Browsing by Author "Gockel, Ines"

Simple Summary Despite the potential of fluorescence imaging during pancreatic cancer surgery, more research is needed to facilitate the approval of tumor-targeted probes, standardize imaging techniques, and most importantly, gain trust from surgeons. Despite advancements in the development of novel probes, preclinical research settings do not always accurately represent the surgical setting. This first-of-its-kind Delphi consensus survey highlights current experiences and attitudes towards fluorescence imaging during pancreatic cancer surgery, specifically from surgeon’s perspectives. The results from this consensus survey highlight potential new directions for future research, which could facilitate the standardized use of fluorescence imaging during pancreatic surgery. Abstract Indocyanine green (ICG) is one of the only clinically approved near-infrared (NIR) fluorophores used during fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS), but it lacks tumor specificity for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Several tumor-targeted fluorescent probes have been evaluated in PDAC patients, yet no uniformity or consensus exists among the surgical community on the current and future needs of FGS during PDAC surgery. In this first-published consensus report on FGS for PDAC, expert opinions were gathered on current use and future recommendations from surgeons’ perspectives. A Delphi survey was conducted among international FGS experts via Google Forms. Experts were asked to anonymously vote on 76 statements, with ≥70% agreement considered consensus and ≥80% participation/statement considered vote robustness. Consensus was reached for 61/76 statements. All statements were considered robust. All experts agreed that FGS is safe with few drawbacks during PDAC surgery, but that it should not yet be implemented routinely for tumor identification due to a lack of PDAC-specific NIR tracers and insufficient evidence proving FGS’s benefit over standard methods. However, aside from tumor imaging, surgeons suggest they would benefit from visualizing vasculature and surrounding anatomy with ICG during PDAC surgery. Future research could also benefit from identifying neuroendocrine tumors. More research focusing on standardization and combining tumor identification and vital-structure imaging would greatly improve FGS’s use during PDAC surgery.

PURPOSE In patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC), chemotherapy is the treatment of choice. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are still being debated. This randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter phase III trial (EudraCT 2006-006088-22; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02158988 ) explored the impact on overall survival (OS) of HIPEC after CRS. PATIENTS AND METHODS Adult patients with GC and histologically proven PM were randomly assigned (1:1) to perioperative chemotherapy and CRS alone (CRS-A) or CRS plus HIPEC (CRS + H). HIPEC comprised mitomycin C 15 mg/m 2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 in 5 L of saline perfused for 60 minutes at 42°C. The primary end point was OS; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), other distant metastasis-free survival (MFS), and safety. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS Between March 2014 and June 2018, 105 patients were randomly assigned (53 patients to CRS-A and 52 patients to CRS + H). The trial stopped prematurely because of slow recruitment. In 55 patients, treatment stopped before CRS mainly due to disease progression/death. Median OS was the same for both groups (CRS + H, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 8.7 to 17.7] months v CRS-A, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 7.0 to 19.4] months; P = .1647). The PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 7.0) in the CRS-A group and 7.1 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 10.5; P = .047) in the CRS + H group. The CRS + H group showed better MFS (10.2 months [95% CI, 7.7 to 14.7] v CRS-A, 9.2 months [95% CI, 6.8 to 11.5]; P = .0286). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) was similar between groups (CRS-A, 38.1% v CRS + H, 43.6%; P = .79). CONCLUSION This study showed no OS difference between CRS + H and CRS-A. PFS and MFS were significantly better in the CRS + H group, which needs further exploration. HIPEC did not increase AEs.

Background: Recent studies have shown that hyperspectral imaging (HSI) combined with neural networks can detect colorectal cancer. Usually, different pre-processing techniques (e.g., wavelength selection and scaling, smoothing, denoising) are analyzed in detail to achieve a well-trained network. The impact of post-processing was studied less. Methods: We tested the following methods: (1) Two pre-processing techniques (Standardization and Normalization), with (2) Two 3D-CNN models: Inception-based and RemoteSensing (RS)-based, with (3) Two post-processing algorithms based on median filter: one applies a median filter to a raw predictions map, the other applies the filter to the predictions map after adopting a discrimination threshold. These approaches were evaluated on a dataset that contains ex vivo hyperspectral (HS) colorectal cancer records of 56 patients. Results: (1) Inception-based models perform better than RS-based, with the best results being 92% sensitivity and 94% specificity; (2) Inception-based models perform better with Normalization, RS-based with Standardization; (3) Our outcomes show that the post-processing step improves sensitivity and specificity by 6.6% in total. It was also found that both post-processing algorithms have the same effect, and this behavior was explained. Conclusion: HSI combined with tissue classification algorithms is a promising diagnostic approach whose performance can be additionally improved by the application of the right combination of pre- and post-processing.

Objective: This NEUROmonitoring System (NEUROS) trial assessed whether pelvic intraoperative neuromonitoring (pIONM) could improve urogenital and ano-(neo-)rectal functional outcomes in patients who underwent total mesorectal excisions (TMEs) for rectal cancer. Background: High-level evidence from clinical trials is required to clarify the benefits of pIONM. Methods: NEUROS was a 2-arm, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial that included 189 patients with rectal cancer who underwent TMEs at 8 centers, from February 2013 to January 2017. TMEs were performed with pIONM (n=90) or without it (control, n=99). The groups were stratified according to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and sex, with blocks of variable length. Data were analyzed according to a modified intention-to-treat protocol. The primary endpoint was a urinary function at 12 months after surgery, assessed with the International Prostate Symptom Score, a patient-reported outcome measure. Deterioration was defined as an increase of at least 5 points from the preoperative score. Secondary endpoints were sexual and anorectal functional outcomes, safety, and TME quality. Results: The intention-to-treat analysis included 171 patients. Marked urinary deterioration occurred in 22/171 (13%) patients, with significantly different incidence between groups (pIONM: n=6/82, 8%; control: n=16/89, 19%; 95% confidence interval, 12.4–94.4; P=0.0382). pIONM was associated with better sexual and ano-(neo)rectal function. At least 1 serious adverse event occurred in 36/88 (41%) in the pIONM group and 53/99 (54%) in the control group, none associated with the study treatment. The groups had similar TME quality, surgery times, intraoperative complication incidence, and postoperative mortality. Conclusion: pIONM is safe and has the potential to improve functional outcomes in rectal cancer patients undergoing TME.