patients (16%). Median overall survival and disease-specific survival was 23.9 and 26.5 months. Eighty-eight patients (27%) survived a minimum of 5 years and had a median overall survival of 11 years. Of these, 21 (24%) experienced recurrence, 7 (8%) after 5 years. Late recurrences occurred most frequently in the lungs, the latest at 6.7 years. Multivariate analysis identified disease-negative lymph nodes (P = .02) and no prior attempt at resection (P = 0.01) as associated with 5-year survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our 27% actual 5-year survival rate for patients with resected PC is superior to that previously reported, and it is influenced by our emphasis on detailed staging and patient selection, a standardized operative approach, and routine use of multimodality therapy.

POPULATION ASSESSMENTS OF INFECTION WITH SCHISTOSOMA MANSONI: EFFECTS OF BIAS CAUSED BY THE RELATIVE SENSITIVITY OF DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES (PUERTO RICO)

This study establishes the extent and relevance of bias of population estimates of prevalence, incidence, and intensity of infection with Schistosoma mansoni caused by the relative sensitivity of stool examination techniques. The population studied was Parcelas de Boqueron in Las Piedras, Puerto Rico, where the Centers for Disease Control, had undertaken a prospective community-based study of infection with S. mansoni in 1972. During each January of the succeeding years stool specimens from this population were processed according to the modified Ritchie concentration (MRC) technique. During January 1979 additional stool specimens were collected from 30 individuals selected on the basis of their mean S. mansoni egg output during previous years. Each specimen was divided into ten 1-gm aliquots and three 42-mg aliquots. The relationship of egg counts obtained with the Kato-Katz (KK) thick smear technique as a function of the mean of ten counts obtained with the MRC technique was established by means of regression analysis. Additionally, the effect of fecal sample size and egg excretion level on technique sensitivity was evaluated during a blind assessment of single stool specimen samples, using both examination methods, from 125 residents with documented S. mansoni infections. The regression equation was: Ln KK = 2.3324 + 0.6319 Ln MRC, and the coefficient of determination (r('2)) was 0.73. The regression equation was then utilized to correct the term "m" for sample size in the expression P ((GREATERTHEQ) 1 egg) = 1 - e('-ms), which estimates the probability P of finding at least one egg as a function of the mean S. mansoni egg output "m" of the population and the effective stool sample size "s" utilized by the coprological technique. This algorithm closely approximated the observed sensitivity of the KK and MRC tests when these were utilized to blindly screen a population of known parasitologic status for infection with S. mansoni. In addition, the algorithm was utilized to adjust the apparent prevalence of infection for the degree of functional sensitivity exhibited by the diagnostic test. This permitted the estimation of true prevalence of infection and, hence, a means for correcting estimates of incidence of infection. ^