Literature DB >> 35238112

Genomic analysis of familial pancreatic cancers and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms: A cross-sectional study.

Kodai Abe1, Minoru Kitago1, Kenjiro Kosaki2, Mamiko Yamada2, Eisuke Iwasaki3, Shintaro Kawasaki3, Keijiro Mizukami4, Yukihide Momozawa4, Chikashi Terao5, Hiroshi Yagi1, Yuta Abe1, Yasushi Hasegawa1, Shutaro Hori1, Masayuki Tanaka1, Yutaka Nakano1, Yuko Kitagawa1.   

Abstract

Environmental and genetic factors play a critical role in the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer, which is likely to follow a multistep process that includes intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. The pathogenesis of familial pancreatic cancer has been reported; however, epidemiological characteristics and causative genes remain unclear. This study aimed to determine the relationship between the family history of pancreatic cancer and tumor malignancy and identify novel susceptible germline variants of pancreatic cancer. We performed an epidemiologic study at our institute on a cohort of 668 patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm and 242 with pancreatic cancer but without associated intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm stratified by family history of pancreatic cancer. Whole-exome sequencing was conducted for 10 patients from seven families with familial pancreatic cancer and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. We found that patients who had intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm with positive family history of pancreatic cancer within first-degree relatives were more likely to develop malignancy in a shorter period than those without family history. Duplicate frameshift variants in TET2 c.3180dupG (p.Pro1061fs) and ASXL1 c.1934dupG (p.Gly646fs) in one family and POLN c.1194dupT (p.Glu399fs) in another were identified as pathogenic truncating germline variants which were previously recognised susceptibility genes. Moreover, PDIA2 c.1403C>T (p.Pro468Leu) and DPYSL4 c.926C>A (p.Pro309Gln) were shared in four and two patients, respectively. In particular, PDIA2 was identified as a novel candidate for one of the deleterious variants of familial pancreatic cancer.
© 2022 The Authors. Cancer Science published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Cancer Association.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cancer susceptibility genes; cross-sectional study; familial pancreatic cancer; germline variant; intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35238112      PMCID: PMC9128188          DOI: 10.1111/cas.15316

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Sci        ISSN: 1347-9032            Impact factor:   6.518


endoscopic ultrasound intraductal papillary mucinous carcinoma intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm main pancreatic duct magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is a malignant tumor with a poor prognosis, partly because of difficulty in detecting the cancer in early stages. Delineation of risk factors for pancreatic cancer could help initiate surveillance targeting a subpopulation at greater risk. Previous studies have shown that both environmental and genetic factors play important roles in the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancers. Known environmental risk factors include obesity, diabetes, smoking, and alcohol consumption. Documentation of familial aggregation of pancreatic cancer in the literature points to the influence of genetic factors. A prospective epidemiological study of pancreatic cancer conducted by Klien et al. in 2004 showed that the lifetime risk of pancreatic cancer was 6.4 times higher in family members with two first‐degree relatives with pancreatic cancer than in those without first‐degree relatives with pancreatic cancer. In addition, the risk was 32 times higher in family members with three first‐degree relatives with pancreatic cancer. Sequencing analysis of germline variants of families with pancreatic cancer unraveled the critical role of ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, and CHEK2. , , , Besides studies on familial clusters, genome‐wide association studies demonstrated that the single‐nucleotide variants rs13303010 in NOC2L at 1p36.33 and rs78193826 in GP2 at 16p12.3 are associated with pancreatic cancer even among patients without apparent family histories. , Similar to other cancers, the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancers is likely a multistep process. The observation that familial pancreatic cancer was more likely to have earlier onset and mortality supports the multistep progression of pancreatic cancers. Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) has been regarded as the critical precancerous lesion of pancreatic cancers. A recent whole‐exome analysis of 350 patients with IPMN showed that germline variants in ATM and BRCA2 are associated with the progression of IPMN to pancreatic cancer. However, whether genetic factors play a role in the development of IPMN remains unclear. In this study, we performed epidemiologic and genetic studies on 668 patients with IPMN and 242 patients with pancreatic cancer but without associated IPMN. Among these two groups, we identified 18 patients with two or more affected family members, excluding the proband. Among these 18 patients, 10 patients from seven families underwent genomic studies. Identification of new risk genes for pancreatic cancer may facilitate genomic screening for early detection and treatment of pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study design and ethical approval

This retrospective and genome‐sequencing study was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki after approval from the Institutional Review Board of the Keio University School of Medicine (approval numbers: 20120443 and 20190042; date of approval: October 30, 2019).

Patients and data collection

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical characteristics and environmental factors of all patients who underwent endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography between 2012 and 2020 and identified 668 patients with IPMN and 242 patients with non–IPMN‐associated pancreatic cancer (Figure S1). We defined non–IPMN‐associated pancreatic cancer as pancreatic cancer with no evidence of pancreatic cysts or IPMN based on magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) or EUS scan interpreted by the radiologist and endoscopist. The patients' clinical backgrounds were collected from medical records, and a questionnaire was provided during the first visit. Data collected included age, sex, body mass index (BMI), history of smoking and habitual alcohol consumption, medical history, family history of diabetes and cancer within first‐ or second‐degree relatives, and imaging findings of pancreatic lesions. Habitual alcohol consumption was defined as the consumption of more than 100 g of alcohol per week. History of diabetes was defined as receiving antidiabetic treatment before the diagnosis of pancreatic tumors. The clinical characteristics of all patients (668 IPMN and 242 non–IPMN‐associated pancreatic cancer) are shown in Table S1. Patients with IPMN were classified as high risk or low risk according to the IPMN International Clinical Practice Guidelines 2017. , The high‐risk IPMN group included those who met the criteria for “worrisome features (imaging findings include cyst of ≥3 cm, enhancing mural nodule <5 cm, thickened enhanced cyst walls, main pancreatic duct [MPD] 5–9 mm, lymphadenopathy, an elevated serum level of carbohydrate antigen, and a rapid rate of cyst growth >5 mm per 2 years)” and “high‐risk stigma (obstructive jaundice, enhanced mural nodule ≥5 mm, MPD ≥10 mm).” Furthermore, those with intraductal papillary mucinous carcinoma (IPMC)‐, IPMN‐concomitant, and IPMN‐derived pancreatic cancer were included in the high‐risk IPMN group. The low‐risk IPMN group comprised patients with IPMN who did not meet the criteria defined above.

Whole‐exome sequencing of germline samples

After obtaining written informed consent, whole‐exome sequencing was performed on peripheral blood samples of 10 patients from seven families using the NovaSeq platform (Illumina) and Sure Select XT Human All Exon V6 (Agilent Technologies). Mapping of the sequenced reads to the reference human genome (GRCh37) and variant calling were performed according to the best practice guidelines of the Burrows‐Wheeler Aligner and the Genome Analysis Tool Kit, as packaged in the integrated analysis suite variant tools. The variants were annotated with SnpEff.

Annotation of variants

To characterize potential functional significance of the variants revealed by whole‐exome analysis, the allele frequencies of the variants among Japanese patients were evaluated from epidemiological standpoints. Any variant for which the allele frequency among >7000 normal Japanese individuals was larger than 0.03 as per the ToMMo database was excluded from further consideration. Thus, only variants for which the allele frequency was between 40% and 60% were retained. When two or more affected members including the proband were tested, only the shared variants were retained. Among the 10 patients from seven families, 4148 variants were retained according to these criteria.

Search for pathogenic variants in previously recognized susceptibility genes

We extracted frameshift, nonsense, and splicing variants and filtered them by previously reported pancreatic cancer–related genes (Table S2). Variants corresponding to a combined annotation‐dependent depletion (CADD) score of >20 were extracted.

Comparison with molecular epidemiological data from Japan

We further evaluated these filtered (nonsynonymous) variants based on our previous work on whole‐genome analysis of samples from Biobank Japan. We analyzed the table of variants and their allele count, allele number, and allele frequency of 6206 samples derived from patients with noncancer polygenic disorders and 1521 samples from patients with various kinds of cancer excluding pancreatic cancer. , Nonsynonymous variants with increased frequency among cancers were considered as candidate susceptibility variants. Filtered variants from familial pancreatic cancers and IPMN were identified from the table of candidate variants.

Statistical analyses

Categorical variables were compared between the two groups using the chi‐squared and Fisher's exact tests. The Mann‐Whitney U test was used to compare quantitative variables. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS for Mac (version 25.0; IBM). Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05, and all tests were two‐sided. Kaplan‐Meier analysis was used to assess differences in survival between cohorts.

RESULTS

Clinical characteristics of patients with IPMN and pancreatic cancer with a strong family history of pancreatic cancer

Among the 668 patients with IPMN and the 242 with non–IPMN‐associated pancreatic cancer, we identified 15 patients with IPMN and three patients with non–IPMN‐associated pancreatic cancer who had two or more affected family members excluding the proband (i.e., two first‐degree relatives or one first‐degree and one second‐degree relative with pancreatic cancer; Figure S2). These patients were arbitrarily defined as “patients with a strong family history.” The clinical characteristics of patients with IPMN and pancreatic cancer with a strong family history of pancreatic cancer (n = 18) are shown in Table 1. Seven patients with IPMN had branch‐type IPMN, two had high‐grade IPMN, three had IPMN‐derived pancreatic cancer, three had IPMN concomitant with pancreatic cancer, and three had non–IPMN‐related pancreatic cancer.
TABLE 1

Characteristics of patients with a strong family history of pancreatic cancer (N = 18)

PatientPedigreeAgeSexDiseaseFamily history of pancreatic cancerPast cancer historyGenome sequencingOutcome
#1#A41FemaleBranch duct–type IPMNMother and grandmotherNoneAlive
#2#B79FemaleBranch duct–type IPMNOlder brother and younger sisterNoneWhole‐exome sequencingAlive
#3#B82FemaleBranch duct–type IPMNYounger brother and younger sisterNoneWhole‐exome sequencingAlive
#4#C52FemaleBranch duct–type IPMNFather, younger brother, and father's auntNoneGene panel testingAlive
#5#D73FemaleBranch duct–type IPMNOlder brother, mother, and mother's unclesNoneWhole‐exome sequencingAlive
#6#E62FemaleBranch duct–type IPMNFather, father's aunt, and grand fatherNoneAlive
#7#F72FemaleBranch duct–type IPMNFather, older brother, and younger brotherBreast cancerWhole‐exome sequencingAlive
#8#G78FemaleHigh‐grade IPMNYounger sister and daughterCervical cancerWhole genome sequencingAlive
#9#G51FemaleHigh‐grade IPMNMother and mother's auntNoneWhole genome sequencingAlive
#10#H54FemaleIPMN‐derived pancreatic cancerFather and father's grandmotherBreast cancerDead
#11#I75MaleIPMN‐derived pancreatic cancerOlder brothers, father, and motherNoneWhole‐exome sequencingAlive
#12#J69MaleIPMN‐concomitant pancreatic cancerOlder sister and younger sisterRectal cancerDead
#13#K72MaleIPMN‐concomitant pancreatic cancerOlder brother and younger brotherNoneWhole‐exome sequencingAlive
#14#L79FemaleIPMN‐derived pancreatic cancerMother and older sisterLung cancerDead
#15#M82FemaleIPMN‐concomitant pancreatic cancerFather and older sisterNoneDead
#16#G72FemaleNon–IPMN‐related pancreatic cancerOlder sister and sister's daughterNoneWhole genome sequencingAlive
#17#N71MaleNon–IPMN‐related pancreatic cancerFather and father's uncleGastric cancerWhole‐exome sequencingAlive
#18#O53MaleNon–IPMN‐related pancreatic cancerFather and father's auntNoneDead

Abbreviation: IPMN, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm.

Characteristics of patients with a strong family history of pancreatic cancer (N = 18) Abbreviation: IPMN, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm.

Malignant progression of IPMN with positive family history of pancreatic cancer

We compared the clinical backgrounds of the patients with IPMN and those with non–IPMN‐related pancreatic cancer by categorizing them into those with positive family history of pancreatic cancer (more than one first‐degree relative with pancreatic cancer) and those without (Table 2). Patients with IPMN‐related pancreatic cancer with positive family history of pancreatic cancer were more likely to be female and to have a personal history of cancer; however, this finding was not statistically significant (Table 2).
TABLE 2

Clinical backgrounds of patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) and pancreatic cancer stratified by family history of pancreatic cancer (N = 668)

CharacteristicsPositive family history of pancreatic cancer (n = 46)No family history of pancreatic cancer (n = 622) p
Age, years, median (range)68 (41–83)70 (28–90)0.384
Age >70 years20 (43.5)312 (50.2)0.382
Sex (male/female)18/28316/3060.127
BMI (kg/m2)21.0 (16.7–31.6)21.8 (12.8–34.2)0.313
BMI >257 (15.2)105 (16.9)0.704
Smoking (Ex/Cur)15 [13/2] (32.6)216 [177/39] (34.7)0.765
Alcohol consumption13 (28.3)119 (19.1)0.134
History of diabetes5 (10.9)75 (12.1)0.889
History of cancer7 (15.2)159 (25.6)0.117

Data are presented as n (%) unless otherwise indicated.

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; Cur, current smoker; Ex, ex‐smoker.

Clinical backgrounds of patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) and pancreatic cancer stratified by family history of pancreatic cancer (N = 668) Data are presented as n (%) unless otherwise indicated. Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; Cur, current smoker; Ex, ex‐smoker. Progression to malignant pancreatic cancer or high‐risk IPMN (including high‐grade IPMN, IPMC, and IPMN‐related pancreatic cancer) was evaluated in these subgroups using Kaplan‐Meier analysis (Figure 1). We observed 242 patients with high‐risk IPMN during the study period, of which 23 had a positive family history of pancreatic cancer and 219 had no family history of pancreatic cancer. We found that patients with IPMN and positive family history were more likely to develop malignancy in a shorter period than those with no family history of pancreatic cancer (log‐rank test, p = 0.006).
FIGURE 1

Cumulative risk of malignancy and overall survival of patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) stratified by family history of pancreatic cancer. The cumulative hazard ratio for malignant transformation in patients with IPMN with a family history of pancreatic cancer is shown. Malignant transformation includes intraductal papillary mucinous carcinoma and IPMN‐concomitant pancreatic cancer. The red line represents those with family history, whereas the blue line represents those without. p = 0.006 (analyzed by log rank test)

Cumulative risk of malignancy and overall survival of patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) stratified by family history of pancreatic cancer. The cumulative hazard ratio for malignant transformation in patients with IPMN with a family history of pancreatic cancer is shown. Malignant transformation includes intraductal papillary mucinous carcinoma and IPMN‐concomitant pancreatic cancer. The red line represents those with family history, whereas the blue line represents those without. p = 0.006 (analyzed by log rank test)

Families with truncating variants in known pancreatic cancer–related genes

Of the 18 patients with a strong family history, 11 patients underwent genomic analysis, five patients died, and two did not wish to undergo testing. One patient (#7) underwent commercial testing for multiple cancer genes, and a heterozygous PALB2 pathogenic variant (c.1675_1676inv [p. Gln559*]) and a heterozygous NBN pathogenic variant (c.265C>T [p. Arg89*]) were identified that has been reported elsewhere. Whole‐exome sequencing was performed for 10 patients from seven families. The summary of the whole‐exome sequencing results is shown in Table 3. Truncating variants of genes already implicated in the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer (Table S1) were identified in two families. Heterozygous frameshift variants of NM_017628.4 (TET2; c.3180dupG, p. Pro1061fs) and NM_015338.6 (ASXL1; c.1934dupG, p. Gly646fs) were identified in patient #16 (Table 3a and Figure 2A), and a frameshift variant of NM_181808.4 (POLN; c.1194dupT, p. Glu399fs) was identified in patient #10 (Table 3b and Figure 2B).
TABLE 3

