Cited by 1,967Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsBreast Cancer Treatment Studies

Subtypes of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and their differing responses to therapy

Open access
Collisson, Eric A, Sadanandam, Anguraj, Olson, Peter, Gibb, William J, Truitt, Morgan, Gu, Shenda, Cooc, Janine, Weinkle, Jennifer +10 more·2011·Nature Medicine

Abstract

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is a lethal disease. Overall survival is typically 6 months from diagnosis. Numerous phase 3 trials of agents effective in other malignancies have failed to benefit unselected PDA populations, although patients do occasionally respond. Studies in other solid tumors have shown that heterogeneity in response is determined, in part, by molecular differences between tumors. Furthermore, treatment outcomes are improved by targeting drugs to tumor subtypes in which they are selectively effective, with breast and lung cancers providing recent examples. Identification of PDA molecular subtypes has been frustrated by a paucity of tumor specimens available for study. We have overcome this problem by combined analysis of transcriptional profiles of primary PDA samples from several studies, along with human and mouse PDA cell lines. We define three PDA subtypes: classical, quasimesenchymal and exocrine-like, and we present evidence for clinical outcome and therapeutic response differences between them. We further define gene signatures for these subtypes that may have utility in stratifying patients for treatment and present preclinical model systems that may be used to identify new subtype specific therapies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nm.2344

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Collisson, Sadanandam and colleagues identified three PDAC subtypes-classical, quasimesenchymal, and exocrine-like-using patient microarray datasets and PDAC cell lines.

    “They identified three subtypes, termed “classical”, “quasimesenchymal”, and “exocrine-like”130.”

    From Pancreatic cancer: Advances and challenges (2023) · cites this paper as [130]

  • These three subtypes could predict drug response in cell culture models, and patient outcomes differed significantly across subtypes.

    “these subtypes could predict drug response in cell culture models, and patient outcomes were significantly different across their subtypes.”

    From Pancreatic cancer: Advances and challenges (2023) · cites this paper as [130]

  • The glycolytic metabolic subtype aligns with a quasimesenchymal transcriptional subtype, and the lipogenic metabolic state aligns with a classical signature.

    “The glycolytic metabolic subtype aligns with a “quasimesenchymal” transcriptional subtype and lipogenic metabolism state with a “classical” signature130.”

    From Pancreatic cancer: Advances and challenges (2023) · cites this paper as [130]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Collisson, E. A., Sadanandam, A., Olson, P., Gibb, W. J., Truitt, M., Gu, S., Cooc, J., Weinkle, J., Kim, G. E., Jakkula, L., Feiler, H. S., Ko, A. H., Olshen, A. B., Danenberg, K. L., Tempero, M. A., Spellman, P. T., Hanahan, D., & Gray, J. W.
Affiliations
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Gray, Joe W
Venue
Nature Medicine
Published
2011-04
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
500-503
ISSN
  • 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-170X
OpenAlex
W2154790710
Cited by
1,967
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 142 · 2025: 155 · 2024: 163 · 2023: 200 · 2022: 215 · 2021: 221 · 2020: 193 · 2019: 146 · 2018: 121 · 2017: 109 · 2016: 90 · 2015: 64 · 2014: 46 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 39
FWCI
22.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (K08CA137153, P50CA058207, P50CA083639, P01CA117969, U54CA112970)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
Keywords
pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, tumor subtypes, classical subtype, gene expression signatures, gene expression profiling, treatment response, prognosis, molecular heterogeneity
MeSH terms
Erlotinib Hydrochloride, Gemcitabine, Animals, Antineoplastic Agents, Deoxycytidine, Female, Humans, Male, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Pharmacogenetics, Proto-Oncogene Proteins, Quinazolines, Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras), ras Proteins, Gene Expression Profiling, Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal, Cell Line, Tumor, GATA6 Transcription Factor, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review