Annika L Windon1, Arturo Loaiza-Bonilla2, Christopher E Jensen3, Michael Randall3, Jennifer J D Morrissette4, Stuti G Shroff1. 1. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 2. Medical Oncology, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 4. Center for Personalized Diagnostics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The KRAS oncogene is a driver mutation and is present in greater than 90% of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC). A subset of these tumors, however, do not harbor mutations in KRAS (wild type KRAS). Studies have shown that patients with mutated KRAS have a poorer survival on first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy compared to wild type KRAS. In this study, we examined a cohort of patients with PDAC at our institution who were either wild type or mutant for the KRAS gene and assessed for differences in survival and response to different chemotherapeutic regimens. METHODS: We examined clinical records of patients treated at the Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania from 2013 to 2017. Patients with a pancreatic mass and a histologic diagnosis of pancreatic or pancreaticobiliary adenocarcinoma were identified. Thirty-nine patients with PDAC who underwent tumor sequencing at Penn Medicine's Center for Personalized Diagnostics (CPD) were selected for further study. Twelve patients were identified whose tumors were KRAS wild type. Twenty-seven patients with PDAC whose tumors harbored KRAS mutations were selected as controls (KRAS mutant). RESULTS: We noted a longer overall survival (OS) among KRAS wild type patients compared to KRAS mutant patients (P=0.026). This was independent of the age at diagnosis, patient gender, stage of diagnosis, tumor morphology, mismatch repair (MMR) status, and chemotherapeutic regimen. CONCLUSIONS: Similar to previously reported studies, PDAC with a KRAS wild type mutational profile has a better prognosis with a longer OS. This improved prognosis is independent of the protocol utilized in therapy for these patients. Our findings suggest that future clinical trials in pancreatic cancer should take into consideration the presence of KRAS mutations in their pre-planned analysis when assessing the efficacy of a novel therapeutic approach. This may be a crucial factor in trial concepts and outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The KRAS oncogene is a driver mutation and is present in greater than 90% of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC). A subset of these tumors, however, do not harbor mutations in KRAS (wild type KRAS). Studies have shown that patients with mutated KRAS have a poorer survival on first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy compared to wild type KRAS. In this study, we examined a cohort of patients with PDAC at our institution who were either wild type or mutant for the KRAS gene and assessed for differences in survival and response to different chemotherapeutic regimens. METHODS: We examined clinical records of patients treated at the Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania from 2013 to 2017. Patients with a pancreatic mass and a histologic diagnosis of pancreatic or pancreaticobiliary adenocarcinoma were identified. Thirty-nine patients with PDAC who underwent tumor sequencing at Penn Medicine's Center for Personalized Diagnostics (CPD) were selected for further study. Twelve patients were identified whose tumors were KRAS wild type. Twenty-seven patients with PDAC whose tumors harbored KRAS mutations were selected as controls (KRAS mutant). RESULTS: We noted a longer overall survival (OS) among KRAS wild type patients compared to KRAS mutant patients (P=0.026). This was independent of the age at diagnosis, patient gender, stage of diagnosis, tumor morphology, mismatch repair (MMR) status, and chemotherapeutic regimen. CONCLUSIONS: Similar to previously reported studies, PDAC with a KRAS wild type mutational profile has a better prognosis with a longer OS. This improved prognosis is independent of the protocol utilized in therapy for these patients. Our findings suggest that future clinical trials in pancreatic cancer should take into consideration the presence of KRAS mutations in their pre-planned analysis when assessing the efficacy of a novel therapeutic approach. This may be a crucial factor in trial concepts and outcomes.
