Cited by 1,081Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchPancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances

DPC4 Gene Status of the Primary Carcinoma Correlates With Patterns of Failure in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer

Open access
Iacobuzio-Donahue, Christine A., Fu, Baojin, Yachida, Shinichi, Luo, Mingde, Abe, Hisashi, Henderson, Clark M., Vilardell, Felip, Wang, Zheng +12 more·2009·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Contrary to the extensive data accumulated regarding pancreatic carcinogenesis, the clinical and molecular features characteristic of advanced stage (stage III and IV) disease are unknown. A comprehensive study of pancreatic cancers from patients who have succumbed to their disease has the potential to greatly expand our understanding of the most lethal stage of this disease and identify novel areas for intervention. Materials and Methods: Rapid autopsies were performed on 76 patients with documented pancreatic cancer. The histologic features of end stage disease were determined and correlated to the stage at initial diagnosis, patterns of failure (locally destructive v metastatic disease) and the status of the KRAS2, TP53, and DPC4 genes. Results: At autopsy, 30% of patients died with locally destructive pancreatic cancer, and 70% died with widespread metastatic disease. These divergent patterns of failure found at autopsy (locally destructive v metastatic) were unrelated to clinical stage at initial presentation, treatment history, or histopathologic features. However, Dpc4 immunolabeling status of carcinoma tissues harvested at autopsy, a sensitive marker of DPC4 genetic status, was highly correlated with the presence of widespread metastasis but not with locally destructive tumors (P = .007). Conclusion: Pancreatic cancers are represented by distinct genetic subtypes with significantly different patterns of failure. Determinations of DPC4 status at initial diagnosis may be of value in stratifying patients into treatment regimens related to local control versus systemic therapy.

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 · 10.1200/jco.2008.17.7188

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?

  • SMAD4 loss is associated with higher rates of metastatic dissemination during neoadjuvant therapy and terminal disease.

    “is associated with higher rates of metastatic dissemination during neoadjuvant therapy and terminal disease55,56.”

    From Pancreatic cancer: Advances and challenges (2023) · cites this paper as [55]

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
Iacobuzio-Donahue, C. A., Fu, B., Yachida, S., Luo, M., Abe, H., Henderson, C. M., Vilardell, F., Wang, Z., Keller, J. W., Banerjee, P., Herman, J. M., Cameron, J. L., Yeo, C. J., Halushka, M. K., Eshleman, J. R., Raben, M., Klein, A. P., Hruban, R. H., Hidalgo, M., & Laheru, D.
Affiliations
  • From the Departments of Pathology, Surgery, and Oncology, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore MD; and the Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and Department of Surgery and the Jefferson Pancreas, Biliary and Related Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia PA.
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2009-04-10
Volume
27
Issue
11
Pages
1806-1813
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2118797060
Cited by
1,081
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 87 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 69 · 2018: 75 · 2017: 103 · 2016: 81 · 2015: 89 · 2014: 90 · 2013: 71 · 2012: 59
FWCI
19.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Rolfe Pancreatic Cancer Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (CA62924)
  • National Cancer Institute (K08CA106610, CA106610, P50CA062924, CA 62924)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Neuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Keywords
pancreatic cancer, failure patterns, metastasis, KRAS2, TP53, autopsy, genetic subtypes, advanced disease
MeSH terms
Adenocarcinoma, Aged, Autopsy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Proto-Oncogene Proteins, Survival Analysis, Genes, p53, Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras), Treatment Failure, Carcinoma, Adenosquamous, ras Proteins, Smad4 Protein

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