1
|
Vallés-Martí A, Mantini G, Manoukian P, Waasdorp C, Sarasqueta AF, de Goeij-de Haas RR, Henneman AA, Piersma SR, Pham TV, Knol JC, Giovannetti E, Bijlsma MF, Jiménez CR. Phosphoproteomics guides effective low-dose drug combinations against pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Cell Rep 2023; 42:112581. [PMID: 37269289 DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112581] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2022] [Revised: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 05/16/2023] [Indexed: 06/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a devastating disease with a limited set of known driver mutations but considerable cancer cell heterogeneity. Phosphoproteomics provides a readout of aberrant signaling and has the potential to identify new targets and guide treatment decisions. Using two-step sequential phosphopeptide enrichment, we generate a comprehensive phosphoproteome and proteome of nine PDAC cell lines, encompassing more than 20,000 phosphosites on 5,763 phospho-proteins, including 316 protein kinases. By using integrative inferred kinase activity (INKA) scoring, we identify multiple (parallel) activated kinases that are subsequently matched to kinase inhibitors. Compared with high-dose single-drug treatments, INKA-tailored low-dose 3-drug combinations against multiple targets demonstrate superior efficacy against PDAC cell lines, organoid cultures, and patient-derived xenografts. Overall, this approach is particularly more effective against the aggressive mesenchymal PDAC model compared with the epithelial model in both preclinical settings and may contribute to improved treatment outcomes in PDAC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Vallés-Martí
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, OncoProteomics Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Biology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Pharmacology Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Giulia Mantini
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, OncoProteomics Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Pharmacology Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Pharmacology Lab, AIRC Start-Up Unit, Fondazione Pisana per la Scienza, San Giuliano Terme, Pisa, Italy
| | - Paul Manoukian
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Biology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cynthia Waasdorp
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Biology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Richard R de Goeij-de Haas
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, OncoProteomics Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Alex A Henneman
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, OncoProteomics Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sander R Piersma
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, OncoProteomics Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thang V Pham
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, OncoProteomics Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jaco C Knol
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, OncoProteomics Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Elisa Giovannetti
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Pharmacology Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Pharmacology Lab, AIRC Start-Up Unit, Fondazione Pisana per la Scienza, San Giuliano Terme, Pisa, Italy
| | - Maarten F Bijlsma
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Biology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Connie R Jiménez
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, OncoProteomics Laboratory, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Suurmeijer JA, Soer EC, Dings MPG, Kim Y, Strijker M, Bonsing BA, Brosens LAA, Busch OR, Groen JV, Halfwerk JB, Slooff RAE, van Laarhoven HWM, Molenaar IQ, Offerhaus GJA, Morreau H, van de Vijver MJ, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Verheij J, Besselink MG, Bijlsma MF, Dijk F. Impact of classical and basal-like molecular subtypes on overall survival in resected pancreatic cancer in the SPACIOUS-2 multicentre study. Br J Surg 2022; 109:1150-1155. [PMID: 35979597 PMCID: PMC10364758 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znac272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2022] [Revised: 04/30/2022] [Accepted: 07/15/2022] [Indexed: 08/02/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The recently identified classical and basal-like molecular subtypes of pancreatic cancer impact on overall survival (OS). However, the added value of routine subtyping in both clinical practice and randomized trials is still unclear, as most studies do not consider clinicopathological parameters. This study examined the clinical prognostic value of molecular subtyping in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS Subtypes were determined on fresh-frozen resected pancreatic cancer samples from three Dutch centres using the Purity Independent Subtyping of Tumours classification. Patient, treatment, and histopathological variables were compared between subtypes. The prognostic value of subtyping in (simulated) pre- and postoperative settings was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS Of 199 patients with resected pancreatic cancer, 164 (82.4 per cent) were classified as the classical and 35 (17.6 per cent) as the basal-like subtype. Patients with a basal-like subtype had worse OS (11 versus 16 months (HR 1.49, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 2.15; P = 0.035)) than patients with a classical subtype. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, including only clinical variables, the basal-like subtype was a statistically significant predictor for poor OS (HR 1.61, 95 per cent c.i. 1.11 to 2.34; P = 0.013). When histopathological variables were added to this model, the prognostic value of subtyping decreased (HR 1.49, 95 per cent c.i. 1.01 to 2.19; P = 0.045). CONCLUSION The basal-like subtype was associated with worse OS in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Adding molecular classification to inform on tumor biology may be used in patient stratification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Annelie Suurmeijer
- *Correspondence to: Frederike Dijk, Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9 (AMC hospital), 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands (e-mail: ); Marc Gerard Besselink, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (VUMC Hospital, ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands (e-mail: )
| | - Eline C Soer
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mark P G Dings
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Yongsoo Kim
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marin Strijker
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Lodewijk A A Brosens
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Faculty of Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jesse V Groen
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes B Halfwerk
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robbert A E Slooff
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hanneke W M van Laarhoven
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein & University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - G Johan A Offerhaus
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Faculty of Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hans Morreau
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Marc J van de Vijver
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joanne Verheij
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- *Correspondence to: Frederike Dijk, Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9 (AMC hospital), 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands (e-mail: ); Marc Gerard Besselink, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (VUMC Hospital, ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands (e-mail: )
| | - Maarten F Bijlsma
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Frederike Dijk
- *Correspondence to: Frederike Dijk, Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9 (AMC hospital), 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands (e-mail: ); Marc Gerard Besselink, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (VUMC Hospital, ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands (e-mail: )
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Moons LMG, Bastiaansen BAJ, Richir MC, Hazen WL, Tuynman J, Elias SG, Schrauwen RWM, Vleggaar FP, Dekker E, Bos P, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Lacle M, Hompes R, Didden P. Endoscopic intermuscular dissection for deep submucosal invasive cancer in the rectum: a new endoscopic approach. Endoscopy 2022; 54:993-998. [PMID: 35073588 DOI: 10.1055/a-1748-8573] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The risk of lymph node metastasis associated with deep submucosal invasion should be balanced against the mortality and morbidity of total mesorectal excision (TME). Dissection through the submucosa hinders radical deep resection, and full-thickness resection may influence the outcome of completion TME. Endoscopic intermuscular dissection (EID) in between the circular and longitudinal part of the muscularis propria could potentially provide an R0 resection while leaving the rectal wall intact. METHODS In this prospective cohort study, the data of patients treated with EID for suspected deep submucosal invasive rectal cancer between 2018 and 2020 were analyzed. Study outcomes were the percentages of technical success, R0 resection, curative resection, and adverse events. RESULTS 67 patients (median age 67 years; 73 % men) were included. The median lesion size was 25 mm (interquartile range 20-33 mm). The rates of overall technical success, R0 resection, and curative resection were 96 % (95 %CI 89 %-99 %), 81 % (95 %CI 70 %-89 %), and 45 % (95 %CI 33 %-57 %). Only minor adverse events occurred in eight patients (12 %). CONCLUSION EID for deep invasive T1 rectal cancer appears to be feasible and safe, and the high R0 resection rate creates the potential of rectal preserving therapy in 45 % of patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leon M G Moons
- Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Milan C Richir
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Wouter L Hazen
- Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Elizabeth Tweesteden Ziekenhuis, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sjoerd G Elias
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ruud W M Schrauwen
- Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Bernhoven, Uden, The Netherlands
| | - Frank P Vleggaar
- Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Evelien Dekker
- Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Philip Bos
- Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Gelderse Vallei, Ede, The Netherlands
| | | | - Miangela Lacle
- Department of Pathology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Roel Hompes
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Paul Didden
- Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Schouten TJ, Daamen LA, Dorland G, van Roessel SR, Groot VP, Besselink MG, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Brosens LAA, Busch OR, van Dam RM, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Intven M, Kazemier G, de Meijer VE, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Raicu GM, Roos D, Schreinemakers JMJ, Stommel MWJ, van Velthuysen MF, Verdonk RC, Verheij J, Verkooijen HM, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ. Nationwide Validation of the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM Staging System and Five Proposed Modifications for Resected Pancreatic Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:5988-5999. [PMID: 35469113 PMCID: PMC9356941 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11664-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2021] [Accepted: 03/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The prognostic value of four proposed modifications to the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system has yet to be evaluated. This study aimed to validate five proposed modifications. METHODS Patients who underwent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma resection (2014-2016), as registered in the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit, were included. Stratification and prognostication of TNM staging systems were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox proportional hazard analyses, and C-indices. A new modification was composed based on overall survival (OS). RESULTS Overall, 750 patients with a median OS of 18 months (interquartile range 10-32) were included. The 8th edition had an increased discriminative ability compared with the 7th edition {C-index 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.61) vs. 0.56 (95% CI 0.54-0.58)}. Although the 8th edition showed a stepwise decrease in OS with increasing stage, no differences could be demonstrated between all substages; stage IIA vs. IB (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30, 95% CI 0.80-2.09; p = 0.29) and stage IIB vs. IIA (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.75-1.83; p = 0.48). The four modifications showed comparable prognostic accuracy (C-index 0.59-0.60); however, OS did not differ between all modified TNM stages (ns). The new modification, migrating T3N1 patients to stage III, showed a C-index of 0.59, but did detect significant survival differences between all TNM stages (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS The 8th TNM staging system still lacks prognostic value for some categories of patients, which was not clearly improved by four previously proposed modifications. The modification suggested in this study allows for better prognostication in patients with all stages of disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs J. Schouten
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Lois A. Daamen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Galina Dorland
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stijn R. van Roessel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent P. Groot
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A. Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | | | - Olivier R. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M. van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Ignace H. J. T. de Hingh
- GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent E. de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - G. Mihaela Raicu
- Department of Pathology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Robert C. Verdonk
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Joanne Verheij
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Helena M. Verkooijen
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C. van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - I. Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - The Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Schouten TJ, Daamen LA, Dorland G, van Roessel SR, Groot VP, Besselink MG, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Brosens LAA, Busch OR, van Dam RM, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Intven M, Kazemier G, de Meijer VE, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Raicu GM, Roos D, Schreinemakers JMJ, Stommel MWJ, van Velthuysen MF, Verdonk RC, Verheij J, Verkooijen HM, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ. Correction to: Nationwide Validation of the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM Staging System and Five Proposed Modifications for Resected Pancreatic Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:7820-7821. [PMID: 35798899 PMCID: PMC9550723 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-12182-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs J Schouten
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Lois A Daamen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Galina Dorland
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stijn R van Roessel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent P Groot
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | | | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - G Mihaela Raicu
- Department of Pathology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, The Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Robert C Verdonk
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Joanne Verheij
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
de Jong EJM, Mommers I, Fariña Sarasqueta A, van der Geest LG, Heij L, de Hingh IHJT, Homs MYV, Tjan-Heijnen VCG, Valkenburg-van Iersel LBJ, Wilmink JW, Geurts SME, de Vos-Geelen J. Adjuvant and first-line palliative chemotherapy regimens in patients diagnosed with periampullary cancer: a short report from a nationwide registry. Acta Oncol 2022; 61:591-596. [PMID: 35382678 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2022.2053199] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Evelien J. M. de Jong
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Center, GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Irene Mommers
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Center, GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Center Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lydia G. van der Geest
- Department of Research and Innovation, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Lara Heij
- Department of Surgery, School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of General, Gastrointestinal, Hepatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Aachen, Germany
- Institute of Pathology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
| | - Ignace H. J. T. de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
- GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Marjolein Y. V. Homs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Vivianne C. G. Tjan-Heijnen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Center, GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Liselot B. J. Valkenburg-van Iersel
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Center, GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Johanna W. Wilmink
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Center Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sandra M. E. Geurts
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Center, GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Judith de Vos-Geelen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Center, GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Schouten TJ, Daamen LA, Dorland G, van Roessel SR, Groot VP, Besselink MG, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Brosens LAA, Busch OR, van Dam RM, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Intven M, Kazemier G, de Meijer VE, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Raicu GM, Roos D, Schreinemakers JMJ, Stommel MWJ, van Velthuysen MF, Verdonk RC, Verheij J, Verkooijen HM, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ. ASO Visual Abstract: Nationwide Validation of the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM Staging System and Five Proposed Modifications for Resected Pancreatic Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11777-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
8
|
Woei‐A‐Jin FSH, Weijl NI, Burgmans MC, Fariña Sarasqueta A, van Wezel JT, Wasser MN, Coenraad MJ, Burggraaf J, Osanto S. Neoadjuvant Treatment with Angiogenesis-Inhibitor Dovitinib Prior to Local Therapy in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Phase II Study. Oncologist 2021; 26:854-864. [PMID: 34251745 PMCID: PMC8488766 DOI: 10.1002/onco.13901] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2020] [Accepted: 07/02/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence rates following locoregional treatment are high. As multireceptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFRs) are effective in advanced HCC, we assessed the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant systemic treatment with dovitinib in early- and intermediate-stage HCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty-four patients with modified Child-Pugh class A early- and intermediate-stage HCC received neoadjuvant oral dovitinib 500 mg daily (5 days on/2 days off) for 4 weeks, followed by locoregional therapy. Primary endpoints were objective response rates and intratumoral blood flow changes. Secondary endpoints were safety, pharmacodynamical plasma markers of VEGFR-blockade, time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Modified RECIST overall response rate was 48%, including 13% complete remission, and despite dose reduction/interruption in 83% of patients, intratumoral perfusion index decreased significantly. Grade 3-4 adverse events, most frequently (on-target) hypertension (54%), fatigue (25%), and thrombocytopenia (21%), occurred in 88% of patients. Plasma VEGF-A, VEGF-D, and placental growth factor increased significantly, whereas sTie-2 decreased, consistent with VEGFR-blockade. Following neoadjuvant dovitinib, all patients could proceed to their original planned locoregional treatment. No delayed toxicity occurred. Seven patients (three early, four intermediate stage) underwent orthotopic liver transplant after median 11.4 months. Censoring at transplantation, median TTP and OS were 16.8 and 34.8 months respectively; median cancer-specific survival was not reached. CONCLUSION Already after a short 4-week dovitinib treatment period, intratumoral blood flow reduction and modest antitumor responses were observed. Although these results support use of systemic neoadjuvant strategies, the poor tolerability indicates that dovitinib dose adaptations are required in HCC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Orthotopic liver transplantation may cure early and intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Considering the expected waiting time >6 months because of donor liver scarcity, there is an unmet need for effective neoadjuvant downsizing strategies. Angiogenesis inhibition by dovitinib does not negatively affect subsequent invasive procedures, is safe to administer immediately before locoregional therapy, and may provide a novel treatment approach to improve patient outcomes if tolerability in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma can be improved by therapeutic drug monitoring and personalized dosing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F.J. Sherida H. Woei‐A‐Jin
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden,Einthoven Laboratory for Experimental Vascular Medicine, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden
| | - Nir I. Weijl
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden
| | - Mark C. Burgmans
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeidenThe Netherlands
| | | | - J. Tom van Wezel
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeidenThe Netherlands
| | | | - Minneke J. Coenraad
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeidenThe Netherlands
| | | | - Susanne Osanto
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden,Einthoven Laboratory for Experimental Vascular Medicine, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
van Roessel S, Soer EC, van Dieren S, Koens L, van Velthuysen MLF, Doukas M, Groot Koerkamp B, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Bronkhorst CM, Raicu GM, Kuijpers KC, Seldenrijk CA, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ, van der Post RS, Stommel MWJ, Busch OR, Besselink MG, Brosens LAA, Verheij J. Axial slicing versus bivalving in the pathological examination of pancreatoduodenectomy specimens (APOLLO): a multicentre randomized controlled trial. HPB (Oxford) 2021; 23:1349-1359. [PMID: 33563546 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.01.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2020] [Revised: 12/23/2020] [Accepted: 01/05/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In pancreatoduodenectomy specimens, dissection method may affect the assessment of primary tumour origin (i.e. pancreatic, distal bile duct or ampullary adenocarcinoma), which is primarily determined macroscopically. This is the first study to prospectively compare the two commonly used techniques, i.e. axial slicing and bivalving. METHODS In four centres, a randomized controlled trial was performed in specimens of patients with a suspected (pre)malignant tumour in the pancreatic head. Primary outcome measure was the level of certainty (scale 0-100) regarding tumour origin by four independent gastrointestinal pathologists based on macroscopic assessment. Secondary outcomes were inter-observer agreement and R1 rate. RESULTS In total, 128 pancreatoduodenectomy specimens were randomized. The level of certainty in determining the primary tumour origin did not differ between axial slicing and bivalving (mean score 72 [sd 13] vs. 68 [sd 16], p = 0.21), nor did inter-observer agreement, both being moderate (kappa 0.45 vs. 0.47). In pancreatic cancer specimens, R1 rate (60% vs. 55%, p = 0.71) and the number of harvested lymph nodes (median 16 vs. 17, p = 0.58) were similar. CONCLUSION This study demonstrated no differences in determining the tumour origin between axial slicing and bivalving. Both techniques performed similarly regarding inter-observer agreement, R1 rate, and lymph node harvest.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stijn van Roessel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Eline C Soer
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lianne Koens
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Michael Doukas
- Department of Pathology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Carolien M Bronkhorst
- Department of Pathology, Pathology-DNA, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - G Mihaela Raicu
- Department of Pathology, Pathology-DNA, St. Antonius Hospital, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Karel C Kuijpers
- Department of Pathology, Pathology-DNA, St. Antonius Hospital, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis A Seldenrijk
- Department of Pathology, Pathology-DNA, St. Antonius Hospital, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Rachel S van der Post
- Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lodewijk A A Brosens
- Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Joanne Verheij
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
van Roessel S, Soer EC, Daamen LA, van Dalen D, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Stommel MWJ, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC, van de Vlasakker VCJ, de Hingh IHJT, Groen JV, Mieog JSD, van Dam JL, van Eijck CHJ, van Tienhoven G, Klümpen HJ, Wilmink JW, Busch OR, Brosens LAA, Groot Koerkamp B, Verheij J, Besselink MG. Preoperative misdiagnosis of pancreatic and periampullary cancer in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy: A multicentre retrospective cohort study. Eur J Surg Oncol 2021; 47:2525-2532. [PMID: 33745791 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.03.228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2020] [Revised: 02/16/2021] [Accepted: 03/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Whereas neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy is increasingly used in pancreatic cancer, it is currently not recommended for other periampullary (non-pancreatic) cancers. This has important implications for the relevance of the preoperative diagnosis for pancreatoduodenectomy. This retrospective multicentre cohort study aimed to determine the frequency of clinically relevant misdiagnoses in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or other periampullary cancer. METHODS Data from all consecutive patients who underwent a pancreatoduodenectomy between 2014 and 2018 were obtained from the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. The preoperative diagnosis as concluded by the multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting was compared with the final postoperative diagnosis at pathology to determine the rate of clinically relevant misdiagnosis (defined as missed pancreatic cancer or incorrect diagnosis of pancreatic cancer). RESULTS In total, 1244 patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy of whom 203 (16%) had a clinically relevant misdiagnosis preoperatively. Of all patients with a final diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, 13% (87/679) were preoperatively misdiagnosed as distal cholangiocarcinoma (n = 41, 6.0%), ampullary cancer (n = 27, 4.0%) duodenal cancer (n = 16, 2.4%), or other (n = 3, 0.4%). Of all patients with a final diagnosis of periampullary (non-pancreatic) cancer, 21% (116/565) were preoperatively incorrectly diagnosed as pancreatic cancer. Accuracy of preoperative diagnosis was 84% for pancreatic cancer, 71% for distal cholangiocarcinoma, 73% for ampullary cancer and 73% for duodenal cancer. A prediction model for the preoperative likelihood of pancreatic cancer (versus other periampullary cancer) prior to pancreatoduodenectomy demonstrated an AUC of 0.88. DISCUSSION This retrospective multicentre cohort study showed that 16% of patients have a clinically relevant misdiagnosis that could result in either missing the opportunity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer or inappropriate administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer. A preoperative prediction model is available on www.pancreascalculator.com.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stijn van Roessel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Eline C Soer
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lois A Daamen
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Demi van Dalen
- Department of Surgery, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Jesse V Groen
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Jacob L van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Geertjan van Tienhoven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Heinz-Josef Klümpen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Johanna W Wilmink
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lodewijk A A Brosens
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Pathology, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Joanne Verheij
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Meijer RPJ, de Valk KS, Deken MM, Boogerd LSF, Hoogstins CES, Bhairosingh SS, Swijnenburg RJ, Bonsing BA, Framery B, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Putter H, Hilling DE, Burggraaf J, Cailler F, Mieog JSD, Vahrmeijer AL. Intraoperative detection of colorectal and pancreatic liver metastases using SGM-101, a fluorescent antibody targeting CEA. Eur J Surg Oncol 2020; 47:667-673. [PMID: 33158638 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.10.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2020] [Revised: 10/16/2020] [Accepted: 10/27/2020] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fluorescence-guided surgery can provide surgeons with an imaging tool for real-time intraoperative tumor detection. SGM-101, an anti-CEA antibody labelled with a fluorescent dye, is a tumor-specific imaging agent that can aid in improving detection and complete resection for CEA-positive tumors. In this study, the performance of SGM-101 for the detection of colorectal and pancreatic liver metastases was investigated. METHODS In this open-label, non-randomized, single-arm pilot study, patients were included with liver metastases from colorectal origin and intraoperatively detected liver metastases from pancreatic origin (during planned pancreatic surgery). SGM-101 was administered two to four days before the scheduled surgery as a single intravenous injection. Intraoperative fluorescence imaging was performed using the Quest Spectrum® imaging system. The performance of SGM-101 was assessed by measuring the intraoperative fluorescence signal and comparing this to histopathology. RESULTS A total of 19 lesions were found in 11 patients, which were all suspected as malignant in white light and subsequent fluorescence inspection. Seventeen lesions were malignant with a mean tumor-to-background ratio of 1.7. The remaining two lesions were false-positives as proven by histology. CONCLUSION CEA-targeted fluorescence-guided intraoperative tumor detection with SGM-101 is feasible for the detection of colorectal and pancreatic liver metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruben P J Meijer
- Centre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Kim S de Valk
- Centre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Marion M Deken
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Leonora S F Boogerd
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Charlotte E S Hoogstins
- Centre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Hein Putter
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Denise E Hilling
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Sibinga Mulder BG, Feshtali S, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Vahrmeijer AL, Swijnenburg RJ, Bonsing BA, Mieog JSD. A Prospective Clinical Trial to Determine the Effect of Intraoperative Ultrasound on Surgical Strategy and Resection Outcome in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer. Ultrasound Med Biol 2019; 45:2019-2026. [PMID: 31130412 DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2019.04.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2018] [Revised: 04/07/2019] [Accepted: 04/24/2019] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
Surgical exploration in patients with pancreatic or periampullary cancer is often performed without intraoperative image guidance. Although intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) may enhance visualization during resection, this tool has not been investigated in detail until now. Here, we performed a prospective cohort study to evaluate the effect of IOUS on surgical strategy and to evaluate whether vascular involvement and radicality of the resection could be correctly assessed with IOUS. IOUS was performed by an experienced abdominal radiologist during surgical exploration in 31 consecutive procedures. IOUS affected surgical strategy by either (i) having no effect, (ii) determining tumor localization, (iii) evaluating vascular involvement or (iv) waiving surgery. Radicality of the resections and vascular contact were determined during pathologic analysis and compared with preoperative imaging and IOUS findings. Overall, IOUS influenced surgical strategy in 61% of procedures. In 21 out of 27 malignant tumors, a radical resection was achieved (78%). Vascular contact was assessed correctly using IOUS in 89% compared with 74% of patients using preoperative imaging. IOUS can help the surgical team to assess the resectability and to visualize the tumor and possible vascular contact in real time during resection. IOUS may therefore increase the likelihood of achieving a radical resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Shirin Feshtali
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Boogerd LS, van der Valk MJ, Boonstra MC, Prevoo HA, Hilling DE, van de Velde CJ, Sier CF, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Vahrmeijer AL. Biomarker expression in rectal cancer tissue before and after neoadjuvant therapy. Onco Targets Ther 2018; 11:1655-1664. [PMID: 29615840 PMCID: PMC5870658 DOI: 10.2147/ott.s145473] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Intraoperative identification of rectal cancer (RC) can be challenging, especially because of fibrosis after treatment with preoperative chemo- and radiotherapy (CRT). Tumor-targeted fluorescence imaging can enhance the contrast between tumor and normal tissue during surgery. Promising targets for RC imaging are carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) and the tyrosine-kinase receptor Met (c-Met). The effect of CRT on their expression determines their applicability for imaging. Therefore, we investigated whether CRT modifies expression patterns in tumors, lymph node (LN) metastases and adjacent normal rectal tissues. Patients and methods Preoperative biopsies, primary tumor specimens and metastatic LNs were collected from 38 RC patients who did not receive CRT (cohort 1) and 34 patients who did (cohort 2). CEA, EpCAM and c-Met expression was determined using immunohistochemical staining and was semiquantified by a total immunostaining score (TIS), consisting of the percentage and intensity of stained tumor cells (0–12). Results In both cohorts CEA, EpCAM and c-Met were significantly highly expressed in >60% of tumor tissues compared with adjacent normal epithelium (T/N ratio, P<0.01). EpCAM showed the most homogenous expression in tumors, whereas CEA showed the highest T/N ratio. Most importantly, CEA and EpCAM expression did not significantly change in normal or neoplastic RC tissue after CRT, whereas levels of c-Met changed (P=0.02). Tissues of eight patients with a pathological complete response after CRT showed expression of all biomarkers with TIS close to normal epithelium. Conclusion Histological evaluation shows that CEA, EpCAM and c-Met are suitable targets for RC imaging, because all three are significantly enhanced in cancer tissue from primary tumors or LN metastases compared with normal adjacent tissue. Furthermore, the expression of CEA and EpCAM is not significantly changed after CRT. These data underscore the applicability of c-Met and especially, CEA and EpCAM as targets for image-guided RC surgery, both before and after CRT.
Collapse
|
14
|
den Dulk AC, Shi X, Verhoeven CJ, Dubbeld J, Claas FHJ, Wolterbeek R, Brand-Schaaf SH, Verspaget HW, Sarasqueta AF, van der Laan LJW, Metselaar HJ, van Hoek B, Kwekkeboom J, Roelen DL. Donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies are not associated with nonanastomotic biliary strictures but both are independent risk factors for graft loss after liver transplantation. Clin Transplant 2017; 32. [DOI: 10.1111/ctr.13163] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/23/2017] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Claire den Dulk
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Leiden University Medical Center; Leiden The Netherlands
| | - Xiaolei Shi
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Erasmus MC-University Medical Center; Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | | | - Jeroen Dubbeld
- Department of Transplant Surgery; Leiden University Medical Center; Leiden The Netherlands
| | - Frans H. J. Claas
- Department of Immunohematology and Blood Transfusion; Section Immunogenetics and Transplantation Immunology; Leiden University Medical Center; Leiden The Netherlands
| | - Ron Wolterbeek
- Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics; Leiden University Medical Center; Leiden The Netherlands
| | - Simone H. Brand-Schaaf
- Department of Immunohematology and Blood Transfusion; Section Immunogenetics and Transplantation Immunology; Leiden University Medical Center; Leiden The Netherlands
| | - Hein W. Verspaget
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Leiden University Medical Center; Leiden The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Herold J. Metselaar
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Erasmus MC-University Medical Center; Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | - Bart van Hoek
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Leiden University Medical Center; Leiden The Netherlands
| | - Jaap Kwekkeboom
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Erasmus MC-University Medical Center; Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | - Dave L. Roelen
- Department of Immunohematology and Blood Transfusion; Section Immunogenetics and Transplantation Immunology; Leiden University Medical Center; Leiden The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Sarasqueta AF, Forte G, Corver WE, de Miranda NF, Ruano D, van Eijk R, Oosting J, Tollenaar RAEM, van Wezel T, Morreau H. Integral analysis of p53 and its value as prognostic factor in sporadic colon cancer. BMC Cancer 2013; 13:277. [PMID: 23739040 PMCID: PMC3682902 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-277] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2012] [Accepted: 05/08/2013] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND p53 (encoded by TP53) is involved in DNA damage repair, cell cycle regulation, apoptosis, aging and cellular senescence. TP53 is mutated in around 50% of human cancers. Nevertheless, the consequences of p53 inactivation in colon cancer outcome remain unclear. Recently, a new role of p53 together with CSNK1A1 in colon cancer invasiveness has been described in mice. METHODS By combining data on different levels of p53 inactivation, we aimed to predict p53 functionality and to determine its effects on colon cancer outcome. Moreover, survival effects of CSNK1A1 together with p53 were also studied.Eighty-three formalin fixed paraffin embedded colon tumors were enriched for tumor cells using flow sorting, the extracted DNA was used in a custom SNP array to determine chr17p13-11 allelic state; p53 immunostaining, TP53 exons 5, 6, 7 and 8 mutations were determined in combination with mRNA expression analysis on frozen tissue. RESULTS Patients with a predicted functional p53 had a better prognosis than patients with non functional p53 (Log Rank p=0.009). Expression of CSNK1A1 modified p53 survival effects. Patients with low CSNK1A1 expression and non-functional p53 had a very poor survival both in the univariate (Log Rank p<0.001) and in the multivariate survival analysis (HR=4.74 95% CI 1.45 - 15.3 p=0.009). CONCLUSION The combination of mutational, genomic, protein and downstream transcriptional activity data predicted p53 functionality which is shown to have a prognostic effect on colon cancer patients. This effect was specifically modified by CSKN1A1 expression.
Collapse
|
16
|
Fariña Sarasqueta A, van Lijnschoten G, Lemmens VEPP, Rutten HJT, van den Brule AJC. Pharmacogenetics of oxaliplatin as adjuvant treatment in colon carcinoma: are single nucleotide polymorphisms in GSTP1, ERCC1, and ERCC2 good predictive markers? Mol Diagn Ther 2012. [PMID: 21958378 DOI: 10.2165/11592080-000000000-00000] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in stage III colon cancer patients. However, a subgroup of patients still develops recurrent disease at some point in time, partly because of the ineffectiveness of the chemotherapy. Predictive markers of response are therefore crucial. Our aim was to study the predictive value of functional polymorphisms in genes involved in the metabolism of oxaliplatin and in DNA repair in stage III colon cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS Normal DNA was isolated from 98 patients diagnosed with stage III colon carcinoma. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in three genes (the excision repair cross-complementing genes ERCC1 [19007T>C] and ERCC2 [2251A>C], and the glutathione S-transferase pi 1 gene [GSTP1 313A>G]) were tested by PCR followed by digestion with restriction enzymes or by direct sequencing. These genes and SNPs were selected on the basis of their reported associations with oxaliplatin response in colorectal cancer. RESULTS The genotype frequencies were in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. GSTP1 and ERCC2 polymorphisms were significantly associated with sex. The AA genotype of GSTP1 313A>G was more frequent in men than in women (59% vs 30%, p = 0.02), and the CC genotype of ERCC2 2251A>C was significantly more frequent in women than in men (24% vs 6%, p = 0.02). In univariate and multivariate survival analysis, none of the tested polymorphisms seemed to influence disease-free survival. The GSTP1 AA genotype had different effects on survival between men and women; homozygous A men had significantly worse cancer-specific survival and overall survival than women with the same genotype (log rank p = 0.029 and p = 0.015, respectively). CONCLUSION None of the tested polymorphisms is likely to be a reliable marker of response to oxaliplatin therapy. The GSTP1 313A>G homozygous A genotype may have a prognostic value in male patients.
