15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Head and Body/Tail Pancreatic Carcinomas Are Not the Same Tumors

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The association between pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) location (head vs. Body/Tail (B/T)) and clinical outcome remains controversial. We collected clinicopathological and gene expression data from 249 resected PDAC samples from public data sets, and we compared data between 208 head and 41 B/T samples. The 2-year overall survival (OS) was better for the head than for the B/T PDACs (44 vs. 27%, p = 0.043), especially when comparing tumors with similar TNM classification (T3/4N0M0: 67% vs. 17%, p = 0.002) or from the same molecular class (squamous subtype: 31% vs. 0%, p < 0.0001). Bailey’s molecular subtypes were differentially distributed within the two groups, with the immunogenic subtype being underrepresented in the “B/T” group ( p = 0.005). Uni- and multivariate analyses indicated that PDAC anatomic location was an independent prognostic factor. Finally, the supervised analysis identified 334 genes differentially expressed. Genes upregulated in the “head” group suggested lymphocyte activation and pancreas exocrine functions. Genes upregulated in the “B/T” group were related to keratinocyte differentiation, in line with the enrichment for squamous phenotype. We identified a robust gene expression signature (GES) associated with B/T PDAC location, suggesting that head and B/T PDAC are different. This GES could serve as an indicator for differential therapeutic management based on PDAC location.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Virtual microdissection identifies distinct tumor- and stroma-specific subtypes of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

          Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a lethal disease with a 5-year survival of 4%. A key hallmark of PDAC is extensive stromal involvement, which makes capturing precise tumor-specific molecular information difficult. Here, we have overcome this problem by applying blind source separation to a diverse collection of PDAC gene expression microarray data, which includes primary, metastatic, and normal samples. By digitally separating tumor, stroma, and normal gene expression, we have identified and validated two tumor-specific subtypes including a “basal-like” subtype which has worse outcome, and is molecularly similar to basal tumors in bladder and breast cancer. Furthermore, we define “normal” and “activated” stromal subtypes which are independently prognostic. Our results provide new insight into the molecular composition of PDAC which may be used to tailor therapies or provide decision support in a clinical setting where the choice and timing of therapies is critical.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

            The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK)

              Despite years of research and hundreds of reports on tumour markers in oncology, the number of markers that have emerged as clinically useful is pitifully small. Often initially reported studies of a marker show great promise, but subsequent studies on the same or related markers yield inconsistent conclusions or stand in direct contradiction to the promising results. It is imperative that we attempt to understand the reasons that multiple studies of the same marker lead to differing conclusions. A variety of methodological problems have been cited to explain these discrepancies. Unfortunately, many tumour marker studies have not been reported in a rigorous fashion, and published articles often lack sufficient information to allow adequate assessment of the quality of the study or the generalisability of the study results. The development of guidelines for the reporting of tumour marker studies was a major recommendation of the US National Cancer Institute and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (NCI-EORTC) First International Meeting on Cancer Diagnostics in 2000. Similar to the successful CONSORT initiative for randomised trials and the STARD statement for diagnostic studies, we suggest guidelines to provide relevant information about the study design, preplanned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods. In addition, the guidelines suggest helpful presentations of data and important elements to include in discussions. The goal of these guidelines is to encourage transparent and complete reporting so that the relevant information will be available to others to help them to judge the usefulness of the data and understand the context in which the conclusions apply.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cancers (Basel)
                Cancers (Basel)
                cancers
                Cancers
                MDPI
                2072-6694
                08 April 2019
                April 2019
                : 11
                : 4
                : 497
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Laboratoire Oncologie Prédictive, Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie de Marseille, INSERM UMR1068, CNRS UMR725, Aix-Marseille Université, 13273 Marseille, France; bertuccif@ 123456ipc.unicancer.fr (F.B.); finettip@ 123456ipc.unicancer.fr (P.F.); daniel.birnbaum@ 123456inserm.fr (D.B.); emilie.mamessier@ 123456inserm.fr (E.M.)
                [2 ]Faculté de Médecine, Aix-Marseille Université, 13385 Marseille, France
                [3 ]Département de Chirurgie Générale et Viscérale, AP-HM, 13015 Marseille, France
                [4 ]Département d’Oncologie Médicale, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, 13009 Marseille, France
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: david.birnbaum10@ 123456gmail.com ; Tel.: +33-4-91-22-34-77
                Article
                cancers-11-00497
                10.3390/cancers11040497
                6520848
                30965637
                525da3bc-606f-4523-bb36-1d45f797280d
                © 2019 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 07 February 2019
                : 02 April 2019
                Categories
                Article

                pancreatic cancer,tumor location,expression profiling,prognosis,survival

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content286

                Cited by38

                Most referenced authors1,814