Susceptible germline variants of pancreatic cancer and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. (a) Susceptible frameshift variants of familial pancreatic cancer. (b) Susceptible single‐nucleotide variants of familial pancreatic cancer

(a)
GeneNMPatientsCodon changeAmino acid changeAFCADD scoreCategory
TET2 NM_017628.4#13c.3180dupGp. Pro1061fs32.0Cancer driver gene
ASXL1 NM_015338.6#13c.1934dupGp. Gly646fs0.0008434.0Cancer driver gene
POLN NM_181808.4#5c.1194dupTp. Glu399fs0.00124.8DNA polymerase gene

Abbreviations: AF, allele frequency; CADD, combined annotation‐dependent depletion; CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; PROVEAN, protein variation effect analyzer; SIFT, sorting intolerant from tolerant.

FIGURE 2

Family tree of patients who underwent whole‐exome sequencing analysis. A, Patient #13 (pedigree #K; pancreatic cancer) was identified to have TET2 and ASXL1 frameshift overlapped variants. B, Patient #5 (pedigree #D; branch duct–type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm [IPMN]) has a POLN frameshift variant and a PDIA2 missense variant, similar to pedigree #G of patients #16 (pancreatic cancer), #8 (high‐grade IPMN), and #9 (high‐grade IPMN). C, Patient #11 (pedigree #I; IPMN‐related pancreatic cancer) and patient #17 (pedigree #N; pancreatic cancer) have a common missense variant DPYSL4

Susceptible germline variants of pancreatic cancer and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. (a) Susceptible frameshift variants of familial pancreatic cancer. (b) Susceptible single‐nucleotide variants of familial pancreatic cancer Abbreviations: AF, allele frequency; CADD, combined annotation‐dependent depletion; CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; PROVEAN, protein variation effect analyzer; SIFT, sorting intolerant from tolerant. Family tree of patients who underwent whole‐exome sequencing analysis. A, Patient #13 (pedigree #K; pancreatic cancer) was identified to have TET2 and ASXL1 frameshift overlapped variants. B, Patient #5 (pedigree #D; branch duct–type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm [IPMN]) has a POLN frameshift variant and a PDIA2 missense variant, similar to pedigree #G of patients #16 (pancreatic cancer), #8 (high‐grade IPMN), and #9 (high‐grade IPMN). C, Patient #11 (pedigree #I; IPMN‐related pancreatic cancer) and patient #17 (pedigree #N; pancreatic cancer) have a common missense variant DPYSL4

Comparison with molecular epidemiological data from Japan

We then compared the 4148 variants extracted from the analyzed patients to the allele frequencies of the whole‐genome sequencing data from cancer (n = 1521) and noncancer patients (n = 6206). Of these variants, 172 variants with odds ratios >1.0 and P‐values <0.05 were extracted. We further tested whether any of the variants were recurrent among the 10 families in which the proband underwent whole‐exome analysis. Two were common among families and deleterious according to the PROVEAN, SIFT (http://provean.jcvi.org/protein_batch_submit.php?species=human), and PolyPhen‐2 scores (http://genetics.bwh.harvard.edu/pph2/): NM_006849.4 (PDIA2; c.1403C>T, p. Pro468Leu) was common to patients #1, #10, #11, and #12 (Table 3b and Figure 2B), and NM_006426.3 (DPYSL4; c.926C>A, p. Pro309Gln) was common to patients #2 and #14 (Table 3b and Figure 2C). In most families, only the probands were tested. Intrafamilial segregation was confirmed in two families.

DISCUSSION

In this study, we found deleterious variants in cancer susceptibility genes, including TET2, ASXL1, and POLN, which are known susceptibility genes, and PDIA2 and DPSYL4, which are novel risk factors. Premature truncating germline variants in TET2 and ASXL1 have been identified in patients with familial pancreatic cancer. , Tet methyl cytosine dioxygenase 2 (TET2) is involved in DNA demethylation, and its loss‐of‐function mutations result in hypermethylation. Meanwhile, ASXL1 is a histone modifier, and gain‐of‐function mutations are associated with tumorigenesis. Somatic variants in TET2 and ASXL1 represent poor prognostic indicators in hematological tumors. It is notable that a patient with strong family history was a double heterozygote for truncating germline variants of TET2 and ASXL1. The two genes could have an additive effect in tumorigenesis. POLN gene is a member of the DNA polymerase family and is responsible for repairing DNA damage. Truncating variants of POLN have been previously reported as causative genes of germline variants in pancreatic cancer. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report that a truncating variant (i.e., a frameshift variant) of POLN could be associated with both IPMN and pancreatic cancer. , Two variants observed in patients with a strong family history were previously reported to have a significantly higher frequency in patients with various cancers than in the general population. First, the protein disulfide‐isomerase A2 (PDIA2), a protein expressed in the pancreas, is involved in the regulation of cellular levels and biological functions of estrogen and has been identified as an autoantibody for autoimmune pancreatitis in vivo. , Although the association between a pathogenic PDIA2 variant and pancreatic cancer has not yet been reported, all four patients in the two families with this variant were females with a strong family history, which could lead to pancreatic cancer or cystic changes. Second, DPYSL4 is an intracellular metabolic regulator induced by p53, a known tumor suppressor, and is found in mitochondria of mast cells. However, its relatively high allele frequency among Southeast Asians (0.098) makes the candidacy of variants less likely. This study has some limitations. First, protein functions by candidate gene variants obtained from our analysis have only been investigated using in silico analysis. According to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/the Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG/AMP) guideline 2015, NM_006849.4 (PDIA2: c.1403C>T, p. Pro468Leu) and NM_015338.6 (DPYSL4: c.926C>A, p. Pro309Gln) are classified as variants of uncertain significance, suggesting the need for functional and segregation analysis. Second, only subsets of the affected family members and obligate carriers underwent genomic analysis. The segregation analysis is incomplete because of the limited availability of samples from family members. Nevertheless, even among families who were not shown to have relevant variants in known cancer susceptibility genes, IPMN and strong family history were demonstrated as significant factors predictive of progression to IPMC or pancreatic cancer. Furthermore, patients with IPMN and strong family history tended to be negative for known environmental risk factors for pancreatic cancer. Patients with IPMN and a strong family history of pancreatic cancer could benefit from surveillance using EUS and/or MRCP regardless of the known environmental risk factors. , The identification of novel pancreatic cancer or IPMN susceptibility genes, including PDIA2, could advance the genomic screening of patients who would benefit from regular imaging studies for IPMN and pancreatic cancers and provide a better understanding of the multistep pathogenic progression of pancreatic cancer. In conclusion, in our cohort of 668 patients with IPMN and 244 with pancreatic cancer, we identified 18 patients with a strong family history who are at high risk of progression to pancreatic cancer. Genomic analysis of these patients identified three previously recognized susceptibility genes and a novel potential candidate, PDIA2.

DISCLOSURE

Yuko Kitagawa received grants from CHUGAI PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.; TAIHO PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD; Yakult Honsha Co. Ltd.; ASAHI KASEI PHARMA CORPORATION EA Pharma Co., Ltd.; Astellas Pharma Inc.; Toyama Chemical Co., Ltd.; MEDICON INC.; KAKEN PHARMACEUTICAL CO. LTD.; Eisai Co., Ltd.; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Factory Inc.; TEIJIN PHARMA LIMITED; NIHON PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.; Nippon Covidien Inc.; SHIONOGI & CO., LTD.; Olympus Corporation AstraZeneca K.K.; Ethicon, Inc.; MSD K.K.; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.; Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.; ONO PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.; TSUMURA & CO.; Kyouwa Hakkou Kirin Co., Ltd.; DAINIPPON SUMITOMO PHARMA Co., Ltd.; Smith&Nephew KK; and Bristol‐Myers Squibb K.K. Supplementary Material Click here for additional data file.
  33 in total

1.  Whole-exome Sequencing Reveals New Potential Susceptibility Genes for Japanese Familial Pancreatic Cancer.

Authors:  Erina Takai; Hiromi Nakamura; Suenori Chiku; Emi Kubo; Akihiro Ohmoto; Yasushi Totoki; Tatsuhiro Shibata; Ryota Higuchi; Masakazu Yamamoto; Junji Furuse; Kyoko Shimizu; Hideaki Takahashi; Chigusa Morizane; Toru Furukawa; Shinichi Yachida
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 13.787

2.  Whole Genome Sequencing Defines the Genetic Heterogeneity of Familial Pancreatic Cancer.

Authors:  Nicholas J Roberts; Alexis L Norris; Gloria M Petersen; Melissa L Bondy; Randall Brand; Steven Gallinger; Robert C Kurtz; Sara H Olson; Anil K Rustgi; Ann G Schwartz; Elena Stoffel; Sapna Syngal; George Zogopoulos; Syed Z Ali; Jennifer Axilbund; Kari G Chaffee; Yun-Ching Chen; Michele L Cote; Erica J Childs; Christopher Douville; Fernando S Goes; Joseph M Herman; Christine Iacobuzio-Donahue; Melissa Kramer; Alvin Makohon-Moore; Richard W McCombie; K Wyatt McMahon; Noushin Niknafs; Jennifer Parla; Mehdi Pirooznia; James B Potash; Andrew D Rhim; Alyssa L Smith; Yuxuan Wang; Christopher L Wolfgang; Laura D Wood; Peter P Zandi; Michael Goggins; Rachel Karchin; James R Eshleman; Nickolas Papadopoulos; Kenneth W Kinzler; Bert Vogelstein; Ralph H Hruban; Alison P Klein
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 39.397

3.  Genomic analysis of familial pancreatic cancers and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms: A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Kodai Abe; Minoru Kitago; Kenjiro Kosaki; Mamiko Yamada; Eisuke Iwasaki; Shintaro Kawasaki; Keijiro Mizukami; Yukihide Momozawa; Chikashi Terao; Hiroshi Yagi; Yuta Abe; Yasushi Hasegawa; Shutaro Hori; Masayuki Tanaka; Yutaka Nakano; Yuko Kitagawa
Journal:  Cancer Sci       Date:  2022-03-09       Impact factor: 6.518

4.  Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology.

Authors:  Sue Richards; Nazneen Aziz; Sherri Bale; David Bick; Soma Das; Julie Gastier-Foster; Wayne W Grody; Madhuri Hegde; Elaine Lyon; Elaine Spector; Karl Voelkerding; Heidi L Rehm
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 8.822

