Citations

We searched for oncogenes activated by copy number increases using whole-genome sequencing data of 535 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs). We found that gains of 1q were the second most common gain, occurring in 213 (39.8%) of PDACs. Single-cell analysis via fluorescence in situ hybridization on 33 cancers confirmed these results. A portion of 1q, rather than the entire 1q arm, was gained in 75 (14.0%) PDACs, allowing us to pinpoint two ~3-megabase regions of 1q that were nearly always gained. These two regions contained NCSTN and PSEN2 , genes that code two subunits of the γ-secretase complex. Evaluation of 267 precancerous lesions revealed that extra copies of NCSTN and PSEN2 were common (49%) in noninvasive neoplasms (high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasms), which are at relatively high risk for progression to PDACs, but uncommon (6%) in low-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia lesions, which have low malignant potential. We hypothesize that γ-secretase genes are genetically activated oncogenes in the early phases of pancreatic neoplasia.

SEEK and you may find cancer earlier Many cancers can be cured by surgery and/or systemic therapies when detected before they have metastasized. This clinical reality, coupled with the growing appreciation that cancer's rapid genetic evolution limits its response to drugs, have fueled interest in methodologies for earlier detection of the disease. Cohen et al. developed a noninvasive blood test, called CancerSEEK that can detect eight common human cancer types (see the Perspective by Kalinich and Haber). The test assesses eight circulating protein biomarkers and tumor-specific mutations in circulating DNA. In a study of 1000 patients previously diagnosed with cancer and 850 healthy control individuals, CancerSEEK detected cancer with a sensitivity of 69 to 98% (depending on cancer type) and 99% specificity. Science , this issue p. 926 ; see also p. 866

Significance Few patients with pancreatic cancer survive longer than 5 y, in part because most patients are identified only after their disease has progressed to an advanced stage. In this study, we show how combining mutations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) with protein markers can result in a screening test with improved sensitivity while retaining specificity. The combination of the ctDNA and protein markers was superior to any single marker. Moreover, the combination detected nearly two-thirds of pancreatic cancers that had no evidence of distant metastasis at the time of surgical resection. The strategy may represent an approach to detect cancers of many types at an earlier stage.

Abstract Pancreatic cancer is projected to become the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States by 2020. A familial aggregation of pancreatic cancer has been established, but the cause of this aggregation in most families is unknown. To determine the genetic basis of susceptibility in these families, we sequenced the germline genomes of 638 patients with familial pancreatic cancer and the tumor exomes of 39 familial pancreatic adenocarcinomas. Our analyses support the role of previously identified familial pancreatic cancer susceptibility genes such as BRCA2, CDKN2A, and ATM, and identify novel candidate genes harboring rare, deleterious germline variants for further characterization. We also show how somatic point mutations that occur during hematopoiesis can affect the interpretation of genome-wide studies of hereditary traits. Our observations have important implications for the etiology of pancreatic cancer and for the identification of susceptibility genes in other common cancer types. Significance: The genetic basis of disease susceptibility in the majority of patients with familial pancreatic cancer is unknown. We whole genome sequenced 638 patients with familial pancreatic cancer and demonstrate that the genetic underpinning of inherited pancreatic cancer is highly heterogeneous. This has significant implications for the management of patients with familial pancreatic cancer. Cancer Discov; 6(2); 166–75. ©2015 AACR. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 109