Cited by 71Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchTGF-β signaling in diseasesCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies

SMAD4 Expression Predicts Local Spread and Treatment Failure in Resected Pancreatic Cancer

Yamada, Suguru, Fujii, Tsutomu, Shimoyama, Yoshie, Kanda, Mitsuro, Nakayama, Goro, Sugimoto, Hiroyuki, Koike, Masahiko, Nomoto, Shuji +3 more·2015·Pancreas

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic relevance of SMAD4 expression in pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We analyzed the correlations between SMAD4 expression and clinicopathological parameters and outcome in 174 patients with pancreatic cancer. Specimens were also classified into subtypes reflecting epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, based on E-cadherin and vimentin. RESULTS: We found that 59.8% (104/174) of patients were SMAD4 and 40.2% (70/174) were SMAD4. Disease-specific survival in patients with SMAD4 was significantly better than that in SMAD4. SMAD4 status was significantly correlated with portal vein invasion, lymph vessel invasion, and perineural invasion and was an independent prognostic factor. SMAD4 was significantly associated with mesenchymal phenotype. The loss of SMAD4 expression was found in 49.4% of patients with no vascular invasion, 61.9% with portal vein invasion, 76.5% with common hepatic artery invasion, and 80.8% with superior mesenteric artery invasion. In addition, the specimens from 59.0% of patients with local recurrence, 66.7% of those with both local and distant recurrence, and 73.7% of those with distant recurrence were SMAD4. CONCLUSIONS: The loss of SMAD4 expression is an independent prognostic factor and seems to be associated with tumor progression, pattern of failure, and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition status. Preoperative stratification based on SMAD4 could lead to appropriate treatment strategy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/mpa.0000000000000315

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Multivariate analysis identified SMAD4− as the most prominent prognostic factor for PDAC, alongside elevated CA19-9 levels and metastatic characteristics.

    “Multivariate analysis identified SMAD4− as the most prominent prognostic factor for PDAC, emphasizing its significance alongside other factors like elevated CA19-9 levels and metastatic characteristics [79].”
  • In one study, 59.8% of specimens were SMAD4−, correlating significantly with adverse clinicopathological parameters and adverse EMT status.

    “In one study, 59.8% of specimens were SMAD4−, correlating significantly with adverse clinicopathological parameters and adverse EMT status.”
  • Patients with SMAD4+ experienced significantly better disease-specific and disease-free survival compared to SMAD4− counterparts.

    “Patients with SMAD4+ experienced significantly better disease-specific and disease-free survival compared to their SMAD4− counterparts.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yamada, S., Fujii, T., Shimoyama, Y., Kanda, M., Nakayama, G., Sugimoto, H., Koike, M., Nomoto, S., Fujiwara, M., Nakao, A., & Kodera, Y.
Affiliations
  • Nagoya University Hospital (JP)
  • Nagoya Central Hospital (JP)
Corresponding author
  • Yamada, Suguru
  • Fujii, Tsutomu
  • Kanda, Mitsuro
  • Nakayama, Goro
  • Sugimoto, Hiroyuki
  • Koike, Masahiko
  • Nomoto, Shuji
  • Fujiwara, Michitaka
  • Kodera, Yasuhiro
Venue
Pancreas
Published
2015-05
Volume
44
Issue
4
Pages
660-664
ISSN
0885-3177 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2005272613
Cited by
71
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3
FWCI
4.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pancreas (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › TGF-β signaling in diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Keywords
SMAD4, pancreatic cancer, prognostic factors, SMAD4 loss, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, portal vein invasion, lymph vessel invasion, perineural invasion, local recurrence, disease-specific survival, vimentin, E-cadherin, resected pancreatic cancer
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Invasiveness, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Pancreatectomy, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Prognosis, Biomarkers, Tumor, Pancreaticoduodenectomy, Treatment Failure, Disease Progression, Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal, Smad4 Protein, Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition

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