DNA aneuploidy is an independent factor of poor prognosis in pancreatic and peripancreatic cancer

Aneuploidy increases resistance to chemotherapeutics by antagonizing cell division

Aneuploidy, defined as whole chromosome gains and losses, is associated with poor patient prognosis in many cancer types. However, the condition causes cellular stress and cell cycle delays, foremost in G1 and S phase. Here, we investigate how aneuploidy causes both slow proliferation and poor disease outcome. We test the hypothesis that aneuploidy brings about resistance to chemotherapies because of a general feature of the aneuploid condition-G1 delays. We show that single chromosome gains lead to increased resistance to the frontline chemotherapeutics cisplatin and paclitaxel. Furthermore, G1 cell cycle delays are sufficient to increase chemotherapeutic resistance in euploid cells. Mechanistically, G1 delays increase drug resistance to cisplatin and paclitaxel by reducing their ability to damage DNA and microtubules, respectively. Finally, we show that our findings are clinically relevant. Aneuploidy correlates with slowed proliferation and drug resistance in the Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE) dataset. We conclude that a general and seemingly detrimental effect of aneuploidy, slowed proliferation, provides a selective benefit to cancer cells during chemotherapy treatment.

Tumor Markers in the Diagnosis, Monitoring and Therapy of Pancreatic Cancer: State of the Art

The present review focuses on the utility of serum tumor markers in screening, diagnosis, prognosis and monitoring of pancreatic cancer. Serum determination of all tumor markers studied offers no help in screening or early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. For diagnosis, blood group-related antigens, in particular CA 19-9, are considered the best indicators of this neoplasm. However, as occurs with other glycoproteic tumor markers, the circulating levels of CA 19-9 are significantly influenced by jaundice, probably because its liver metabolism is reduced. Therefore, the finding of elevated CA 19-9 levels in jaundiced patients has to be evaluated with caution. Since pancreatic cancer recurrences are not susceptible to treatment, the clinical role of widespread use of tumor marker determination in follow-up programs is limited and calls for a critical evaluation.

Precision Immuno-Oncology: Prospects of Individualized Immunotherapy for Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer, most commonly referring to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), remains one of the most deadly diseases, with very few effective therapies available. Emerging as a new modality of modern cancer treatments, immunotherapy has shown promises for various cancer types. Over the past decades, the potential of immunotherapy in eliciting clinical benefits in pancreatic cancer have also been extensively explored. It has been demonstrated in preclinical studies and early phase clinical trials that cancer vaccines were effective in eliciting anti-tumor immune response, but few have led to a significant improvement in survival. Despite the fact that immunotherapy with checkpoint blockade (e.g., anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 [CTLA-4] and anti-programmed cell death 1 [PD-1]/PD-L1 antibodies) has shown remarkable and durable responses in various cancer types, the application of checkpoint inhibitors in pancreatic cancer has been disappointing so far. It may, in part, due to the unique tumor microenvironment (TME) of pancreatic cancer, such as existence of excessive stromal matrix and hypovascularity, creating a TME of strong inhibitory signaling circuits and tremendous physical barriers for immune agent infiltration. This informs on the need for combination therapy approaches to engender a potent immune response that can translate to clinical benefits. On the other hand, lack of effective and validated biomarkers to stratify subgroup of patients who can benefit from immunotherapy poses further challenges for the realization of precision immune-oncology. Future studies addressing issues such as TME modulation, biomarker identification and therapeutic combination are warranted. In this review, advances in immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer were discussed and opportunities as well as challenges for personalized immune-oncology were addressed.

Tumor budding as a strong prognostic indicator in invasive ampullary adenocarcinomas

Prognostication of invasive ampullary adenocarcinomas (AACs) and their stratification into appropriate management categories have been highly challenging owing to a lack of well-established predictive parameters. In colorectal cancers, recent studies have shown that tumor budding confers a worse prognosis and correlates significantly with nodal metastasis and recurrence; however, this has not been evaluated in AAC.To investigate the prevalence, significance, and clinical correlations of tumor budding in AAC, 244 surgically resected, stringently defined, invasive AAC were analyzed for tumor budding---defined as the presence of more than or equal to 5 isolated single cancer cells or clusters composed of fewer than 5 cancer cells per field measuring 0.785 mm using a 20× objective lens in the stroma of the invasive front. The extent of the budding was then further classified as "high" if there were greater than or equal to 3 budding foci and as "low" if there were <3 budding foci or no budding focus.One hundred ninety-four AACs (80%) were found to be high-budding and 50 (20%) were low-budding. When the clinicopathologic features and survival of the 2 groups were compared, the AACs with high-budding had larger invasion size (19 mm vs. 13 mm; P<0.001), an unrecognizable/absent preinvasive component (57% vs. 82%; P<0.005), infiltrative growth (51% vs. 2%; P<0.001), nonintestinal-type histology (72% vs. 46%; P<0.001), worse differentiation (58% vs. 10%; P<0.001), more lymphatic (74% vs. 10%; P<0.001), and perineural invasion (28% vs. 2%; P<0.001); more lymph node metastasis (44% vs. 17%; P<0.001), higher T-stage (T3 and T4) (42% vs. 10%; P<0.001), and more aggressive behavior (mean survival: 50 mo vs. 32 mo; 3-year and 5-year survival rates: 93% vs. 41% and 68% vs. 24%, respectively; P<0.001). Furthermore, using a multivariable Cox regression model, tumor budding was found to be an independent predictor of survival (P=0.01), which impacts prognosis (hazard ratio: 2.6) even more than T-stage and lymph node metastasis (hazard ratio: 1.9 and 1.8, respectively).In conclusion, tumor budding is frequently encountered in AAC. High-budding is a strong independent predictor of overall survival, with a prognostic correlation stronger than the 2 established parameters: T-stage and lymph node metastasis. Therefore, budding should be incorporated into surgical pathology reports for AAC.

Road to the crossroads of life and death: linking sister chromatid cohesion and separation to aneuploidy, apoptosis and cancer

Genomic instability, aberrant cell proliferation and defects in apoptotic cell death are critical issues in cancer. The two most prominent hallmarks of cancer cells are multiple mutations in key genes encoding proteins that regulate important cell-survival pathways, and marked restructuring or redistribution of the chromosomes (aneuploidy) indicative of genomic instability. Both these aspects have been suggested to cause cancer, though a causal role for chromosomal restructuring in tumorigenesis has not been experimentally fully substantiated. This review is aimed at understanding the mechanisms of cell cycle (proliferation) and programmed cell death (apoptosis) and chromosomal instability governed by cohesin and other aneuploidy promoters, which will provide new insights into the process of carcinogenesis and new avenues for targeted treatment.

Prognostic value of histological grading in ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Klöppel vs TNM grading

A new histological grading system with prognostic correlation for pancreatic cancer was proposed by Klöppel et al. in 1985. Histological sections from 60 ductal adenocarcinomas operated on between January 1980 and December 1990 were retrospectively reviewed in order to compare Klöppel's grading with standard TNM's grading and assess their prognostic value. Klöppel grading was determined through the following histologic and cytologic factors: number duct-like structures, mucus production, neoplastic epithelium, arrangement and pleomorphism of nuclei, and mitotic activity. A score from 0 (well differentiated) to 2 (poorly differentiated) was given to each factor. The mean value obtained dividing the sum of the different values by the number of parameters was used to construct a malignancy scale and therefore allocate each patient to his Klöppel grading. The concordance index K between the two grading systems was relevant (K = 0.85 p < 0.001). There was no relation either between gradings (Klöppel or TNM) and preoperative duration of symptoms or between gradings and UICC stages. TNM's G2 grades of malignancy, N status, and tumor stage were significantly related to survival time (p < 0.05). Klöppel's grading does not show any advantage over the classical and simpler TNM's grading, even though it can be considered more objective and therefore more easily reproducible. This characteristic further should be enhanced by the introduction of a malignancy scale such as the "mean value."