4.4 Article

Clinical implications of the proliferative ability of the squamous component regarding tumor progression of adenosquamous carcinoma of the pancreas: A preliminary report

期刊

PANCREATOLOGY
卷 17, 期 5, 页码 788-794

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2017.08.001

关键词

Adenosquamous carcinoma; Ki-67; Pancreatic cancer; Prognosis; Proportion

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to examine the clinicopathological characteristics of patients with adenosquamous carcinoma of the pancreas (ASCP) and assess whether the proliferative ability of the squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) component contributes to either its proportion within the tumor or tumor progression. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 12 patients with resected ASCP and compared their clinicopathological characteristics with those of 161 patients with adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (ACP). The Ki-67 indexes of the separate ASCP components were assessed. Results: All the clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes were similar between the ASCP patients and ACP patients. Among the 12 ASCP cases, nine exhibited higher Ki-67 levels in the SCC component than in the corresponding adenocarcinoma (AC) component at primary sites (P = 0.022). The component with a higher Ki-67 level coincided with the predominant component at the primary site in nine of 11 patients. In all 10 patients who presented lymph node metastasis, the metastases almost entirely consisted of either the SCC or AC component. The SCC component was absent from metastatic lymph nodes in five of 10 patients even though the Ki-67 levels at the primary site in four of these patients were higher in the SCC component than in the AC component. Conclusions: The enhanced proliferative ability of the SCC component of ASCP is reflected by its proportion within the tumor. However, other biological factors might contribute to metastasis in ASCP. (C) 2017 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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