Pancreatic Cancer pp 1523-1549 | Cite as

Multiparameter Modalities for the Study of Patients in the Setting of Individualized Medicine

  • Koji Miyabayashi
  • David A. Tuveson
  • Kenneth H. Yu
Reference work entry


The recent revolution in cancer genetics offers the promise of using genetic information to individualize patient treatment. In pancreatic cancer, numerous studies have described a genetic landscape characterized by a set of commonly mutated genes aggregated into core molecular pathways accompanied by numerous but infrequently mutated genes. Studies have also demonstrated significant intratumoral heterogeneity. Resistance against chemotherapeutic agents has also been attributed to difficulty of drug delivery through a rich stromal microenvironment. For these reasons, therapeutic development against pancreatic cancer has been challenging, and a number of promising agents have failed clinical trial testing. Personalized models have been studied as a tool for testing candidate drugs to select the most efficacious treatment. The patient-derived xenograft (PDX) is a well-established preclinical tool to improve the drug screening and development. The PDX model requires adequate tissue for transplantation, and failure is common. A recently described, innovative three-dimensional organoid culture platform can be exploited for genomic and functional studies at the level of the individual patient for personalized treatment approach. Organoid technology may fill the gap between cancer genetics and patient trials and allow personalized therapy design. Combination of genome-based medicine and individualized model-based drug screening may fulfill the promise of precision medicine for pancreatic cancer.


Precision medicine Three-dimensional organoid culture Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) Genomic-based medicine 


  1. 1.
    Kaufman B, et al. Olaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:244–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bailey P, et al. Genomic analyses identify molecular subtypes of pancreatic cancer. Nature. 2016;531:47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jones S, et al. Exomic sequencing identifies PALB2 as a pancreatic cancer susceptibility gene. Science. 2009;324:217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Villarroel MC, et al. Personalizing cancer treatment in the age of global genomic analyses: PALB2 gene mutations and the response to DNA damaging agents in pancreatic cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2011;10:3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Waddell N, et al. Whole genomes redefine the mutational landscape of pancreatic cancer. Nature. 2015;518:495–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chantrill LA, et al. Precision medicine for advanced pancreas cancer: the individualized molecular pancreatic cancer therapy (IMPaCT) trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:2029–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Biankin AV, et al. Pancreatic cancer genomes reveal aberrations in axon guidance pathway genes. Nature. 2012;491:399–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jones S, et al. Core signaling pathways in human pancreatic cancers revealed by global genomic analyses. Science. 2008;321:1801–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang L, et al. Whole-exome sequencing of human pancreatic cancers and characterization of genomic instability caused by MLH1 haploinsufficiency and complete deficiency. Genome Res. 2012;22:208–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nones K, et al. Genome-wide DNA methylation patterns in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma reveal epigenetic deregulation of SLIT-ROBO, ITGA2 and MET signaling. Int J Cancer. 2014;135:1110–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garcia PL, et al. The BET bromodomain inhibitor JQ1 suppresses growth of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in patient-derived xenograft models. Oncogene. 2016;35:833–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mazur PK, et al. Combined inhibition of BET family proteins and histone deacetylases as a potential epigenetics-based therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Nat Med. 2015;21:1163–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Collisson EA, et al. Subtypes of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and their differing responses to therapy. Nat Med. 2011;17:500–3. Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moffitt RA, et al. Virtual microdissection identifies distinct tumor- and stroma-specific subtypes of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Nat Genet. 2015;47:1168–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Noll EM, et al. CYP3A5 mediates basal and acquired therapy resistance in different subtypes of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Nat Med. 2016;22:278–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rosty C, Goggins M. Early detection of pancreatic carcinoma. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2002;16:37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ching CK, Rhodes JM. Enzyme-linked PNA lectin binding assay compared with CA19-9 and CEA radioimmunoassay as a diagnostic blood test for pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer. 1989;59:949–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Uehara H, et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic cancer by detecting telomerase activity in pancreatic juice: comparison with K-ras mutations. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:2513–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yokoyama M, et al. Matrix metalloproteinase-2 in pancreatic juice for diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Pancreas. 2002;24:344–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bettegowda C, et al. Detection of circulating tumor DNA in early- and late-stage human malignancies. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6:224ra24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chen R, Pan S, Aebersold R, Brentnall TA. Proteomics studies of pancreatic cancer. Proteomics Clin Appl. 2007;1:1582–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yu KH, Rustgi AK, Blair IA. Characterization of proteins in human pancreatic cancer serum using differential gel electrophoresis and tandem mass spectrometry. J Proteome Res. 2005;4:1742–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wehr AY, Furth EE, Sangar V, Blair IA, Yu KH. Analysis of the human pancreatic stellate cell secreted proteome. Pancreas. 2011;40:557–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yu KH, et al. Stable isotope dilution multidimensional liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for pancreatic cancer serum biomarker discovery. J Proteome Res. 2009;8:1565–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wehr AY, Hwang W-T, Blair IA, Yu KH. Relative quantification of serum proteins from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients by stable isotope dilution liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. J Proteome Res. 2012;11:1749–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Britton D, et al. Quantification of pancreatic cancer proteome and phosphorylome: indicates molecular events likely contributing to cancer and activity of drug targets. PLoS One. 2014;9:e90948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Humphrey ES, et al. Resolution of novel pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma subtypes by global phosphotyrosine profiling. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2016;15:2671–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Daemen A, et al. Metabolite profiling stratifies pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas into subtypes with distinct sensitivities to metabolic inhibitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112:E4410–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ying H, et al. Oncogenic Kras maintains pancreatic tumors through regulation of anabolic glucose metabolism. Cell. 2012;149:656–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kottakis F, et al. LKB1 loss links serine metabolism to DNA methylation and tumorigenesis. Nature. 2016;539:390–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhao H, et al. Tumor microenvironment derived exosomes pleiotropically modulate cancer cell metabolism. eLife. Sciences. 2016;5:e10250.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sherman MH, et al. Vitamin D receptor-mediated stromal reprogramming suppresses pancreatitis and enhances pancreatic cancer therapy. Cell. 2014;159:80–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kobayashi T, et al. A novel serum metabolomics-based diagnostic approach to pancreatic cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2013;22:571–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mayers JR, et al. Elevation of circulating branched-chain amino acids is an early event in human pancreatic adenocarcinoma development. Nat Med. 2014;20:1193–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fukutake N, et al. A novel multivariate index for pancreatic cancer detection based on the plasma free amino acid profile. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0132223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zhang G, et al. Integration of metabolomics and transcriptomics revealed a fatty acid network exerting growth inhibitory effects in human pancreatic cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:4983–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Davis VW, Schiller DE, Eurich D, Bathe OF, Sawyer MB. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is associated with a distinct urinary metabolomic signature. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(Suppl 3):S415–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Canto MI, et al. International cancer of the pancreas screening (CAPS) Consortium summit on the management of patients with increased risk for familial pancreatic cancer. Gut. 2013;62:339–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Witt H, et al. Variants in CPA1 are strongly associated with early onset chronic pancreatitis. Nat Genet. 2013;45:1216–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Von Hoff DD, et al. Pilot study using molecular profiling of patients’ tumors to find potential targets and select treatments for their refractory cancers. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4877–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Yu KH, et al. Pharmacogenomic modeling of circulating tumor and invasive cells for prediction of chemotherapy response and resistance in pancreatic cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:5281–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Singh A, et al. A gene expression signature associated with “K-Ras addiction” reveals regulators of EMT and tumor cell survival. Cancer Cell. 2009;15:489–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Garnett MJ, et al. Systematic identification of genomic markers of drug sensitivity in cancer cells. Nature. 2012;483:570–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Iorio F, et al. A landscape of pharmacogenomic interactions in cancer. Cell. 2016;166:740–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Voskoglou-Nomikos T, Pater JL, Seymour L. Clinical predictive value of the in vitro cell line, human xenograft, and mouse allograft preclinical cancer models. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9:4227–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Abaan OD, et al. The exomes of the NCI-60 panel: a genomic resource for cancer biology and systems pharmacology. Cancer Res. 2013;73:4372–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bardeesy N, et al. Smad4 is dispensable for normal pancreas development yet critical in progression and tumor biology of pancreas cancer. Genes Dev. 2006;20:3130–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hruban RH, et al. Pathology of genetically engineered mouse models of pancreatic exocrine cancer: consensus report and recommendations. Cancer Res. 2006;66:95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Olive KP, et al. Inhibition of hedgehog signaling enhances delivery of chemotherapy in a mouse model of pancreatic cancer. Science. 2009;324:1457–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hingorani SR, et al. Trp53R172H and KrasG12D cooperate to promote chromosomal instability and widely metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in mice. Cancer Cell. 2005;7:469–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Jacobetz MA, et al. Hyaluronan impairs vascular function and drug delivery in a mouse model of pancreatic cancer. Gut. 2013;62:112–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Toole BP, Slomiany MG. Hyaluronan: a constitutive regulator of chemoresistance and malignancy in cancer cells. Semin Cancer Biol. 2008;18:244–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Rhim AD, et al. Stromal elements act to restrain, rather than support, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Cancer Cell. 2014;25:735–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Feig C, et al. Targeting CXCL12 from FAP-expressing carcinoma-associated fibroblasts synergizes with anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy in pancreatic cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:20212–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Morran DC, et al. Targeting mTOR dependency in pancreatic cancer. Gut. 2014;63:1481–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Miyabayashi K, et al. Erlotinib prolongs survival in pancreatic cancer by blocking gemcitabine-induced MAPK signals. Cancer Res. 2013;73:2221–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Chiou S-H, et al. Pancreatic cancer modeling using retrograde viral vector delivery and in vivo CRISPR/Cas9-mediated somatic genome editing. Genes Dev. 2015;29:1576–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Johnson JI, et al. Relationships between drug activity in NCI preclinical in vitro and in vivo models and early clinical trials. Br J Cancer. 2001;84:1424–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rubio-Viqueira B, et al. An in vivo platform for translational drug development in pancreatic cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:4652–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bertotti A, et al. A molecularly annotated platform of patient-derived xenografts (‘xenopatients’) identifies HER2 as an effective therapeutic target in cetuximab-resistant colorectal cancer. Cancer Discov. 2011;1:508–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Garrido-Laguna I, et al. Integrated preclinical and clinical development of mTOR inhibitors in pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer. 2010;103:649–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Garrido-Laguna I, et al. Tumor engraftment in nude mice and enrichment in stroma-related gene pathways predict poor survival and resistance to gemcitabine in patients with pancreatic cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:5793–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Hidalgo M, et al. A pilot clinical study of treatment guided by personalized tumorgrafts in patients with advanced cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2011;10:1311–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Sebastiani V. Immunohistochemical and genetic evaluation of deoxycytidine kinase in pancreatic cancer: relationship to molecular mechanisms of gemcitabine resistance and survival. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:2492–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Sato T, et al. Single Lgr5 stem cells build crypt-villus structures in vitro without a mesenchymal niche. Nature. 2009;459:262–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ootani A, et al. Sustained in vitro intestinal epithelial culture within a Wnt-dependent stem cell niche. Nat Med. 2009;15:701–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Boj SF, et al. Organoid models of human and mouse ductal pancreatic cancer. Cell. 2015;160:324–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Huang L, et al. Ductal pancreatic cancer modeling and drug screening using human pluripotent stem cell- and patient-derived tumor organoids. Nat Med. 2015;21:1364–71. Scholar
  69. 69.
    Walsh AJ, Castellanos JA, Nagathihalli NS, Merchant NB, Skala MC. Optical imaging of drug-induced metabolism changes in murine and human pancreatic cancer organoids reveals heterogeneous drug response. Pancreas. 2016;45:863–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Li X, et al. Oncogenic transformation of diverse gastrointestinal tissues in primary organoid culture. Nat Med. 2014;20:769–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    van de Wetering M, et al. Prospective derivation of a living organoid biobank of colorectal cancer patients. Cell. 2015;161:933–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Koji Miyabayashi
    • 1
  • David A. Tuveson
    • 1
  • Kenneth H. Yu
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Cold Spring Harbor LaboratoryCold Spring HarborUSA
  2. 2.Gastrointestinal Oncology ServiceMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical CollegeNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations