Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37435855›Full record

ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2023

The additive value of CA19.9 monitoring in a pancreatic cyst surveillance program.

Iris J M Levink, Sanne C Jaarsma, Brechtje D M Koopmann, Priscilla A van Riet, Kasper A Overbeek, Jihane Meziani, Marloes L J A Sprij, Riccardo Casadei, Carlo Ingaldi, Marcin Polkowski and 22 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Pancreatic Cancer: A Review of Risk Factors.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

32 authors at 20 institutions in 9 countries.

Iris J M LevinkDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9825-8728
Sanne C JaarsmaDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Brechtje D M KoopmannDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Priscilla A van RietDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Kasper A OverbeekDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1829-9963
Jihane MezianiDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marloes L J A SprijDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Riccardo CasadeiDepartment of Surgery, Bologna University, Bologna, Italy.
Carlo IngaldiDepartment of Surgery, Bologna University, Bologna, Italy.
Marcin PolkowskiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Clinical Oncology, Center of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland.
Megan M L EngelsDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.
Laurens A van der WaaijDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Martini Hospital, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Silvia CarraraDepartment of Gastroenterology, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Elizabeth PandoDepartment of Surgery, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Research, Barcelona, Spain.
Marlies VornhülzDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Pieter HonkoopDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Erik J SchoonDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Johanna LaukkarinenDepartment of Surgery, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Jilling F BergmannDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Haga Ziekenhuis, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Gemma RossiPancreato-Biliary Endoscopy and Endosonography Division, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Frederike G I van VilsterenDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Anne-Marie van BerkelDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Noordwest Hospital, Alkmaar, The Netherlands.
Trevor TaboneDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Mater dei Hospital, Msida, Malta.
Matthijs P SchwartzDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
Adriaan C I T L TanDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Jeanin E van HooftDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Rutger QuispelDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Reinier de Graaf, Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6109-9310
Ellert van SoestDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Spaarne Gasthuis, Haarlem, The Netherlands.
Laszlo CzackoDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.
Marco J BrunoDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Djuna L CahenDepartment of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
PACYFIC-registry work group
Erasmus MC · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLUniversity of Bologna · ITAlbert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis · NLApotheek Haagse Ziekenhuizen · NLCanisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis · NLIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital · ITLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEMartini Ziekenhuis · NLMater Dei Hospital · MTMeander Medisch Centrum · NLNoordwest Ziekenhuisgroep · NLPostgraduate School of Molecular Medicine · PLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLReinier de Graaf Hospital · NLSpaarne Ziekenhuis · NLTampere University Hospital · FIUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity of Szeged · HUVall d'Hebron Institut de Recerca · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurveillance of pancreatic cysts focuses on the detection of (mostly morphologic) features warranting surgery. European guidelines consider elevated CA19.9 as a relative indication for surgery. We aimed to evaluate the role of CA19.9 monitoring for early detection and management in a cyst surveillance population.

methodsThe PACYFIC-registry is a prospective collaboration that investigates the yield of pancreatic cyst surveillance performed at the discretion of the treating physician. We included participants for whom at least one serum CA19.9 value was determined by a minimum follow-up of 12 months.

resultsOf 1865 PACYFIC participants, 685 met the inclusion criteria for this study (mean age 67 years, SD 10; 61% female). During a median follow-up of 25 months (IQR 24, 1966 visits), 29 participants developed high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or pancreatic cancer. At baseline, CA19.9 ranged from 1 to 591 kU/L (median 10 kU/L [IQR 14]), and was elevated (≥37 kU/L) in 64 participants (9%). During 191 of 1966 visits (10%), an elevated CA19.9 was detected, and these visits more often led to an intensified follow-up (42%) than those without an elevated CA19.9 (27%; p < 0.001). An elevated CA19.9 was the sole reason for surgery in five participants with benign disease (10%). The baseline CA19.9 value was (as continuous or dichotomous variable at the 37 kU/L threshold) not independently associated with HGD or pancreatic cancer development, whilst a CA19.9 of ≥ 133 kU/L was (HR 3.8, 95% CI 1.1-13, p = 0.03).

conclusionsIn this pancreatic cyst surveillance cohort, CA19.9 monitoring caused substantial harm by shortening surveillance intervals (and performance of unnecessary surgery). The current CA19.9 cutoff was not predictive of HGD and pancreatic cancer, whereas a higher cutoff may decrease false-positive values. The role of CA19.9 monitoring should be critically appraised prior to implementation in surveillance programs and guidelines.

Indexed as

Pancreatic CystPancreatic NeoplasmsAgedCA-19-9 AntigenFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesCA-19-9 AntigenbiomarkersCA19.9early detectionfollow-upGICApancreatic cancerpancreatic cystspancreatic lesionssurgical interventionsurveillance

Identifiers

PMID37435855
PMCPMC10493362
OpenAlexW4383998036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.