Authors: Paolo P Provenzano; Carlos Cuevas; Amy E Chang; Vikas K Goel; Daniel D Von Hoff; Sunil R Hingorani Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2012-03-20 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: M Goggins; M Schutte; J Lu; C A Moskaluk; C L Weinstein; G M Petersen; C J Yeo; C E Jackson; H T Lynch; R H Hruban; S E Kern Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1996-12-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Jian Wu; Hanno Matthaei; Anirban Maitra; Marco Dal Molin; Laura D Wood; James R Eshleman; Michael Goggins; Marcia I Canto; Richard D Schulick; Barish H Edil; Christopher L Wolfgang; Alison P Klein; Luis A Diaz; Peter J Allen; C Max Schmidt; Kenneth W Kinzler; Nickolas Papadopoulos; Ralph H Hruban; Bert Vogelstein Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2011-07-20 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Amanda Blackford; Oscar K Serrano; Christopher L Wolfgang; Giovanni Parmigiani; Siân Jones; Xiaosong Zhang; D Williams Parsons; Jimmy Cheng-Ho Lin; Rebecca J Leary; James R Eshleman; Michael Goggins; Elizabeth M Jaffee; Christine A Iacobuzio-Donahue; Anirban Maitra; John L Cameron; Kelly Olino; Richard Schulick; Jordan Winter; Joseph M Herman; Daniel Laheru; Alison P Klein; Bert Vogelstein; Kenneth W Kinzler; Victor E Velculescu; Ralph H Hruban Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-07-07 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Cristina R Ferrone; Douglas A Levine; Laura H Tang; Peter J Allen; William Jarnagin; Murray F Brennan; Kenneth Offit; Mark E Robson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-12-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mark B Ulanja; Alastair E Moody; Bryce D Beutler; Daniel Antwi-Amoabeng; Ganiyu A Rahman; Olatunji B Alese Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2022-06-15
Authors: Philip A Philip; Ibrahim Azar; Joanne Xiu; Michael J Hall; Andrew Eugene Hendifar; Emil Lou; Jimmy J Hwang; Jun Gong; Rebecca Feldman; Michelle Ellis; Phil Stafford; David Spetzler; Moh'd M Khushman; Davendra Sohal; A Craig Lockhart; Benjamin A Weinberg; Wafik S El-Deiry; John Marshall; Anthony F Shields; W Michael Korn Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 13.801
Authors: Fleur van der Sijde; Zakia Azmani; Marc G Besselink; Bert A Bonsing; Jan Willem B de Groot; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Brigitte C M Haberkorn; Marjolein Y V Homs; Wilfred F J van IJcken; Quisette P Janssen; Martijn P Lolkema; Saskia A C Luelmo; Leonie J M Mekenkamp; Dana A M Mustafa; Ron H N van Schaik; Johanna W Wilmink; Eveline E Vietsch; Casper H J van Eijck Journal: Ther Adv Med Oncol Date: 2021-08-18 Impact factor: 8.168
Authors: Thomas B Karasic; Mark H O'Hara; Arturo Loaiza-Bonilla; Kim A Reiss; Ursina R Teitelbaum; Erkut Borazanci; Ana De Jesus-Acosta; Colleen Redlinger; Jessica A Burrell; Daniel A Laheru; Daniel D Von Hoff; Ravi K Amaravadi; Jeffrey A Drebin; Peter J O'Dwyer Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Abhinav V Reddy; Colin S Hill; Shuchi Sehgal; Ding Ding; Amy Hacker-Prietz; Jin He; Lei Zheng; Joseph M Herman; Jeffrey Meyer; Amol K Narang Journal: Radiat Oncol J Date: 2021-12-17
Authors: Matthew S Dietz; Thomas L Sutton; Brett S Walker; Charles E Gast; Luai Zarour; Sidharth K Sengupta; John R Swain; Jennifer Eng; Michael Parappilly; Kristen Limbach; Ariana Sattler; Erik Burlingame; Yuki Chin; Austin Gower; Jose L Montoya Mira; Ajay Sapre; Yu-Jui Chiu; Daniel R Clayburgh; SuEllen J Pommier; Jeremy P Cetnar; Jared M Fischer; Jerry J Jaboin; Rodney F Pommier; Brett C Sheppard; V Liana Tsikitis; Alison H Skalet; Skye C Mayo; Charles D Lopez; Joe W Gray; Gordon B Mills; Zahi Mitri; Young Hwan Chang; Koei Chin; Melissa H Wong Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 4.379