Introduction: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is lethal due to its late diagnosis and lack of successful treatments. A possible strategy to reduce its death burden is prevention. Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) are precursors of PDAC. It is difficult to estimate the incidence of IPMNs because they are asymptomatic. Two recent studies reported pancreatic cysts in 3% and 13% of scanned subjects. The possibility of identifying a subgroup of IPMN patients with a higher probability of progression into cancer could be instrumental in increasing the survival rate. In this study, genetic and non-genetic PDAC risk factors were tested in a group of IPMN patients under surveillance. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 354 IPMN patients enrolled in two Italian centres with an average follow-up of 64 months. With the use of DNA extracted from blood, collected at IPMN diagnosis, all patients were genotyped for 30 known PDAC risk loci. The polymorphisms were analysed individually and grouped in an unweighted polygenic score (PGS) in relation to IPMN progression. The ABO blood group and non-genetic PDAC risk factors were also analysed. IPMN progression was defined based on the development of worrisome features and/or high-risk stigmata during follow-up. Results: Two genetic variants (rs1517037 and rs10094872) showed suggestive associations with an increment of IPMN progression. After correction for multiple testing, using the Bonferroni correction, none of the variants showed a statistically significant association. However, associations were observed for the non-genetic variables, such as smoking status, comparing heavy smokers with light smokers (HR = 3.81, 95% 1.43–10.09, p = 0.007), and obesity (HR = 2.46, 95% CI 1.22–4.95, p = 0.012). Conclusion: In conclusion, this study is the first attempt to investigate the presence of shared genetic background between PDAC risk and IPMN progression; however, the results suggest that the 30 established PDAC susceptibility polymorphisms are not associated with clinical IPMN progression in a sample of 354 patients. However, we observed indications of cigarette smoking and body mass index (BMI) involvement in IPMN progression. The biological mechanism that could link these two risk factors to progression could be chronic inflammation, of which both smoking and obesity are strong promoters.

Role of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma risk factors in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm progression / Gentiluomo, M.; Corradi, C.; Arcidiacono, P. G.; Crippa, S.; Falconi, M.; Belfiori, G.; Farinella, R.; Apadula, L.; Lauri, G.; Bina, N.; Rizzato, C.; Canzian, F.; Morelli, L.; Capurso, G.; Campa, D.. - In: FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 2234-943X. - 13:(2023). [10.3389/fonc.2023.1172606]

Role of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma risk factors in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm progression

Arcidiacono P. G.;Crippa S.;Falconi M.;Belfiori G.;Lauri G.;Capurso G.;
2023-01-01

Abstract

Introduction: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is lethal due to its late diagnosis and lack of successful treatments. A possible strategy to reduce its death burden is prevention. Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) are precursors of PDAC. It is difficult to estimate the incidence of IPMNs because they are asymptomatic. Two recent studies reported pancreatic cysts in 3% and 13% of scanned subjects. The possibility of identifying a subgroup of IPMN patients with a higher probability of progression into cancer could be instrumental in increasing the survival rate. In this study, genetic and non-genetic PDAC risk factors were tested in a group of IPMN patients under surveillance. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 354 IPMN patients enrolled in two Italian centres with an average follow-up of 64 months. With the use of DNA extracted from blood, collected at IPMN diagnosis, all patients were genotyped for 30 known PDAC risk loci. The polymorphisms were analysed individually and grouped in an unweighted polygenic score (PGS) in relation to IPMN progression. The ABO blood group and non-genetic PDAC risk factors were also analysed. IPMN progression was defined based on the development of worrisome features and/or high-risk stigmata during follow-up. Results: Two genetic variants (rs1517037 and rs10094872) showed suggestive associations with an increment of IPMN progression. After correction for multiple testing, using the Bonferroni correction, none of the variants showed a statistically significant association. However, associations were observed for the non-genetic variables, such as smoking status, comparing heavy smokers with light smokers (HR = 3.81, 95% 1.43–10.09, p = 0.007), and obesity (HR = 2.46, 95% CI 1.22–4.95, p = 0.012). Conclusion: In conclusion, this study is the first attempt to investigate the presence of shared genetic background between PDAC risk and IPMN progression; however, the results suggest that the 30 established PDAC susceptibility polymorphisms are not associated with clinical IPMN progression in a sample of 354 patients. However, we observed indications of cigarette smoking and body mass index (BMI) involvement in IPMN progression. The biological mechanism that could link these two risk factors to progression could be chronic inflammation, of which both smoking and obesity are strong promoters.
2023
association study
intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN)
pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PADC)
polygenic score (PGS)
single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
fonc-13-1172606.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: PDF editoriale (versione pubblicata dall'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 607.65 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
607.65 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11768/146945
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact