Cargando…

Validation and comparison of the molecular classifications of pancreatic carcinomas

Four molecular classifications of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), biologically and clinically relevant and based on gene expression profiles, were established in the recent years, including the Collisson’s, Moffitt’s (“tumor” and “stroma” classifications), and Bailey’s classifications. The...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Birnbaum, David J., Finetti, Pascal, Birnbaum, Daniel, Mamessier, Emilie, Bertucci, François
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5674743/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29110659
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12943-017-0739-z
_version_ 1783276840114192384
author Birnbaum, David J.
Finetti, Pascal
Birnbaum, Daniel
Mamessier, Emilie
Bertucci, François
author_facet Birnbaum, David J.
Finetti, Pascal
Birnbaum, Daniel
Mamessier, Emilie
Bertucci, François
author_sort Birnbaum, David J.
collection PubMed
description Four molecular classifications of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), biologically and clinically relevant and based on gene expression profiles, were established in the recent years, including the Collisson’s, Moffitt’s (“tumor” and “stroma” classifications), and Bailey’s classifications. The aim of this study was to validate the prognostic value of the Moffitt’s classifications and to compare the Collisson’s, Moffitt’s, and Bailey’s classifications in a large series of samples. We collected clinical and gene expression data of PDAC samples from 15 public data sets, resulting in a total of 846 primary cancer samples, including 601 with survival annotation. All samples were classified according to each of the four multigene classifiers. We confirmed the independent prognostic value of the Moffitt “tumor”, Moffitt “stroma”, and Bailey’s classifications, but not that of the Collisson’s classification. Despite a relatively low gene overlap, all classifications were associated with pathological grade, an important prognostic feature and reflect of intrinsic molecular characteristics of tumors. The concordance rate in term of “good-prognosis” vs. “poor-prognosis” prediction by classifiers was relatively high (from 73 to 86%) between the three “tumor” classifications based on tumor gene lists (Collisson, Moffitt “tumor”, Bailey), but low (from 50 to 60%) with the Moffitt’s stroma classification based on stroma genes. Multivariate analysis incorporating the four classifiers together retained as significant variables the Moffitt “stroma” and Bailey classifications, highlighting the complementarity of classifiers based on tumor epithelium (Bailey) and tumor stroma (Moffitt stroma). Our results reinforce the clinical validity of subtyping in PDAC, which should be regarded as a collection of separate diseases. Beside their clinical utility that remains to be demonstrated, the clinical interest of the subtypes, notably those from Bailey’s and Moffitt’s “stroma” classifiers that show independent prognostic value, will be reinforced by the identification of new biomarkers and/or therapeutic targets in each subtype for designing and testing novel specific targeted therapies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12943-017-0739-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5674743
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56747432017-11-15 Validation and comparison of the molecular classifications of pancreatic carcinomas Birnbaum, David J. Finetti, Pascal Birnbaum, Daniel Mamessier, Emilie Bertucci, François Mol Cancer Letter to the Editor Four molecular classifications of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), biologically and clinically relevant and based on gene expression profiles, were established in the recent years, including the Collisson’s, Moffitt’s (“tumor” and “stroma” classifications), and Bailey’s classifications. The aim of this study was to validate the prognostic value of the Moffitt’s classifications and to compare the Collisson’s, Moffitt’s, and Bailey’s classifications in a large series of samples. We collected clinical and gene expression data of PDAC samples from 15 public data sets, resulting in a total of 846 primary cancer samples, including 601 with survival annotation. All samples were classified according to each of the four multigene classifiers. We confirmed the independent prognostic value of the Moffitt “tumor”, Moffitt “stroma”, and Bailey’s classifications, but not that of the Collisson’s classification. Despite a relatively low gene overlap, all classifications were associated with pathological grade, an important prognostic feature and reflect of intrinsic molecular characteristics of tumors. The concordance rate in term of “good-prognosis” vs. “poor-prognosis” prediction by classifiers was relatively high (from 73 to 86%) between the three “tumor” classifications based on tumor gene lists (Collisson, Moffitt “tumor”, Bailey), but low (from 50 to 60%) with the Moffitt’s stroma classification based on stroma genes. Multivariate analysis incorporating the four classifiers together retained as significant variables the Moffitt “stroma” and Bailey classifications, highlighting the complementarity of classifiers based on tumor epithelium (Bailey) and tumor stroma (Moffitt stroma). Our results reinforce the clinical validity of subtyping in PDAC, which should be regarded as a collection of separate diseases. Beside their clinical utility that remains to be demonstrated, the clinical interest of the subtypes, notably those from Bailey’s and Moffitt’s “stroma” classifiers that show independent prognostic value, will be reinforced by the identification of new biomarkers and/or therapeutic targets in each subtype for designing and testing novel specific targeted therapies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12943-017-0739-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-11-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5674743/ /pubmed/29110659 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12943-017-0739-z Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Letter to the Editor
Birnbaum, David J.
Finetti, Pascal
Birnbaum, Daniel
Mamessier, Emilie
Bertucci, François
Validation and comparison of the molecular classifications of pancreatic carcinomas
title Validation and comparison of the molecular classifications of pancreatic carcinomas
title_full Validation and comparison of the molecular classifications of pancreatic carcinomas
title_fullStr Validation and comparison of the molecular classifications of pancreatic carcinomas
title_full_unstemmed Validation and comparison of the molecular classifications of pancreatic carcinomas
title_short Validation and comparison of the molecular classifications of pancreatic carcinomas
title_sort validation and comparison of the molecular classifications of pancreatic carcinomas
topic Letter to the Editor
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5674743/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29110659
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12943-017-0739-z
work_keys_str_mv AT birnbaumdavidj validationandcomparisonofthemolecularclassificationsofpancreaticcarcinomas
AT finettipascal validationandcomparisonofthemolecularclassificationsofpancreaticcarcinomas
AT birnbaumdaniel validationandcomparisonofthemolecularclassificationsofpancreaticcarcinomas
AT mamessieremilie validationandcomparisonofthemolecularclassificationsofpancreaticcarcinomas
AT bertuccifrancois validationandcomparisonofthemolecularclassificationsofpancreaticcarcinomas