4.6 Review

Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Molecular Pathology and Predictive Biomarkers

期刊

CELLS
卷 11, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells11193068

关键词

pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; molecular pathology; predictive marker; tumor microenvironment; targeted therapy and immunotherapy

资金

  1. [1R01CA196941]
  2. [1R01CA195651]
  3. [U01CA196403]
  4. [P01CA117969]
  5. [P50CA221707]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review provides an overview of the histological and molecular heterogeneity of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), as well as its subtypes, precursor lesions, immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME), and available predictive molecular markers.
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an extremely poor prognosis due to the lack of methods or biomarkers for early diagnosis and its resistance to conventional treatment modalities, targeted therapies, and immunotherapies. PDACs are a heterogenous group of malignant epithelial neoplasms with various histomorphological patterns and complex, heterogenous genetic/molecular landscapes. The newly proposed molecular classifications of PDAC based on extensive genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic and epigenetic data have provided significant insights into the molecular heterogeneity and aggressive biology of this deadly disease. Recent studies characterizing the tumor microenvironment (TME) have shed light on the dynamic interplays between the tumor cells and the immunosuppressive TME of PDAC, which is essential to disease progression, as well as its resistance to chemotherapy, newly developed targeted therapy and immunotherapy. There is a critical need for the development of predictive markers that can be clinically utilized to select effective personalized therapies for PDAC patients. In this review, we provide an overview of the histological and molecular heterogeneity and subtypes of PDAC, as well as its precursor lesions, immunosuppressive TME, and currently available predictive molecular markers for patients.

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

4.6
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