Skip to main content
Log in

Pathologic Major Response After FOLFIRINOX is Prognostic for Patients Secondary Resected for Borderline or Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: An AGEO-FRENCH, Prospective, Multicentric Cohort

  • Pancreatic Tumors
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript



In view of increased response rates and survivals in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) with FOLFIRINOX, many centers proposed this regimen as induction chemotherapy for borderline (BR) or locally advanced (LA) PAC. The aim of this study was to assess surgical and oncological outcomes of patients who underwent resection after induction FOLFIRINOX therapy.


We prospectively identified surgical consecutive BR or LA PAC patients after induction FOLFIRINOX in 20 observational French centers between November 2010 and December 2013. Two independent experts retrospectively evaluated initial CT scan for central review.


Eighty patients were included, 47 had BR and 33 had LA PAC. Median number of FOLFIRINOX cycles was 6 (range 1–30) and 65 % of patients received chemoradiation. The 30-day-mortality, major complications, and symptomatic pancreatic fistula rates were 2.5, 22.5, and 4 %, respectively. R0 resection was achieved in 84 %. After a median follow-up of 38.2 months since diagnosis, disease-free survival (DFS) was 17.16 months. The overall survival rates at 12 and 24 months were 92 and 81 %, respectively. A 26 % (n = 21) pathologic major response (pMR) rate was reached. In univariate and multivariate analysis, pMR was a prognostic factor for DFS (hazard ratio 0.33; P = 0.01 and hazard ratio 0.38; P = 0.035).


Resection after induction FOLFIRINOX is safe and associated with similar or better outcomes as upfront surgery in patients with PAC. A pMR was observed in 26 % of cases and was prognostic of DFS. This therapeutic design should be investigated in prospective studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Eheman C, Henley SJ, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Annual Report to the Nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2008, featuring cancers associated with excess weight and lack of sufficient physical activity. Cancer. 2012;118(9):2338–66.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Bouvier AM, Remontet L, Jougla E, et al. Incidence of gastrointestinal cancers in France. Gastroenterol Clin Biol. 2004;28(10):877–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Coleman MP, Gatta G, Verdecchia A, et al. EUROCARE-3 summary: cancer survival in Europe at the end of the 20th century. Ann Oncol. 2003;14 Suppl 5:v128–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Puleo F, Marechal R, Demetter P, et al. New challenges in perioperative management of pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21(8):2281–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Delpero JR, Paye F, Bachellier P, Boyer JM. Cancer du pancréas Rapport présenté au 112e Congrés Français de Chirurgie 2010. 2010.

  6. Katz MH, Pisters PW, Evans DB, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: the importance of this emerging stage of disease. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206(5):833–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Katz MH, Crane CH, Varadhachary G. Management of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2014;24(2):105–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gillen S, Schuster T, Meyer Zum Buschenfelde C, Friess H, Kleeff J. Preoperative/neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of response and resection percentages. PLoS Med. 2010;7(4):e1000267.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Katz MH, Fleming JB, Bhosale P, et al. Response of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer to neoadjuvant therapy is not reflected by radiographic indicators. Cancer. 2012;118(23):5749–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Seufferlein T, Bachet JB, Van Cutsem E, Rougier P, Group EGW. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: ESMO-ESDO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(Suppl 7):vii33–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Philip PA, Mooney M, Jaffe D, et al. Consensus report of the national cancer institute clinical trials planning meeting on pancreas cancer treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(33):5660–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Conroy T, Desseigne F, Ychou M, et al. FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(19):1817–25.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Von Hoff DD, Ervin T, Arena FP, et al. Increased survival in pancreatic cancer with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(18):1691–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Christians KK, Tsai S, Mahmoud A, et al. Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX for borderline resectable pancreas cancer: a new treatment paradigm? Oncologist. 2014;19(3):266–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Blazer M, Wu C, Goldberg RM, et al. Neoadjuvant modified (m) FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced unresectable (LAPC) and borderline resectable (BRPC) adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Ann Surg Oncol. doi:10.1245/s10434-014-4225-1.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Ferrone CR, Marchegiani G, Hong TS, et al. Radiological and surgical implications of neoadjuvant treatment with FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg. 2015;261(1):12–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Petrelli F, Coinu A, Borgonovo KF, et al. Resection rate with FOLFIRINOX-based neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced/Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a pooled analysis of published data. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(Suppl 4):1.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Marthey L, Sa-Cunha A, Blanc JF, et al. FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: results of an ageo multicenter prospective observational cohort. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(1):295–301.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Tempero MA, Malafa MP, Behrman SW, et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma, version 2.2014. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2014;12(8):1083–93.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Pessaux P, Varma D, Arnaud JP. Pancreaticoduodenectomy: superior mesenteric artery first approach. J Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10(4):607–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sanjay P, Takaori K, Govil S, Shrikhande SV, Windsor JA. ‘Artery-first’ approaches to pancreatoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2012;99(8):1027–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery. 2005;138(1):8–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Edge SB, Compton CC. The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(6):1471–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Staley CA, Cleary KR, Abbruzzese JL, et al. The need for standardized pathologic staging of pancreaticoduodenectomy specimens. Pancreas. 1996;12(4):373–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Oettle H, Neuhaus P, Hochhaus A, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and long-term outcomes among patients with resected pancreatic cancer: the CONKO-001 randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;310(14):1473–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Neoptolemos JP, Moore MJ, Cox TF, et al. Effect of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus folinic acid or gemcitabine vs. observation on survival in patients with resected periampullary adenocarcinoma: the ESPAC-3 periampullary cancer randomized trial. JAMA. 2012;308(2):147–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Bonnetain F, Bonsing B, Conroy T, et al. Guidelines for time-to-event end-point definitions in trials for pancreatic cancer. Results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials). Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(17):2983–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Schlieman MG, Ho HS, Bold RJ. Utility of tumor markers in determining resectability of pancreatic cancer. Arch Surg. 2003;138(9):951–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hosein PJ, Macintyre J, Kawamura C, et al. A retrospective study of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in unresectable or borderline-resectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:199.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Paniccia A, Edil BH, Schulick RD, et al. Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX application in borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study. Medicine. 2014;93(27):e198.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Cassinotto C, Mouries A, Lafourcade J-P, et al. Locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: reassessment of response with CT after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Radiology. 2014;273(1):108–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Fong Y, Gonen M, Rubin D, Radzyner M, Brennan MF. Long-term survival is superior after resection for cancer in high-volume centers. Ann Surg. 2005;242(4):540–4.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. DeOliveira ML, Winter JM, Schafer M, et al. Assessment of complications after pancreatic surgery: a novel grading system applied to 633 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2006;244(6):931–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Cameron JL, Riall TS, Coleman J, Belcher KA. One thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. Ann Surg. 2006;244(1):10–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Konstantinidis IT, Warshaw AL, Allen JN, et al. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: is there a survival difference for R1 resections versus locally advanced unresectable tumors? What is a “true” R0 resection? Ann Surg. 2013;257(4):731–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Delpero JR, Bachellier P, Regenet N, et al. Pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a French multicentre prospective evaluation of resection margins in 150 evaluable specimens. HPB. 2014;16(1):20–33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Assifi MM, Lu X, Eibl G, Reber HA, Li G, Hines OJ. Neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis of phase II trials. Surgery. 2011;150(3):466–73.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Chatterjee D, Katz MH, Rashid A, et al. Histologic grading of the extent of residual carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemoradiation in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a predictor for patient outcome. Cancer. 2012;118(12):3182–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Maas M, Nelemans PJ, Valentini V, et al. Long-term outcome in patients with a pathological complete response after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(9):835–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


Daniel Pietrasz and Jean Baptiste Bachet had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. The authors thank Magdalena Benetkiewicz for reviewing the English form of this manuscript. This study was supported by a grant from Celgene, and by the AGEO and FRENCH associations.


The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean Baptiste Bachet MD, PhD.

Additional information

Antonio Sa Cunha and Jean Baptiste Bachet have contributed equally to this work.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 87 kb)

Appendix: Clinical Investigators Who Collected Data, Provided, and Cared for Study Patients

Appendix: Clinical Investigators Who Collected Data, Provided, and Cared for Study Patients

Thomas Aparicio, MD (Avicenne Hospital, Bobigny, France).

Pascal Artru, MD (Jean Mermoz Hospital, Lyon, France).

Anne Berger, MD (Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France).

Laurence Chiche, MD (Bordeaux South Hospital, Bordeaux, France).

Jean-Robert Delpero, MD (Institut Paoli Calmette, Marseille, France).

Bertrand Dousset, MD (Cochin Hospital, Paris, France).

Eric Francois, MD (Nice Hospital, Nice, France).

Diane Goéré, MD (Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France).

Pascal Hammel, MD (Beaujon Hospital, Clichy, France).

Mehdi Karoui, MD (Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Sorbonne University, UPMC University, Paris, France).

Cédric Lecaille, MD (Bordeaux North Hospital, Bordeaux, France).

David Malka, MD (Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France).

Sylvain Mandredi, MD (Rennes Hospital, Rennes, France).

Florence Mary, MD (Bordeaux Saint-André Hospital, Bordeaux, France).

Bernard Meunier, MD (Rennes Hospital, Rennes, France).

François Paye, MD (Saint-Antoine Hospital, Paris, France).

Anne Laure Pointet, MD (Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France).

Alain Sauvanet, MD (Beaujon Hospital, Clichy, France).

Lilian Schwarz, MD (Rouen Hospital, Rouen, France).

Jean-Marc Simon, MD (Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Sorbonne University, UPMC University, Paris, France).

Denis Smith, MD (Bordeaux Saint André Hospital, Bordeaux, France).

Emilie Soularue, MD (Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France).

Jean-Christophe Vaillant, MD (Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Sorbonne University, UPMC University, Paris, France).

Véronique Vendrely, MD (Bordeaux Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux, France).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pietrasz, D., Marthey, L., Wagner, M. et al. Pathologic Major Response After FOLFIRINOX is Prognostic for Patients Secondary Resected for Borderline or Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: An AGEO-FRENCH, Prospective, Multicentric Cohort. Ann Surg Oncol 22 (Suppl 3), 1196–1205 (2015).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: