Abstract 2860: miR-21 overexpression assessed by in situ hybridisation is an independent predictor of survival in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Author(s):  
Asif Ali ◽  
Elisa Giovannetti ◽  
Niccola Funel ◽  
Roderick Ferrier ◽  
Jennifer Morton ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (10) ◽  
pp. 865-873 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noriyuki Shiroma ◽  
Koji Arihiro ◽  
Miyo Oda ◽  
Makoto Orita

AimsThe aim of our study was to analyse correlations between KRAS mutation status, chromosomal changes that affect KRAS status in cells from pancreatic tumours.MethodsWe collected 69 cases of surgically resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) and seven cases of chronic pancreatitis (CP). Chromosomal abnormalities of KRAS and CEP12 were detected using fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH).ResultsThe number of CEP12 signals per cell ranged from 1.78 to 2.04 and 1.46 to 4.88 in CP and PDA samples, respectively, while the number of KRAS signals per cell ranged from 1.94 to 2.06 and 1.88 to 8.18 in CP and PDA samples, respectively. The ‘chromosomal instability index’, which was defined as the percentage of cells with any chromosomal abnormality, was over 5.7 times greater in PDA than in CP. We performed KRAS mutation analysis by direct sequencing and found that tumours with KRAS mutations have a significantly higher mean KRAS signal per cell from PDA samples compared with tumours with wild-type KRAS. KRAS amplification was noted in 10% of cases. Although we found that lymph node metastasis and distal metastasis of PDA were more frequent in cases with KRAS amplification, this was not correlated with overall survival. Using a threshold of 40%, we found that the chromosomal instability index robustly discriminated PDA cells from CP cells.ConclusionsBased on these findings, we concluded that FISH testing of KRAS using cytology samples may represent an accurate approach for the diagnosis of PDA.


2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 512-524 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Balfour Jamieson ◽  
Alan K. Foulis ◽  
Karin A. Oien ◽  
Euan J. Dickson ◽  
Clem W. Imrie ◽  
...  

Pancreas ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Volkan Adsay ◽  
Sanaa T. Dergham ◽  
Frederick C. Koppitch ◽  
Michael C. Dugan ◽  
Anwar N. Mohamed ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shin Kato ◽  
Kenji Chinen ◽  
Susumu Shinoura ◽  
Fumihito Kunishima

The natural growth rate of pancreatic carcinoma in situ with pancreatic duct stricture remains unclear. Herein, we present a case with pancreatic duct stricture that rapidly grew to form a mass lesion within 3 months. A 74-year-old woman was referred to us for the investigation of a pancreatic duct dilatation. Initial images did not reveal any clear mass lesions near the pancreatic duct stricture. Pancreatic juice cytology showed suspicious findings. Distal pancreatectomy was recommended; however, the patient refused to undergo surgical treatment at that time. Images taken 3 months later demonstrated a nodular pancreatic body mass which was identified as a moderately to poorly differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma. Previous reports have suggested that pancreatic carcinoma in situ and small pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma require at least 1–2 years to progress to an advanced mass. This case suggests that pancreatic carcinoma in situ may grow rapidly and indicates a need for close follow-up in patients with pancreatic duct strictures, even if the pathological evidence is not confirmed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175883592093861 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hossein Taghizadeh ◽  
Leonhard Müllauer ◽  
Robert M. Mader ◽  
Martin Schindl ◽  
Gerald W. Prager

Background: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) bears a dismal prognosis due to the limited activity of systemic chemotherapy. In our platform for precision medicine, we aim to offer molecular-guided treatments to patients without further standard therapy options. Methods: In this single center, real-world retrospective analysis of our platform, we describe the molecular-based therapy approaches used in all 50 patients diagnosed with therapy-refractory mPDAC. A molecular portrait of the tumor specimens was created by next-generation sequencing, immunohistochemistry (IHC), microsatellite instability (MSI) testing, and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Results: In total, we detected 123 mutations in 50 patients. The five most frequent mutations were KRAS ( n = 40; 80%), TP53 ( n = 29; 58%), CDKN2A ( n = 8; 16%), SMAD4 ( n = 4; 8%), and NOTCH1 ( n = 4; 8%), which together accounted for 40.2% of all mutations. Two patients had gene fusions, namely, TBL1XR1–PIK3CA and EIF3E–RSPO2. IHC detected expression of EGFR, phosphorylated mTOR, and PTEN in 36 (72%), 33 (66%), and 17 patients (34%), respectively. For 14 (28%) of the 50 patients, a targeted therapy was suggested based on the identified molecular targets. The recommended treatments included the mTOR inhibitor everolimus ( n = 3), pembrolizumab ( n = 3), palbociclib ( n = 2), nintedanib ( n = 2), and cetuximab, crizotinib, tamoxifen, and the combination of lapatinib and trastuzumab, in one patient each. Finally, five patients received the recommended therapy. Four patients died due to disease progression before radiological assessment. One patient was treated with nintedanib and achieved stable disease for 6 months. Conclusion: Based on our observations, precision medicine approaches are feasible and implementable in clinical routine and may provide molecular-based therapy recommendations for mPDAC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document