Cited by 129Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsGenetic factors in colorectal cancer

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms arise from multiple independent clones, each with distinct mutations

Open access
Fischer, Catherine G., Beleva Guthrie, Violeta, Braxton, Alicia M., Zheng, Lily, Wang, Pei, Song, Qianqian, Griffin, James F., Chianchiano, Peter E. +15 more·2019·Gastroenterology

Abstract

Background & aims Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) are lesions that can progress to invasive pancreatic cancer and constitute an important system for studies of pancreatic tumorigenesis. We performed comprehensive genomic analyses of entire IPMNs to determine the diversity of somatic mutations in genes that promote tumorigenesis.Methods We microdissected neoplastic tissues from 6-24 regions each of 20 resected IPMNs, resulting in 227 neoplastic samples that were analyzed by capture-based targeted sequencing. Somatic mutations in genes associated with pancreatic tumorigenesis were assessed across entire IPMN lesions, and the resulting data were supported by evolutionary modeling, whole-exome sequencing, and in situ detection of mutations.Results We found a high prevalence of heterogeneity among mutations in IPMNs. Heterogeneity in mutations in KRAS and GNAS was significantly more prevalent in IPMNs with low-grade dysplasia than in IPMNs with high-grade dysplasia (P < .02). Whole-exome sequencing confirmed that IPMNs contained multiple independent clones, each with distinct mutations, as originally indicated by targeted sequencing and evolutionary modeling. We also found evidence for convergent evolution of mutations in RNF43 and TP53, which are acquired during later stages of tumorigenesis.Conclusions In an analysis of the heterogeneity of mutations throughout IPMNs, we found that early-stage IPMNs contain multiple independent clones, each with distinct mutations, indicating their polyclonal origin. These findings challenge the model in which pancreatic neoplasms arise from a single clone. Increasing our understanding of the mechanisms of IPMN polyclonality could lead to strategies to identify patients at increased risk for pancreatic cancer.

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 · 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.06.001

Cites

44 of 44 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

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
Fischer, C. G., Beleva Guthrie, V., Braxton, A. M., Zheng, L., Wang, P., Song, Q., Griffin, J. F., Chianchiano, P. E., Hosoda, W., Niknafs, N., Springer, S., Dal Molin, M., Masica, D., Scharpf, R. B., Thompson, E. D., He, J., Wolfgang, C. L., Hruban, R. H., Roberts, N. J., Lennon, A. M., Jiao, Y., Karchin, R., & Wood, L. D.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Karchin, Rachel
  • Wood, Laura D.
Venue
Gastroenterology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-10
Volume
157
Issue
4
Pages
1123-1137.e22
ISSN
0016-5085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2948414055
Cited by
129
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 2
FWCI
6.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Gastroenterology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • American Gastroenterological Association
  • American Association for Cancer Research
  • Incyte
  • American Cancer Society
  • Gerald O. Mann Charitable Foundation
  • National Cancer Institute (P50 CA62924)
  • Rolfe Pancreatic Cancer Foundation
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K08 DK107781)
  • Joseph C. Monastra Foundation for Pancreatic Cancer Research
  • Lustgarten Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
Keywords
intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, pancreatic cancer, polyclonal origin, clonal heterogeneity, somatic mutations, KRAS, GNAS, RNF43, TP53, convergent evolution, pancreatic carcinogenesis, dysplasia, microdissection, tumor evolution
MeSH terms
Pancreatic Intraductal Neoplasms, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cell Transformation, Neoplastic, Chromogranins, DNA Mutational Analysis, DNA-Binding Proteins, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mutation, Neoplasm Staging, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Phenotype, Retrospective Studies, Biomarkers, Tumor, Oncogene Proteins, Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras), Evolution, Molecular, GTP-Binding Protein alpha Subunits, Gs, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Ubiquitin-Protein Ligases, Mutation Rate, Clonal Evolution

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