Evidence Hub

Surgical Complications in Patients with (borderline) Resectable Pancreatic Cancer after Neoadjuvant Therapy in the PREOPANC-2 Randomized Controlled Trial

E. Dekker, R. Theijse, J. L. van Dam, Q. Janssen, T. Stoop, B. Bonsing, K. Bosscha, S. Bouwense et al.

Annals of Surgery, 2025

375 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the incidence of major surgical complications between patients with (borderline) resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There are ongoing concerns regarding the possible adverse impact of neoadjuvant treatment on postoperative complication rates following pancreatectomy.

METHODS

This study was a predefined analysis within the investigator-initiated nationwide randomized controlled PREOPANC-2 trial. Patients with (borderline) resectable pancreatic cancer were randomized to receive neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (FFX group) or neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT group), both followed by surgery, and adjuvant gemcitabine only in the CRT group. Surgical complications including postoperative pancreatic fistula, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, bile leakage, postoperative interventions, and 90-day mortality were compared, with major complications defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3.

RESULTS

Between June 5, 2018, and January 28, 2021, in total 375 patients were randomized, of whom 280 (74.7%) underwent pancreatic resection. A pancreatoduodenectomy was performed in 238 patients (85.0%), left pancreatectomy in 41 patients (14.6%), and total pancreatectomy in one patient (0.4%). The incidence of major surgical complications was similar between the FFX and CRT groups (26.8% versus 27.5%, P=0.884). No differences were observed in the risk of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 375 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free