Volume 17, Issue 12 pp. 1119-1123
Original Article

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder cancer: distinguishing molecular profiles to guide potential therapy

Mary Potkonjak

Mary Potkonjak

Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
John T. Miura

John T. Miura

Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Kiran K. Turaga

Kiran K. Turaga

Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Fabian M. Johnston

Fabian M. Johnston

Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Susan Tsai

Susan Tsai

Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Kathleen K. Christians

Kathleen K. Christians

Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
T. Clark Gamblin

Corresponding Author

T. Clark Gamblin

Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

Correspondence

T. Clark Gamblin, Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, 9200 West Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA. Tel.: +1 414 805 5020. Fax: +1 414 805 5771. E-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 16 September 2015
Citations: 1
This study was presented at the Annual Meeting of the AHPBA, 11-15 March 2015, Miami, Florida.

Abstract

Background

Chemotherapy regimens for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and gallbladder adenocarcinoma (GC) remain interchangeable; however, response rates are frequently suboptimal. Biomarkers from ICC and GC patients were interrogated to identify actionable differences with potential therapeutic implications.

Methods

From 2009 to 2012, pathological specimens from 217 ICC and 28 GC patients referred to Caris Life Sciences were evaluated. Specific testing by immunohistochemical analysis for 17 different biomarkers was performed.

Results

In the collective cohort (= 245), actionable targets included: 95% low thymidylate synthase (TS), 82% low ribonucleotide reductase subunit M (RMM) 1 and 74% low excision repair cross complementation group (ERCC) 1, indicating potential susceptibility to fluoropyrimidines/capecitabine, gemcitabine and platinum agents, respectively. Additional targets included TOPO1 (53.3% high, Irinotecan), MGMT (50.3% low, temozolomide), TOP2A (33% high, anthracyclines) and PGP (30.1% low, taxanes). Subgroup analysis by tumour origin demonstrated a differential biomarker expression pattern with a higher frequency of ICC tumours showing low levels of TS (99% versus 72%, P < 0.01), and RRM1 (85% versus 64%, P = 0.02) when compared with GC. Conversely a greater frequency of GC demonstrated high levels of TOPO1 (76% versus 50%, P = 0.02) versus ICC, indicating a potential increased benefit from irinotecan.

Discussion

Differences in the molecular profiles between ICC and GC provide evidence that the two are distinct diseases, requiring different treatment strategies to optimize a response.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.