4.7 Review

Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Carcinoma Versus Conventional Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Comprehensive Review of Clinical-Pathological Features, Outcomes, and Molecular Insights

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22136756

关键词

pancreatic cancer; PDAC; precursor; IPMN; Intraductal papillary mucinous carcinoma; colloid carcinomas

向作者/读者索取更多资源

IPMCs are a main precursor lesion of PDAC, with distinct subtypes and specific clinical-pathological features and genomic hallmarks. Intestinal IPMNs and associated colloid carcinomas are linked to less aggressive features.
Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) are common and one of the main precursor lesions of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PDAC derived from an IPMN is called intraductal papillary mucinous carcinoma (IPMC) and defines a subgroup of patients with ill-defined specificities. As compared to conventional PDAC, IPMCs have been associated to clinical particularities and favorable pathological features, as well as debated outcomes. However, IPMNs and IPMCs include distinct subtypes of precursor (gastric, pancreato-biliary, intestinal) and invasive (tubular, colloid) lesions, also associated to specific characteristics. Notably, consistent data have shown intestinal IPMNs and associated colloid carcinomas, defining the intestinal pathway, to be associated with less aggressive features. Genomic specificities have also been uncovered, such as mutations of the GNAS gene, and recent data provide more insights into the mechanisms involved in IPMCs carcinogenesis. This review synthetizes available data on clinical-pathological features and outcomes associated with IPMCs and their subtypes. We also describe known genomic hallmarks of these lesions and summarize the latest data about molecular processes involved in IPMNs initiation and progression to IPMCs. Finally, potential implications for clinical practice and future research strategies are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据