5.  Genome-wide association meta-analysis identifies GP2 gene risk variants for pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Yingsong Lin; Masahiro Nakatochi; Yasuyuki Hosono; Hidemi Ito; Yoichiro Kamatani; Akihito Inoko; Hiromi Sakamoto; Fumie Kinoshita; Yumiko Kobayashi; Hiroshi Ishii; Masato Ozaka; Takashi Sasaki; Masato Matsuyama; Naoki Sasahira; Manabu Morimoto; Satoshi Kobayashi; Taito Fukushima; Makoto Ueno; Shinichi Ohkawa; Naoto Egawa; Sawako Kuruma; Mitsuru Mori; Haruhisa Nakao; Yasushi Adachi; Masumi Okuda; Takako Osaki; Shigeru Kamiya; Chaochen Wang; Kazuo Hara; Yasuhiro Shimizu; Tatsuo Miyamoto; Yuko Hayashi; Hiromichi Ebi; Tomohiro Kohmoto; Issei Imoto; Yumiko Kasugai; Yoshinori Murakami; Masato Akiyama; Kazuyoshi Ishigaki; Koichi Matsuda; Makoto Hirata; Kazuaki Shimada; Takuji Okusaka; Takahisa Kawaguchi; Meiko Takahashi; Yoshiyuki Watanabe; Kiyonori Kuriki; Aya Kadota; Rieko Okada; Haruo Mikami; Toshiro Takezaki; Sadao Suzuki; Taiki Yamaji; Motoki Iwasaki; Norie Sawada; Atsushi Goto; Kengo Kinoshita; Nobuo Fuse; Fumiki Katsuoka; Atsushi Shimizu; Satoshi S Nishizuka; Kozo Tanno; Ken Suzuki; Yukinori Okada; Momoko Horikoshi; Toshimasa Yamauchi; Takashi Kadowaki; Herbert Yu; Jun Zhong; Laufey T Amundadottir; Yuichiro Doki; Hideshi Ishii; Hidetoshi Eguchi; David Bogumil; Christopher A Haiman; Loic Le Marchand; Masaki Mori; Harvey Risch; Veronica W Setiawan; Shoichiro Tsugane; Kenji Wakai; Teruhiko Yoshida; Fumihiko Matsuda; Michiaki Kubo; Shogo Kikuchi; Keitaro Matsuo
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 14.919

6.  Familial pancreatic cancer with PALB2 and NBN pathogenic variants: a case report.

Authors:  Kodai Abe; Arisa Ueki; Yusaku Urakawa; Minoru Kitago; Tomoko Yoshihama; Yoshiko Nanki; Yuko Kitagawa; Daisuke Aoki; Kenjiro Kosaki; Akira Hirasawa
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 2.857

7.  Prognostic interaction between ASXL1 and TET2 mutations in chronic myelomonocytic leukemia.

Authors:  M M Patnaik; T L Lasho; P Vijayvargiya; C M Finke; C A Hanson; R P Ketterling; N Gangat; A Tefferi
Journal:  Blood Cancer J       Date:  2016-01-15       Impact factor: 11.037

Review 8.  Age-Associated TET2 Mutations: Common Drivers of Myeloid Dysfunction, Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease.

Authors:  Christina K Ferrone; Mackenzie Blydt-Hansen; Michael J Rauh
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 5.923

9.  Genetic characterization of pancreatic cancer patients and prediction of carrier status of germline pathogenic variants in cancer-predisposing genes.

Authors:  Keijiro Mizukami; Yusuke Iwasaki; Eiryo Kawakami; Makoto Hirata; Yoichiro Kamatani; Koichi Matsuda; Mikiko Endo; Kokichi Sugano; Teruhiko Yoshida; Yoshinori Murakami; Hidewaki Nakagawa; Amanda B Spurdle; Yukihide Momozawa
Journal:  EBioMedicine       Date:  2020-09-24       Impact factor: 8.143

Review 10.  Hereditary pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Kodai Abe; Minoru Kitago; Yuko Kitagawa; Akira Hirasawa
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-09-02       Impact factor: 3.402

View more
  2 in total

1.  Genomic analysis of familial pancreatic cancers and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms: A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Kodai Abe; Minoru Kitago; Kenjiro Kosaki; Mamiko Yamada; Eisuke Iwasaki; Shintaro Kawasaki; Keijiro Mizukami; Yukihide Momozawa; Chikashi Terao; Hiroshi Yagi; Yuta Abe; Yasushi Hasegawa; Shutaro Hori; Masayuki Tanaka; Yutaka Nakano; Yuko Kitagawa
Journal:  Cancer Sci       Date:  2022-03-09       Impact factor: 6.518

Review 2.  Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms in Hereditary Cancer Syndromes.

Authors:  Devarshi R Ardeshna; Shiva Rangwani; Troy Cao; Timothy M Pawlik; Peter P Stanich; Somashekar G Krishna
Journal:  Biomedicines       Date:  2022-06-22
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.