Pancreatic fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation in surgical specimens associated with survival in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Acinar Cells
/ pathology
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Atrophy
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ analysis
Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal
/ mortality
Chronic Disease
Disease-Free Survival
Female
Fibrosis
Humans
Inflammation
Male
Middle Aged
Pancreas
/ pathology
Pancreatectomy
/ mortality
Pancreatic Neoplasms
/ mortality
Pancreatitis
/ complications
Prognosis
Proportional Hazards Models
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Survival Rate
Chronic pancreatitis
Pancreatic cancer
Stroma
Tumor–stroma interactions
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Jan 2022
03 Jan 2022
Historique:
received:
09
06
2021
accepted:
29
11
2021
entrez:
4
1
2022
pubmed:
5
1
2022
medline:
4
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), one of the most lethal malignancies, is increasing in incidence. However, the stromal reaction pathophysiology and its role in PDAC development remain unknown. We, therefore, investigated the potential role of histological chronic pancreatitis findings and chronic inflammation on surgical PDAC specimens and disease-specific survival (DSS). Between 2000 and 2016, we retrospectively enrolled 236 PDAC patients treated with curative-intent pancreatic surgery at Helsinki University Hospital. All pancreatic transection margin slides were re-reviewed and histological findings were evaluated applying international guidelines. DSS among patients with no fibrosis, acinar atrophy or chronic inflammation identified on pathology slides was significantly better than DSS among patients with fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation [median survival: 41.8 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) 26.0-57.6 vs. 20.6 months, 95% CI 10.3-30.9; log-rank test p = 0.001]. Multivariate analysis revealed that Ca 19-9 > 37 kU/l [hazard ratio (HR) 1.48, 95% CI 1.02-2.16], lymph node metastases N1-2 (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.16-2.52), tumor size > 30 mm (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.04-2.08), the combined effect of fibrosis and acinar atrophy (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.27-2.88) and the combined effect of fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.03-2.58) independently served as unfavorable prognostic factors for DSS. However, we observed no significant associations between tumor size (> 30 mm) and the degree of perilobular fibrosis (p = 0.655), intralobular fibrosis (p = 0.587), acinar atrophy (p = 0.584) or chronic inflammation (p = 0.453). Our results indicate that the pancreatic stroma is associated with PDAC patients' DSS. Additionally, the more severe the fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation, the worse the impact on DSS, thereby warranting further studies investigating stroma-targeted therapies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), one of the most lethal malignancies, is increasing in incidence. However, the stromal reaction pathophysiology and its role in PDAC development remain unknown. We, therefore, investigated the potential role of histological chronic pancreatitis findings and chronic inflammation on surgical PDAC specimens and disease-specific survival (DSS).
METHODS
METHODS
Between 2000 and 2016, we retrospectively enrolled 236 PDAC patients treated with curative-intent pancreatic surgery at Helsinki University Hospital. All pancreatic transection margin slides were re-reviewed and histological findings were evaluated applying international guidelines.
RESULTS
RESULTS
DSS among patients with no fibrosis, acinar atrophy or chronic inflammation identified on pathology slides was significantly better than DSS among patients with fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation [median survival: 41.8 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) 26.0-57.6 vs. 20.6 months, 95% CI 10.3-30.9; log-rank test p = 0.001]. Multivariate analysis revealed that Ca 19-9 > 37 kU/l [hazard ratio (HR) 1.48, 95% CI 1.02-2.16], lymph node metastases N1-2 (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.16-2.52), tumor size > 30 mm (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.04-2.08), the combined effect of fibrosis and acinar atrophy (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.27-2.88) and the combined effect of fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.03-2.58) independently served as unfavorable prognostic factors for DSS. However, we observed no significant associations between tumor size (> 30 mm) and the degree of perilobular fibrosis (p = 0.655), intralobular fibrosis (p = 0.587), acinar atrophy (p = 0.584) or chronic inflammation (p = 0.453).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results indicate that the pancreatic stroma is associated with PDAC patients' DSS. Additionally, the more severe the fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation, the worse the impact on DSS, thereby warranting further studies investigating stroma-targeted therapies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34980011
doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-09080-0
pii: 10.1186/s12885-021-09080-0
pmc: PMC8721973
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
23Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
PLoS One. 2020 Jul 13;15(7):e0234568
pubmed: 32658932
Pancreatology. 2020 Jul;20(5):910-918
pubmed: 32624419
Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2009 Aug;9(4):411-8
pubmed: 19589727
Br J Surg. 2015 Nov;102(12):1459-72
pubmed: 26350029
Am J Gastroenterol. 2017 Sep;112(9):1366-1372
pubmed: 28762376
Gut. 2018 Jan;67(1):146-156
pubmed: 27646934
Int J Surg. 2013;11(10):1067-72
pubmed: 24161419
PLoS One. 2016 Sep 15;11(9):e0163064
pubmed: 27632196
Br J Surg. 2003 Feb;90(2):215-9
pubmed: 12555298
Cancer Epidemiol. 2020 Feb;64:101647
pubmed: 31811984
N Engl J Med. 2018 Dec 20;379(25):2395-2406
pubmed: 30575490
Pancreatology. 2020 Mar;20(2):254-264
pubmed: 31866391
Int J Clin Oncol. 2021 Oct;26(10):1922-1928
pubmed: 34110531
JAMA. 2013 Oct 9;310(14):1473-81
pubmed: 24104372
Int J Cancer. 2015 May 1;136(9):2216-27
pubmed: 25273947
Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Dec;102(12):2696-707
pubmed: 17764494
Pancreas. 1991 May;6(3):266-74
pubmed: 1862065
JAMA. 2010 Sep 8;304(10):1073-81
pubmed: 20823433
BMC Cancer. 2019 Aug 29;19(1):858
pubmed: 31464604
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Jan;68(1):7-30
pubmed: 29313949
Am J Pathol. 2010 Nov;177(5):2585-96
pubmed: 20934972
Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2009 May 8;382(3):561-5
pubmed: 19292977
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Jun 1;38(16):1763-1773
pubmed: 32105518
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009 Mar;133(3):382-7
pubmed: 19260744
Int J Cancer. 2020 Sep 1;147(5):1450-1460
pubmed: 32162688
Cancer Cell. 2007 Mar;11(3):291-302
pubmed: 17349585
Eur J Med Res. 2020 Oct 7;25(1):46
pubmed: 33028394
Ann Oncol. 2012 Nov;23(11):2964-2970
pubmed: 22767586
Pancreatology. 2010;10(2-3):186-93
pubmed: 20484957
Nature. 2008 Jul 24;454(7203):436-44
pubmed: 18650914
N Engl J Med. 1993 May 20;328(20):1433-7
pubmed: 8479461
Ann Oncol. 2014 Oct;25(10):2065-2072
pubmed: 25057164
Neoplasia. 2014 Jun;16(6):463-70
pubmed: 24953430
Dig Liver Dis. 2017 Nov;49(11):1249-1256
pubmed: 28756974
HPB (Oxford). 2015 Apr;17(4):292-8
pubmed: 25250696
Br J Cancer. 2014 Jan 7;110(1):183-8
pubmed: 24201751
Cell. 2019 Jun 27;178(1):160-175.e27
pubmed: 31155233
Pancreas. 2018 Nov-Dec;47(10):1262-1266
pubmed: 30286010
Pancreatology. 2020 Jun;20(4):586-593
pubmed: 32414657
Ann Oncol. 2012 Apr;23(4):843-52
pubmed: 21890910
Front Oncol. 2020 Aug 21;10:1472
pubmed: 32974173