| Literature DB >> 35888050 |
Ingrid Garajová1, Andrea Cavazzoni2, Michela Verze1, Roberta Minari1, Giuseppe Pedrazzi2, Rita Balsano1,3, Fabio Gelsomino4, Raffaele Dalla Valle2, Graziana Digiacomo2, Elisa Giovannetti3,5, Francesco Leonardi1.
Abstract
Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly devastating disease with rising incidence and poor prognosis. The lack of reliable prognostic biomarkers hampers the individual evaluation of the survival and recurrence potential.Entities:
Keywords: liquid biopsy; pancreatic adenocarcinoma; prognostic biomarker; sPD-L1; sTGF-beta
Year: 2022 PMID: 35888050 PMCID: PMC9323895 DOI: 10.3390/life12070960
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Life (Basel) ISSN: 2075-1729
Clinico-pathological features of PDAC patients.
| Characteristic | Metastatic No, % | Radically Resected No, % |
|---|---|---|
| No. Patients | 23 | 15 |
| Age (median), y | 69 (48–83%) | 69 (43–82%) |
| Sex | ||
| Male | 10 (43.5%) | 8 (53%) |
| Female | 13 (56.5%) | 7 (47%) |
| Tumor location | head: 16 (70%) | head: 10 (67%) |
| body-tail: 5 (30%) | body-tail: 5 (23%) | |
| TNM in resected PDAC pts | ||
| T | T1N0 (1 pt), T2N0 (5 pts), unknown (1 pt) | |
| N | T1-3N+ (8 pts) | |
| CEA elevated after surgery | ||
| no | 11 (73%) | |
| yes | 4 (27%) | |
| CA 19-9 elevated after surgery | ||
| no | 12 (80%) | |
| yes | 3 (20%) | |
| Adjuvant therapy | gemcitabine-based regimen: 6 (40%) | |
| 5-FU based regimen: 7 (47%) | ||
| no adjuvant therapy: 2 (13%) | ||
| Relapse after surgery | ||
| no | 5 (33%) | |
| yes | 10 (67%) | |
| Median DFS | 8 (4–18 months) | |
| CEA elevated at diagnosis of metastatic disease | ||
| no | 10 (43.5%) | |
| yes | 13 (56.5%) | |
| CA 19-9 elevated at diagnosis of metastatic disease | ||
| no | 3 (13%) | |
| yes | 20 (87%) | |
| Location of metastases | liver only: 8 (35%) | |
| lung only: 1 (4%) | ||
| two or more sites: 14 (61%) | ||
| Palliative chemotherapy | gemcitabine-based: 14 (61%) | |
| 5FU-based: 7 (30%) | ||
| no therapy: 2 (9%) |
Figure 1TGF-beta and PD-L1 values differences between radically resected and metastatic PDAC patients. (A) Interval plots showing statistically significant difference for sTGF-beta values between radically resected (label “metastasis No”) and metastatic (label “metastasis yes”) group of PDAC patients (Student’s t-test, p = 0.042). (B) Interval plots showing statistically significant difference for sPD-L1 values between radically resected (label “metastasis No”) and metastatic (label “metastasis yes”) group of PDAC patients (Student’s t-test, p = 0.010).
Figure 2sTGF-beta and sPD-L1 values differences at disease relapse of radically-resected PDAC patients. (A) Interval plots showing statistically significant difference for sTGF-beta baseline values in radically-resected PDAC patients after surgery in comparison to TGF-beta values at disease relapse (Student’s t-test, p = 0.031). (B) The same comparison for PD-L1 levels did not show any statistically significant difference (Student’s t-test, p = 0.891).
Figure 3sTGF-beta values vary at relapse of radically resected PDAC patients. The Correlation Matrix analysis shows a statistically significant difference for sTGF-beta values in radically resected PDAC patients after surgery in comparison to sTGF-beta values at disease relapse (Correlation Matrix, p = 0.049).
Figure 4sTGF-beta and sPD-L1 values at baseline and at the disease progression in metastatic PDAC patients. (A) Interval plots showing no statistically significant difference for baseline sTGF-beta values in metastatic PDAC patients at disease progression compared to sTGF-beta baseline values at the start of first-line treatment (Student’s t-test, p = 0.799). (B) Interval plots showing no statistically significant difference for baseline sPD-L1 values in metastatic PDAC patients at disease progression compared to sPD-L1 baseline values at the start of first-line treatment (Student’s t-test, p = 0.891).
Figure 5Overall survival in metastatic PDAC according to median baseline values of sTGF-beta and sPD-L1. (A) Kaplan–Meier curves showing no statistically significant difference for metastatic PDAC patients with upregulated versus downregulated baseline sTGF-beta values (Logrank test, p = 0.375). (B) Kaplan–Meier curves showing no statistically significant difference for metastatic PDAC patients with upregulated versus downregulated baseline sPD-L1 values (Logrank test, p = 0.218).
Figure 6DFS in radically resected PDAC according to median baseline values of sTGF-beta and sPD-L1. (A) Kaplan–Meier curves showing no statistically significant difference for radically resected PDAC patients with upregulated versus downregulated baseline sTGF-beta values (Logrank test, p = 0.537). (B) Kaplan–Meier curves showing no statistically significant difference for radically resected PDAC with upregulated versus downregulated baseline sPD-L1 values (Logrank test, p = 0.527).