Search

Background Biomarkers are urgently needed for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the cornerstone for diagnosing PDAC. We developed a method for discovery of PDAC biomarkers using the discarded EUS-FNA liquid. Methods This retrospective study included 58 patients with suspected pancreatic lesions who underwent EUS-FNA. Protein extracts from EUS-FNA liquid were analyzed by mass spectrometry. Proteomic and clinical data were modeled by supervised statistical learning to identify protein markers and clinical variables that distinguish PDAC. Results Statistical modeling revealed a protein signature for PDAC screening that achieved high sensitivity and specificity (0.92, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.79–0.98, and 0.85, 95 %CI 0.67–0.93, respectively). We also developed a protein signature score (PSS) to guide PDAC diagnosis. In combination with patient age, the PSS achieved 100 % certainty in correctly identifying PDAC patients > 54 years. In addition, 3 /4 inconclusive EUS-FNA biopsies were correctly identified using PSS. Conclusions EUS-FNA-derived fluid is a rich source of PDAC proteins with biomarker potential. The PSS requires further validation and verification of the feasibility of measuring these proteins in patient sera.

International audience; BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Differential diagnosis between pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PADC) and pseudotumoral forms of chronic pancreatitis remains difficult. Mutation of KRAS oncogene is present in 75% to 95% of PADC. This study aimed to evaluate whether the combined analysis of KRAS mutation with cytopathological findings from endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) might improve discrimination between PADC and chronic pancreatitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective multicenter study included 178 patients with solid pancreatic masses (men 104, women 74; mean age 64.5 years). Cytopathological examination and KRAS mutation analysis (codon-12 and codon-13, restriction fragment length polymorphism [RFLP] and direct sequencing) were performed on EUS-FNAB material. Final diagnoses were obtained on EUS-FNAB analysis and/or a second biopsy and/or clinical follow-up and/or surgery: PADC, n = 129; chronic pancreatitis, n = 27; other pancreatic neoplasms, n = 16; and benign lesions, n = 6. RESULTS: KRAS status analysis was successful in all EUS-FNAB samples. Codon-12 KRAS point mutation was found in 66% of PADC samples. No case of chronic pancreatitis displayed KRAS mutation. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy of cytopathology alone for diagnosis of PADC versus chronic pancreatitis were 83%, 100%, 100%, 56% and 86%, respectively. When KRAS mutation analysis was combined with cytopathology, these values reached 88%, 100%, 100%, 63% and 90% respectively. CONCLUSION: Although the value of KRAS analysis in addition to EUS-FNAB is limited for distinguishing pancreatic mass lesions, when chronic pancreatitis presented as a pseudotumor a negative finding (wild-type KRAS), was useful in strongly suggesting a benign lesion.