Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Gastrointestinal tumours, non-colorectal

2212 - Comparative molecular analyses of pancreatic cancer (PC): Younger vs. older patients (pts)


08 Oct 2016


Gastrointestinal tumours, non-colorectal


Mohamed Salem


Annals of Oncology (2016) 27 (6): 207-242. 10.1093/annonc/mdw371


M. Salem1, P. Philip2, R. Feldman3, J. Hwang4, M. Pishvaian1, J. Xiu3, W. Eldeiry5, S. Reddy6, Z. Gatalica7, N. Trivedi1, A. Zareb8, B.S. Colton1, H. Wang1, A. Shields2, J. Marshall1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Division Of Hematology And Oncology, Lombardi Cancer Center Georgetown University, 20007 - Washington/US
  • 2 Oncology, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit/US
  • 3 Pathology, Caris Life Sciences, 85040 - Phoenix/US
  • 4 Oncology, Levine Cancer Institute, Charlotte/US
  • 5 Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia/US
  • 6 Pathology, Caris Life Sciences, 85224 - Phoenix/US
  • 7 Oncology, Caris Life Sciences, 85224 - Phoenix/US
  • 8 Oncology, King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Dammam/SA


Abstract 2212


There is limited data on molecular tumor characteristics and outcome in younger pts with PC. The effect of an individual's age on their tumor molecular profile is unknown.


Molecular profiles—using protein expression (IHC), gene amplification (ISH) and sequencing—of PC tumors were reviewed and correlated with pt outcomes. A Chi-squared test determined differences between age groups; Kaplan-Meier methodology estimated survival.


In total, 2426 PC tumors were examined. The most frequently mutated genes were KRAS (85%), TP53 (63%), SMAD4 (13%), BRCA2 (12%), ATM/APC/NTRK1 (5% each), BRCA1 (4%), and cMET/PIK3CA (3% each) Subgroup analysis of tumors from 568 younger (median age 50; range 21-55 yr) and 1113 older (71; 65-90) pts was performed. When compared with older pts, younger pts' tumors had a greater frequency of mutations in MLH1 (4% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.003), PTEN (3% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.008), EGFR (2.2% vs. 0%, p = 0.003), CTNNB1 (2.3% vs. 0.5%; p = 0.04), c-KIT (2% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.02), and NTRK1 (20% vs. 0%; p = 0.002; assessed in only 10 and 45 pts, respectively), whereas KRAS mutations were significantly higher in older pts (80% vs. 70%, p = 0.0003). The mutation rates (older vs. younger) of BRCA1 (both 5%), BRCA2 (14% vs. 12%), BRAF (both 1%), GNAS (2.4% vs. 1.6%), PIK3CA (both 3%), NOTCH1 (0.9% vs. 1.6%), cMET (2.8% vs. 3.9%), and RET (0.4% vs. 0.8% were similar in both age groups. Older pts' tumors had higher rates of low RRM1 expression (85% vs. 79%, p = 0.03) and high PDGFR expression (22% vs. 7%, p = 0.03), whereas younger pts had higher TOP2A expression (59% vs. 50%, p = 0.02). There was no difference in either PD-L1 expression in tumor cells (8% vs. 7%) or the frequency of PD-1 expression on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (41% vs. 37%). Outcomes were evaluable for 73 pts. There were no survival differences between the two age groups. Low ERCC1, MGMT, PRM1, and TLE3 expressions appeared to be associated with prolonged survival in older but not younger pts; however, larger studies are needed to define the significance of this finding.


Young pts with PC may carry genetic alterations that are different from older pts. A wider gene panel is needed to aid in the discovery of targeted mutations and provide therapeutic opportunities.

Clinical trial identification

This is Not a clinical trial

Legal entity responsible for the study

Georgetown University




R. Feldman, J. Xiu, S. Reddy, Z. Gatalica: Employment by Caris LS.

All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings