Skip to main content
. 2019 Sep 6;14(9):e0222155. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222155

Table 2. Histologic difference between patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy and upfront surgery.

GnP UP
Median (min-max) Median (min-max) P value
Microscopic tumor volume (mm3) 16950 (825–209300) 24240 (770–92500) 0.0471 *
Lymph nodes with metastasis (n) 1 (0–6) 2 (0–20) 0.0341 *
Necrosis (%) 7.5 (5–70) 5.0 (0–60) 0.8845
Tumor-stroma ratio 40 (5–90) 55 (30–90) 0.0053 *
Number (%) Number (%)
Histologic differentiation
 Well 11 (28) 15 (36) 0.4112
 Moderate 23 (58) 18 (43)
 Poor 6 (15) 9 (21)
Stromal pattern
 Intermediate 31 (78) 31 (74)
 Medullary 4 (10) 10 (24) 0.0746
 Scirrhous 5 (13) 1 (2)
Lymphatic invasion
 0 5 (13) 3 (7) 0.0533
 1 31 (78) 25 (60)
 2 4 (10) 10 (24)
 3 0 (0) 4 (10)
Vascular invasion
 0 1 (3) 2 (5) 0.0418 *
 1 27 (68) 17 (40)
 2 7 (18) 19 (45)
 3 5 (13) 4 (10)
Surgical margin
 0 34 (85) 29 (69) 0.0870
 1 6 (15) 13 (31)
T
 1 0 (0) 2 (5) 0.3495
 2 0 (0) 1 (2)
 3 38 (95) 38 (90)
 4 2 (5) 1 (2)
N
 0 15 (38) 10 (24) 0.1783
 1 25 (63) 32 (76)
Inflammation
 Lymphoplasmacytic 9 (23) 10 (24) 0.8883
 Neutrophilic 31 (78) 32 (76)
Fibrosis in the tumor
 Mature 34 (85) 27 (64) 0.0317 *
 Immature 6 (15) 15 (36)
Encapsulating fibrosis
 Negative 14 (35) 37 (88) <0.0001 *
 Positive 26 (65) 5 (12)

*, P<0.05 between GnP and UP groups by Mann-Whitney U test or chi-square tests. Pathological scores were determined according to General Rules of Japan Pancreas Society, 7th edition. T and N stages were determined according to UICC 8th edition. GnP, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel; NAT, neoadjuvant treatment; UP, upfront surgery.