Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32675551›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery2020

Precision Oncology in Surgery: Patient Selection for Operable Pancreatic Cancer.

Stephan B Dreyer, Mark Pinese, Nigel B Jamieson, Christopher J Scarlett, Emily K Colvin, Marina Pajic, Amber L Johns, Jeremy L Humphris, Jianmin Wu, Mark J Cowley and 28 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Improving outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. A clinical-radiomics nomogram based on dual-layer spectral detector CT to predict cancer stage in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Paradigm shift for defining the resectability of pancreatic cancer.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2021
    Review
  19. [Influence of molecular pathology on oncological surgery of pancreatic cancer].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

38 authors at 12 institutions in 4 countries.

Stephan B DreyerWolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Mark PineseThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Nigel B JamiesonWolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Christopher J ScarlettSchool of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, NSW, Australia.
Emily K ColvinThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Marina PajicThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Amber L JohnsThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Jeremy L HumphrisThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Jianmin WuThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Mark J CowleyThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Angela ChouThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Adnan M NagrialThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Lorraine ChantrillThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Venessa T ChinThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Marc D JonesStratified Medicine Scotland, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Kim Moran-JonesCollege of Medicine, Veterinary, and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Christopher Ross CarterWest of Scotland Pancreatic Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Euan J DicksonWest of Scotland Pancreatic Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Jaswinder S SamraDepartment of Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Neil D MerrettSchool of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia.
Anthony J GillThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
James G KenchThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst and Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Fraser DuthieWolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
David K MillerIllumina Inc, San Diego, CA.
Susanna CookeWolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Daniela AustInstitute for Pathology, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Thomas KnöselInstitute of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany.
Petra RümmeleDepartment of Pathology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Robert GrützmannDepartment of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Christian PilarskyDepartment of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Nam Q NguyenDepartment of Gastroenterology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia.
Elizabeth A MusgroveWolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Peter J BaileyWolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Colin J McKayWolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Andrew V BiankinWolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
David K ChangWolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Australian Pancreatic Cancer Genome Initiative
Glasgow Precision Oncology Laboratory
University of Glasgow · GBThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre · AUGarvan Institute of Medical Research · AUGlasgow Royal Infirmary · GBHunter Water · AUBankstown Lidcombe Hospital · AUQueen Elizabeth University Hospital · GBRoyal Adelaide Hospital · AURoyal Prince Alfred Hospital · AUSt Vincent's Hospital Sydney · AUTU Dresden · DEUniversitätsklinikum Erlangen · DE

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe aimed to define preoperative clinical and molecular characteristics that would allow better patient selection for operative resection.

backgroundAlthough we use molecular selection methods for systemic targeted therapies, these principles are not applied to surgical oncology. Improving patient selection is of vital importance for the operative treatment of pancreatic cancer (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma). Although surgery is the only chance of long-term survival, 80% still succumb to the disease and approximately 30% die within 1 year, often sooner than those that have unresected local disease.

methodIn 3 independent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cohorts (total participants = 1184) the relationship between aberrant expression of prometastatic proteins S100A2 and S100A4 and survival was assessed. A preoperative nomogram based on clinical variables available before surgery and expression of these proteins was constructed and compared to traditional measures, and a postoperative nomogram.

resultsHigh expression of either S100A2 or S100A4 was independent poor prognostic factors in a training cohort of 518 participants. These results were validated in 2 independent patient cohorts (Glasgow, n = 198; Germany, n = 468). Aberrant biomarker expression stratified the cohorts into 3 distinct prognostic groups. A preoperative nomogram incorporating S100A2 and S100A4 expression predicted survival and nomograms derived using postoperative clinicopathological variables.

conclusionsOf those patients with a poor preoperative nomogram score, approximately 50% of patients died within a year of resection. Nomograms have the potential to improve selection for surgery and neoadjuvant therapy, avoiding surgery in aggressive disease, and justifying more extensive resections in biologically favorable disease.

Indexed as

AgedCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalCause of DeathChemotactic FactorsCohort StudiesDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansMaleMiddle AgedNomogramsPancreatectomyPancreatic NeoplasmsPatient SelectionPrognosisChemotactic FactorsS100A2 protein, humanS100 Proteins

Identifiers

PMID32675551
PMCPMC7373491
OpenAlexW2906752735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.