Cancers 2010, 2, 1830-1837; doi:10.3390/cancers2041830
Pancreatic Cancer Biomarkers and Their Implication in Cancer
Diagnosis and Epidemiology
Methods and Technologies Branch, Epidemiology and Genetics Research Program, Division of Cancer
Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institues of Health (NIH), 6130
Executive Blvd., Suite 5100. Bethesda, MD 20892-7324, USA; E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Tel.: +1 301 594 7344; Fax: +1-301 435 5477
Received: 21 October 2010 / Accepted: 29 October 2010 / Published: 2 November 2010
Abstract: Pancreatic cancer is the fourth most common cause of cancer-related mortality
in the United States. Biomarkers are needed to detect this cancer early during the disease
development and for screening populations to identify those who are at risk. In cancer,
“biomarker” refers to a substance or process that is indicative of the presence of cancer in
the body. A biomarker might be either a molecule secreted by a tumor or it can be a
specific response of the body to the presence of cancer. Genetic, epigenetic, proteomic,
glycomic, and imaging biomarkers can be used for cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and
epidemiology. A number of potential biomarkers have been identified for pancreatic
cancer. These markers can be assayed in non-invasively collected biofluids. These
biomarkers need analytical and clinical validation so that they can be used for the purpose
of screening and diagnosing pancreatic cancer and determining disease prognosis. In this
article, the latest developments in pancreatic cancer biomarkers are discussed.
Keywords: biomarker; cancer; diagnosis; epidemiology; epigenetics; glycans; methylation
index; pancreas; prognosis; sensitivity; specificity; survival; treatment
1. Introduction: Pancreatic Cancer Incidence and Mortality
Pancreatic cancer incidence and mortality rates are almost five years in the United States. Due to
the difficulty in detecting pancreatic cancer, it is not typically diagnosed until the disease has
progressed to advanced stages and treatment options are limited [1-3]. Pancreatic cancer is the fourth
leading cause of cancer related deaths in the United States and about 38,000 Americans died last year
Cancers 2010, 2
due to this cancer [4,5]. The five year survival rate for individuals with pancreatic cancer is only 5%.
Treatment includes surgical resection but 80–90% of patients who undergo this surgery suffer a relapse
and die from metastatic or disseminated disease. Sometimes a combination of surgery and
chemotherapy is also applied.
The risk factors for pancreatic cancer include smoking, long-standing diabetes and alcoholism,
however, hypermethylation of p14 and p16 is now considered a risk factor in K-ras mutated
subjects [2,6]. This cancer is strongly associated with the development of hyperglycemia, peripheral
insulin resistance and diabetes mellitus, especially when presented as new-onset diabetes mellitus. In a
nested case-control study of more than 500 participants, Stolzenberg-Solomon et al. demonstrated
adeponectin concentrations as risk factors in male smokers . Conditional logistic regression adjusted
for smoking, blood pressure, and C-peptide levels was used to calculate odds ratios and 95%
confidence intervals for pancreatic cancer in this study.
2. Defining Biomarkers
A biomarker is a characteristic that is objectively measured and evaluated as an indicator of normal
biologic processes, pathogenic processes, or pharmacologic responses to a therapeutic intervention.
Identifying and validating a biomarker which can be used in a clinic setting with high specificity and
sensitivity has always been challenging. Pancreatic cancer is a unique cancer where early detection
markers have not been identified and validated [1,2,8-10]. Sensitivity of a biomarker is its ability to
detect those with true cases of pancreatic cancer identified by the clinical criteria. Thus, it is the
probability that a person with pancreatic cancer or who will develop the disease will have positive test
results. Specificity of a biomarker is a measure of its ability to detect those with true non-cases of
disorder identified by the clinical criteria. An ideal biomarker of pancreatic cancer should have high
sensitivity and specificity.
3. Genetic Biomarkers
RAS is a tyrosine receptor which is involved in multiple cancers and plays a key role in cell growth,
transformation and maintenance of tumor phenotype . Oncogenic gain of function mutation in K-ras
is a risk factor in pancreatic cancer and used for early detection of the cancer [11,12]. K-ras mutations
are also present in lung and colon cancers. Studies were conducted to identify single nucleotide
polymorphisms associated with pancreatic cancer but attempts were unsuccessful. Other risk factors
(family history, life style, exposure history) should be considered before making conclusions about a
pancreatic cancer diagnosis .
4. Epigenetic Biomarkers
In most studies involving pancreatic cancer, the methylation component of epigenetics has been
studied more than histone modifications, miRNA profiles, and chromatin conformational changes .
The Methylation Index (MI) of several genes was compared between the malignant and benign groups
and genes that were found to be hypermethylated included DKK3, p16, SFRP2, DKK2, NPTX2 and
ppENK. Large scale validation of these markers has yet to be completed.
Cancers 2010, 2
5. miRNA Biomarkers
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small noncoding transcripts involved in many cellular mechanisms,
including tumorigenesis. Recently, attempts have been made to identify pancreatic cancer associated
miRNAs and develop methods to determine their quantity at initial and advanced stages of cancer
development. miR-21 and miR-196a are among those miRNAs which exhibit differential expression in
pancreatic cancer [15,16]. miR-210 plasma levels have been reported to be high in pancreatic cancer
patients by Ho et al. .
6. Proteomic Biomarkers
Serum is a good source of biomarkers for detecting pancreatic cancer. Some investigators have
performed serum profiling studies and found more serum profiling variability from pancreatic cancer
patients than from healthy controls [6,9,18-20]. Elevated levels of insulin-like growth factor (IGF) and
its receptors have been reported in pancreatic cancer patients . Investigators have attempted to
characterize proteins expressed during the pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasias (PanINs) stage which is
considered the early stage of pancreatic cancer. In another study, a group of proteins (with a specific
protein called anterior gradient 2) have been identified by proteomic approaches of PanINs
samples [22,23]. Gao et al. have identified serine proteinase-2 (PRSS2) pre-proprotein and pancreatic
lipase related protein-1 (PLRP1) from pancreatic juice of pancreatic cancer patients . Cytokeretin
18 was also reported to be a pancreatic cancer marker . Takayama et al. reported serum REG4 for
pancreatic diagnosis. Stable isotope-labeled proteome (SILAP) standard with extensive
multidimensional separation in combination with tandem MS-MS has been used for separating serum
samples from pancreatic cancer patients . Few investigators have combined SILAP with
iso-electrofocusing (to concentrate proteins by immune-affinity) and 2D LC MS-MS in order to
increase specificity of serum biomarkers. This approach gives excellent quantitative results . The
upregulation of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), a 24 kDa glycoprotein, has been
reported to be nearly 27-fold in pancreatic cancer cells compared to normal ductal cells in a microarray
analysis. Inflammatory-driven processes are involved in pancreatic carcinogenesis because
inflammation-sensitive proteins were increased in pancreatic cancer sera. Technologies such as Liquid
ESI-MS analyses of sera, used in identifying biomarkers, hold promise for future pancreatic cancer
blood tests. The variability observed between the low-mass regions of normal versus pancreatic cancer
spectra may aid in diagnosis and therapy.
8. Other Biomarkers
Messenger RNA (mRNA) expression profiles have been used to detect pancreatic cancer .
Imaging techniques also have potential in pancreatic cancer diagnosis, especially in determining the
therapeutic response and disease stratification . Splice variants (alternative individual splice sites,
alternative exons, alternative introns) have been recommended as pancreatic cancer biomarkers by
Hayes et al. . Systems biology approaches to identify novel markers associated with pancreatic
cancer are also being considered by a few investigators in the field. This approach demands complex
statistical modeling. Splice variants either change protein structure or affect gene regulation by
Cancers 2010, 2
changing mRNA stability [29,30]. Generally, splice variants are stable and their high-throughput
quantitation is possible .
Circulating endothelial cells in serum of patients undergoing treatment have been observed and may
serve as biomarkers for response to treatment . Different growth factors can be measured within
these endothelial cells by standard protocols. Salivary transcriptomic biomarkers have been identified
by Zhang et al. which have potential in pancreatic cancer detection and diagnosis .
Attempts have been made to isolate pancreatic cancer markers in the stool of patients but the
specificity of markers identified has been too low to warrant further investigation . Mucin, MUC1,
has also been reported to be upregulated and abnormally glycosylated in pancreatic cancer [1,34].
9. Biomarkers in Pancreatic Cancer Diagnosis and Epidemiology
Blood has been recognized as a highly important source of disease-related biomarkers [1,3,9,35].
Pancreatic biomarkers have been assayed in biofluids (bile), fine needle tissue aspirate, tissues samples
and formalin fixed samples, and stool [13,15,36,37]. Serum REG4 has been extensively studied in
epidemiologic studies and seems to be an excellent diagnostics marker . Laiyemo et al. conducted a
prospective cohort study to identify populations at high risk of pancreatic cancer . Fong et al. used
a new marker, human trophoblast cell-surface antigen (TROP2), to evaluate its correlation with
aggressiveness and prognosis of pancreatic cancer . They applied immunohistochemistry
technology in paraffin-embedded primary tumor tissue samples from a series of consecutive patients
with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. TROP2 was significantly associated with decreased overall survival
in this study.
10. Challenges, Potential Solutions, and Future Perspective
The development of effective tools for the early detection of pancreatic cancer, or its precursors, in
high-risk subjects could play a key role in reducing the burden of this disease, which is the most lethal
among solid gastrointestinal tumors . It is difficult to access the pancreas due to its anatomical
location and imaging techniques are also difficult to apply for observation of deformities of the organ
during disease development. Biomarkers discussed above may be considered for further investigation
in large prospective cohort studies and pooled analyses with other prospective cohorts. One of the
biggest challenges has been the observation of a few proteins present in large abundance which are not
related with the disease and the protein biomarker is present in low concentrations. Specific removal of
those proteins has been difficult although a few promising approaches, called isobaric tags for relative
and absolute quantification, or iTRAQ, have been developed [26,35].
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma has a tendency to recur and adjuvant therapy is recommended
after surgical resection . It has also been suggested that biomarkers which could predict treatment
outcome would be extremely useful. miRNAs may be appropriate for this purpose. miR-21 turns out to
be a marker with promise because its level decreases with successful therapy. There is still a need for
additional novel biomarkers which could be used for pancreatic cancer prognosis and response to
therapy. Some promise appears with gemcitabin-based chemotherapy and utilization of
cyclo-oxygenase-2 (Cox-2) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which are regulated by an
mRNA binding protein called Hu protein antigen R or HuR, as therapy response markers [5,40]. HuR
Cancers 2010, 2
binds to VEGF mRNA and alters VEGF expression. Such an approach has potential application in
personalized medicine. Alternative therapeutic approaches using inhibitors are also promising [41,42].
Biomarkers which distinguish pancreatitis from pancreatic cancer also should be further characterized.
For all biomarkers, especially genetic biomarkers, the guidelines developed by the Evaluation of
Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Initiative, established by the National
Office of Public Health Genomics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, should be
followed . EGAPP emphasizes that each marker must pass the test of analytic validity, clinical
validity, and clinical utility as defined by the EGAPP Working Group (EWG). These guidelines
support the development and implementation of a rigorous, evidence-based process for evaluating
genetic tests and other genomic applications for clinical and public health practice in the United States.
Multiplexing and use of multiple markers (genetic, epigenetic, and proteomic) in the same sample
may increase the sensitivity and specificity of biomarkers in diagnosis but validation of such an
approach has not been accomplished yet and should be considered. Although an abnormal tumor
marker level may suggest cancer, this alone is usually not enough to diagnose cancer. Therefore,
measurements of tumor markers are usually combined with biopsy results to diagnose cancer.
Furthermore, patient related information (family history, diet and life style, behavior) helps
tremendously in the accurate diagnosis of cancer. Finally, we are still waiting for a group of
biomarkers or a specific biomarker to identify patients with asymptomatic pancreatic cancer. This
needs collaboration of epidemiologists, population scientists, basic and clinical scientists, industry and
We are thankful to Christine Kaefer, Linda Anderson, Muin Khoury and Britt Reid for reading the
manuscript and providing their suggestions.
1. Grote, T.; Logsdon, C.D. Progress on molecular markers of pancreatic cancer. Curr. Opin.
Gastroenterol. 2007, 23, 508-514.
2. Morse, D.L.; Balagurunathan, Y.; Hostetter, G.; Trissal, M.; Tafreshi, N.K.; Burke, N.; Lloyd, M.;
Enkemann, S.; Coppola, D.; Hruby, V.J.; Gillies, R.J.; Han, H. Identification of novel pancreatic
adenocarcinoma cell-surface targets by gene expression profiling and tissue microarray. Biochem.
Pharm. 2010, 80, 748-754.
3. Verma, M. Pancreatic cancer epidemiology. Tech. Cancer Res. Treat. 2005, 4, 295-301.
4. Bartosch-Härlid, A.; Andersson, R. Diabetes Mellitus in Pancreatic Cancer and the Need for
Diagnosis of Asymptomatic Disease. Pancreatology 2010, 10, 423-428.
5. Richards, N.G.; Rittenhouse, D.W.; Freydin, B.; Cozzitorto, J.A.; Grenda, D.; Rui, H.; Gonye, G.;
Kennedy, E.P.; Yeo, C.J.; Brody, J.R.; Witkiewicz, A.K. HuR status is a powerful marker for
prognosis and response to gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for resected pancreatic ductal
adenocarcinoma patients. Ann. Surg. 2010, 252, 499-505.
Cancers 2010, 2
6. Takayama, R.; Nakagawa, H.; Sawaki, A.; Mizuno, N.; Kawai, H.; Tajika, M.; Yatabe, Y.;
Matsuo, K.; Uehara, R.; Ono, K.-I.; Nakamura, Y.; Yamao, K. Serum tumor antigen REG4 as a
diagnostic biomarker in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. J. Gastroenterol. 2010, 45, 52-59.
7. Stolzenberg-Solomon, R.Z.; Weinstein, S.; Pollak, M.; Tao, Y.; Taylor, P.R.; Virtamo, J.;
Albanes, D. Prediagnostic adiponectin concentrations and pancreatic cancer risk in male smokers.
Am. J. Epidemiol. 2008, 168, 1047-1055.
8. Verma, M.; Manne, U. Genetic and epigenetic biomarkers in cancer diagnosis and identifying
high risk populations. Crit. Rev. Onc./Hemt. 2006, 60, 9-18.
9. Verma, M. Proteomics and cancer epidemiology. Meth. Mol. Biol. 2009, 471, 197-215.
10. Verma, M.; Seminara, D.; Arena, F.J.; John, C.; Iwamoto, K.; Hartmuller, V. Genetic and
epigenetic biomarkers in cancer: Improving diagnosis, risk assessment, and disease
stratification. Mol. Diagn. Ther. 2006, 10, 1-15.
11. Jiang, Y.; MacKley, H.; Cheng, H.; Ajani, J.A. Use of K-Ras as a predictive biomarker for
selecting anti-EGF receptor/pathway treatment. Biomark. Med. 2010, 4, 535-541.
12. Kriegshuser, G.; Auner, V.; Zeillinger, R. New and potential clinical applications of KRAS as a
cancer biomarker. Exp. Opin. Med. Diagn. 2010, 4, 383-395.
13. Verma, M. Biomarkers for risk assessment in molecular epidemiology of cancer. Tech. Cancer
Res. Treat. 2004, 3, 505-514.
14. Banerjee, H.N.; Verma, M. Epigenetic mechanisms in cancer. Biomark. Med. 2009, 3, 397-410.
15. Hwang, J.H.; Voortman, J.; Giovannetti, E.; Steinberg, S.M.; Leon, L.G.; Kim, Y.T.; Funel, N.;
Park, J.K.; Kim, M.A.; Kang, G.H.; Kim, S.W.; Del Chiaro, M.; Peters, G.J.; Giaccone, G.
Identification of microRNA-21 as a biomarker for chemoresistance and clinical outcome
following adjuvant therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, 1-12.
16. Kong, X.; Du, Y.; Wang, G.; Gao, J.; Gong, Y.; Li, L.; Zhang, Z.; Zhu, J.; Jing, Q.; Qin, Y.; Li, Z.
Detection of Differentially Expressed microRNAs in Serum of Pancreatic Ductal
Adenocarcinoma Patients: miR-196a Could Be a Potential Marker for Poor Prognosis. Dig. Dis.
Sci. 2010, 10, 1-8.
17. Ho, A.S.; Huang, X.; Cao, H.; Christman-Skieller, C.; Bennewith, K.; Le, Q.-T.; Koong, A.C.
Circulating miR-210 as a novel hypoxia marker in pancreatic cancer. Transl. Oncol. 2010, 3,
18. Chen, R.; Pan, S.; Aebersold, R.; Brentnall, T.A. Proteomics studies of pancreatic cancer.
Proteomics Clin. Appl. 2007, 1, 1582-1591.
19. Hanas, J.S.; Hocker, J.R.; Cheung, J.Y.; Larabee, J.L.; Lerner, M.R.; Lightfoot, S.A.; Morgan,
D.L.; Denson, K.D.; Prejeant, K.C.; Gusev, Y.; Smith, B.J.; Hanas, R.J.; Postier, R.G.; Brackett,
D.J. Biomarker identification in human pancreatic cancer sera. Pancreas 2008, 36, 61-69.
20. Mori-Iwamoto, S.; Kuramitsu, Y.; Ryozawa, S.; Mikuria, K.; Fujimoto, M.; Maehara, S.;
Maehara, Y.; Okita, K.; Nakamura, K.; Sakaida, I. Proteomics finding heat shock protein 27 as a
biomarker for resistance of pancreatic cancer cells to gemcitabine. Int. J. Oncol. 2007, 31, 1345-1350.
21. Douglas, J.B.; Silverman, D.T.; Pollak, M.N.; Tao, Y.; Soliman, A.S.; Stolzenberg-Solomon, R.Z.
Serum IGF-I, IGF-II, IGFBP-3, and IGF-I/IGFBP-3 molar ratio and risk of pancreatic cancer in
the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark.
Prev. 2010, 19, 2298-2306.
Cancers 2010, 2
22. Chen, R.; Pan, S.; Duan, X.; Nelson, B.H.; Sahota, R.A.; de Rham, S.; Kozarek, R.A.; McIntosh,
M.; Brentnall, T.A. Elevated level of anterior gradient-2 in pancreatic juice from patients with
pre-malignant pancreatic neoplasia. Mol. Cancer 2010, 9, 149-151.
23. Sitek, B.; Sipos, B.; Alkatout, I.; Poschmann, G.; Stephan, C.; Schulenborg, T.; Marcus, K.;
Lüttges, J.; Dittert, D. D.; Baretton, G.; Schmiegel, W.; Hahn, S. A.; Klöppel, G.; Meyer, H. E.;
Stühler, K. Analysis of the pancreatic tumor progression by a quantitative proteomic approach and
immunhistochemical validation. J. Proteome Res. 2009, 8, 1647-1656.
24. Gao, J.; Zhu, F.; Lv, S.; Li, Z.; Ling, Z.; Gong, Y.; Jie, C.; Ma, L. Identification of pancreatic
juice proteins as biomarkers of pancreatic cancer. Oncol. Rep. 2010, 23, 1683-1692.
25. Dive, C.; Smith, R.A.; Garner, E.; Ward, T.; George-Smith, S.S.; Campbell, F.; Greenhalf, W.;
Ghaneh, P.; Neoptolemos, J.P. Considerations for the use of plasma cytokeratin 18 as a biomarker
in pancreatic cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2010, 102, 577-582.
26. Tonack, S.; Aspinall-O'Dea, M.; Jenkins, R.E.; Elliot, V.; Murray, S.; Lane, C.S.; Kitteringham,
N.R.; Neoptolemos, J.P.; Costello, E. A technically detailed and pragmatic protocol for
quantitative serum proteomics using iTRAQ. J. Proteomics 2009a, 73, 352-356.
27. Elghazawy, R.M.; Verbeke, C.S. Pathology of pancreatic tumors. Surgery 2010, 28, 189-197.
28. Hayes, G.M.; Carrigan, P.E.; Dong, M.; Reubi, J.; Miller, L.J. A Novel Secretin Receptor Splice
Variant Potentially Useful for Early Diagnosis of Pancreatic Carcinoma. Gastroenterology 2007,
29. Hartel, M.; Narla, G.; Wente, M.N.; Giese, N.A.; Martignoni, M.E.; Martignetti, J.A.; Friess, H.;
Friedman, S.L. Increased alternative splicing of the KLF6 tumour suppressor gene correlates with
prognosis and tumour grade in patients with pancreatic cancer. Eur. J. Cancer 2008, 44,
30. Omenn, G.S.; Yocum, A.K.; Menon, R. Alternative splice variants, a new class of protein cancer
biomarker candidates: Findings in pancreatic cancer and breast cancer with systems biology
implications. Dis. Markers 2010, 28, 241-251.
31. Sabbaghian, M.S.; Rothberger, G.; Alongi, A.P.; Gagner, J.-P.; Goldberg, J.D.; Rolnitzky, L.;
Chiriboga, L.; Hajdu, C.H.; Zagzag, D.; Basch, R.; Shamamian, P. Levels of elevated circulating
endothelial cell decline after tumor resection in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Anticancer Res. 2010, 30, 2911-2917.
32. Zhang, L.; Farrell, J.J.; Zhou, H.; Elashoff, D.; Akin, D.; Park, N.; Chia, D.; Wong, D.T. Salivary
Transcriptomic Biomarkers for Detection of Resectable Pancreatic Cancer. Gastroenterology
2010, 138, 949-957.
33. Haug, U.; Wente, M.N.; Seiler, C.M.; Jesnowski, R.; Brenner, H. Stool testing for the early
detection of pancreatic cancer: Rationale and current evidence. Exp. Rev. Mol. Diagn. 2008,
34. Gold, D.V.; Karanjawala, Z.; Modrak, D.E.; Goldenberg, D.M.; Hruban, R.H. PAM4-reactive
MUC1 is a biomarker for early pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 2007, 13,
35. Tonack, S.; Aspinall-O'Dea, M.; Neoptolemos, J.P.; Costello, E. Pancreatic cancer: Proteomic
approaches to a challenging disease. Pancreatology 2009b, 9, 567-576.
Cancers 2010, 2
36. Anderson, M.A.; Brenner, D.E.; Scheiman, J.M.; Simeone, D.M.; Singh, N.; Sikora, M.J.; Zhao,
L.; Mertens, A.N.; Rae, J.M. Reliable gene expression measurements from fine needle aspirates of
pancreatic tumors: Effect of amplicon length and quality assessment. J. Mol. Diagn. 2010, 12,
37. Oliveira-Cunha, M.; Siriwardena, A.K.; Byers, R. Molecular diagnosis in pancreatic cancer.
Diagn. Histopathol. 2008, 14, 214-222.
38. Laiyemo, A.O.; Kamangar, F.; Marcus, P.M.; Taylor, P.R.; Virtamo, J.; Albanes, D.; Stolzenberg-
Solomon, R.Z. Serum pepsinogen level, atrophic gastritis and the risk of incident pancreatic
cancer-A prospective cohort study. Cancer Epidemiol. 2009, 33, 368-373.
39. Fong, D.; Moser, P.; Krammel, C.; Gostner, J.M.; Margreiter, R.; Mitterer, M.; Gastl, G.; Spizzo,
G. High expression of TROP2 correlates with poor prognosis in pancreatic cancer.
Br. J. Cancer. 2008, 99, 1290-1295.
40. Melnik, M.K.; Webb, C.P.; Richardson, P.J.; Luttenton, C.R.; Campbell, A.D.; Monroe, T.J.;
O'Rourke, T.J.; Yost, K.J.; Szczepanek, C.M.; Bassett, M.R.; Truszkowski, K.J.; Stein, P.; Van
Brocklin, M.W.; Davis, A.T.; Bedolla, G.; Vande Woude, G.F.; Koo, H.-M. Phase II trial to
evaluate gemcitabine and etoposide for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Mol.
Cancer Therap. 2010, 9, 2423-2429.
41. Garrido-Laguna, I.; Tan, A.C.; Uson, M.; Angenendt, M.; Ma, W.W.; Villaroel, M.C.; Zhao, M.;
Rajeshkumar, N.V.; Jimeno, A.; Donehower, R.; Iacobuzio-Donahue, C.; Barrett, M.; Rudek,
M.A.; Rubio-Viqueira, B.; Laheru, D.; Hidalgo, M. Integrated preclinical and clinical
development of mTOR inhibitors in pancreatic cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2010, 103, 649-655.
42. Reni, M. Neoadjuvant treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer: time for phase III testing? World
J. Gastroenterol. 2010, 16, 4883-4887.
43. Teutsch, S.M.; Bradley, L.A.; Palomaki, G.E.; Haddow, J.E.; Piper, M.; Calonge, N.; Dotson,
W.D.; Douglas, M.P.; Berg, A.O.; EGAPP Working Group. The Evaluation of Genomic
Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Initiative: methods of the EGAPP Working
Group. Genet. Med. 2009, 11, 3-14.
© 2010 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license