Collapse
|
17
|
Fariña Sarasqueta A, Zeestraten ECM, van Wezel T, van Lijnschoten G, van Eijk R, Dekker JWT, Kuppen PJK, Goossens-Beumer IJ, Lemmens VEPP, van de Velde CJH, Rutten HJT, Morreau H, van den Brule AJC. PIK3CA kinase domain mutation identifies a subgroup of stage III colon cancer patients with poor prognosis. Cell Oncol (Dordr) 2011; 34:523-31. [PMID: 21830111 DOI: 10.1007/s13402-011-0054-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/03/2011] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND PIK3CA mutations in the helical domain (in exon 9) and in the kinase domain (exon 20) cause tumor formation by different means. We aimed to determine the effects of each of these mutations on survival of colon carcinoma patients. METHODS A large cohort of 685 colon carcinoma patients was tested for PIK3CA mutations in exons 9 and 20 by single nucleotide primer extension (N = 428) or by real time PCR (N = 257). RESULTS PIK3CA mutation rate was 13%. 66 of 83 (79.5%) were in exon 9 and 17 of 83 (20.5%) in exon 20. In survival analysis, PIK3CA mutations in exon 9 and 20 had different effects on patient outcome. The PIK3CA exon 20 mutation conferred a poorer disease free survival compared to patients with wild type alleles and exon 9 mutations (Log rank p = 0.04 and p = 0.03 respectively) and cancer specific survival (Log rank p = 0.03 and p = 0.056 respectively) in stage III patients. In stage I and II this negative effect on outcome was not seen. CONCLUSIONS PIK3CA mutation in exon 20 is a negative prognostic factor in stage III colon cancer patients. Moreover, this negative effect is not present in stage I and II patients.
Collapse
|
18
|
Fariña Sarasqueta A, Moerland E, de Bruyne H, de Graaf H, Vrancken T, van Lijnschoten G, van den Brule AJC. SNaPshot and StripAssay as valuable alternatives to direct sequencing for KRAS mutation detection in colon cancer routine diagnostics. J Mol Diagn 2011; 13:199-205. [PMID: 21354055 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2010.10.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2010] [Revised: 10/01/2010] [Accepted: 10/07/2010] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Although direct sequencing is the gold standard for KRAS mutation detection in routine diagnostics, it remains laborious, time consuming, and not very sensitive. Our objective was to evaluate SNaPshot and the KRAS StripAssay as alternatives to sequencing for KRAS mutation detection in daily practice. KRAS exon 2-specific PCR followed by sequencing or by a SNaPshot reaction was performed. For the StripAssay, a mutant-enriched PCR was followed by hybridization to KRAS-specific probes bound to a nitrocellulose strip. To test sensitivities, dilution series of mutated DNA in wild-type DNA were made. Additionally, direct sequencing and SNaPshot were evaluated in 296 colon cancer samples. Detection limits of direct sequencing, SNaPshot, and StripAssay were 20%, 10%, and 1% tumor cells, respectively. Direct sequencing and SNaPshot can detect all 12 mutations in KRAS codons 12 and 13, whereas the StripAssay detects 10 of the most frequent ones. Workload and time to results are comparable for SNaPshot and direct sequencing. SNaPshot is flexible and easy to multiplex. The StripAssay is less time consuming for daily laboratory practice. SNaPshot is more flexible and slightly more sensitive than direct sequencing. The clinical evaluation showed comparable performances between direct sequencing and SNaPshot. The StripAssay is rapid and an extremely sensitive assay that could be considered when few tumor cells are available. However, found mutants should be confirmed to avoid risk of false positives.
Collapse
|