Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Novel Biomarker Panels Discriminating between Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma and Extrahepatic Bile Duct Carcinoma.
Noh, Byeong-Joo; Choi, Gun Moo; Jang, Hyuk Jai; Ma, Chung Hyeun; Oh, Ho-Suk; Kim, Moonho; Eom, Dae-Woon.
Affiliation
  • Noh BJ; Department of Pathology, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea.
  • Choi GM; Department of Surgery, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea.
  • Jang HJ; Department of Surgery, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea.
  • Ma CH; Department of Surgery, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea.
  • Oh HS; Department of Internal Medicine, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea.
  • Kim M; Department of Internal Medicine, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea.
  • Eom DW; Department of Pathology, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea edwjyh@gnah.co.kr.
Ann Clin Lab Sci ; 52(2): 323-331, 2022 Mar.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35414511
OBJECTIVE: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma (EBDC) are distinct entities with different clinicopathological implications. Therefore, research to differentiate between the two diseases is compulsory. In this study, four biomarkers were selected (Hippocalcin-like 1 (HPCAL1); annexin A10 (ANXA10); MUC5AC; sodium/potassium-transporting ATPase subunit beta-1 (ATP1B1)) and focus was placed on clarifying the diagnostic performance of each biomarker and pioneering novel-combined biomarker panels to discriminate between PDAC and EBDC. PROCEDURES: An immunohistochemical microarray analysis of HPCAL1, ANXA10, MUC5AC, and ATP1B1 was conducted for surgically resected 55 PDACs and 77 EBDCs. The diagnostic performance discriminating between PDAC and EBDC was evaluated using four biomarkers and the combined biomarker panels. RESULTS: PDACs exhibited more positive expressions for HPCAL1, ANXA10, and MUC5AC, whereas EBDCs exhibited more ATP1B1-positive expressions. The PDAC panel with the best diagnostic performance was the profile of (+ in ≥ 2 among HPCAL1, ANXA10, MUC5AC)/ATP1B1-. The immunophenotype pattern of (- in ≥ 1 among HPCAL1, ANXA10, MUC5AC)/ATP1B1+ is the EBDC panel with the most excellent discriminating power. CONCLUSION: The suggested combined biomarker panels demonstrate the distinguishing diagnostic ability between PDAC and EBDC is better than previous studies. Therefore, for differentiation between PDAC and EBDC, these panels are expected to help unravel the clinicopathological enigma as promising biomarker panels in the future.
Subject(s)
Key words
Search on Google
Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pancreatic Neoplasms / Bile Duct Neoplasms / Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic / Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Ann Clin Lab Sci Year: 2022 Document type: Article Country of publication:
Search on Google
Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pancreatic Neoplasms / Bile Duct Neoplasms / Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic / Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Ann Clin Lab Sci Year: 2022 Document type: Article Country of publication: