Next Article in Journal
Advances in the Pathogenesis of EBV-Associated Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma
Previous Article in Journal
Texture Analysis of Fractional Water Content Images Acquired during PET/MRI: Initial Evidence for an Association with Total Lesion Glycolysis, Survival and Gene Mutation Profile in Primary Colorectal Cancer
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Cancers
Volume 13
Issue 11
10.3390/cancers13112716
cancers-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Vitamin D: Promises on the Horizon and Challenges Ahead for Fighting Pancreatic Cancer

by
Daoyan Wei
1,*,
Liang Wang
1,
Xiangsheng Zuo
2 and
Robert S. Bresalier
1,*
1
Unit 1466, Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX 77030, USA
2
Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Cancers 2021, 13(11), 2716; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13112716
Submission received: 18 April 2021 / Revised: 21 May 2021 / Accepted: 27 May 2021 / Published: 31 May 2021
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Pancreatic cancer is an almost universally lethal cancer, largely due to its late diagnosis, early metastasis, and therapeutic resistance. This highlights the need to develop novel and effective intervention strategies to improve the outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer. Vitamin D is one of the hottest topics in cancer research and clinics because of its pleiotropic functions on the hallmarks of cancer. Here we critically review past and current efforts that define the effects of vitamin D on the risk, incidence, patient survival, and mortality of pancreatic cancer. We also provide overviews on the opportunities and challenges associated with vitamin D as an economic adjunct to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy and chemo- or radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer has a dismal prognosis, while its incidence is increasing. This is attributed, in part, to a profound desmoplastic and immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment associated with this cancer and resistance to current available therapies. Novel and effective intervention strategies are urgently needed to improve the outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer. Vitamin D has pleiotropic functions beyond calcium–phosphate homeostasis and has been extensively studied both in the laboratory and clinic as a potential preventive agent or adjunct to standard therapies. Accumulating evidence from ecological, observational, and randomized controlled trials suggests that vitamin D has beneficial effects on risk, survival, and mortality in pancreatic cancer, although controversies still exist. Recent advances in demonstrating the important functions of vitamin D/vitamin D receptor (VDR) signaling in the regulation of stromal reprogramming, the microbiome, and immune response and the emergence of checkpoint immunotherapy provide opportunities for using vitamin D or its analogues as an adjunct for pancreatic cancer intervention. Many challenges lie ahead before the benefits of vitamin D can be fully realized in pancreatic cancer. These challenges include the need for randomized controlled trials of vitamin D to assess its impact on the risk and survival of pancreatic cancer, optimizing the timing and dosage of vitamin D or its analogues as an adjunct for pancreatic cancer intervention and elucidating the specific role of vitamin D/VDR signaling in the different stages of pancreatic cancer. Nevertheless, vitamin D holds great promise for reducing risk and improving outcomes of this disease.

1. Introduction

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is currently the third-leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States and is predicted to be the second by 2030 [1,2]. PC has a dismal prognosis, with an overall survival from diagnosis of about 8 months, and a 5-year survival rate of less than 9%, which is largely due to its late diagnosis and resistance to conventional therapy. New treatments, such as checkpoint immunotherapy, which has achieved impressive success in several other malignancies, have had little efficacy in treating PC. This lack of efficacy is due in part to the unique, profoundly desmoplastic and immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment that prevents the infiltration and activation of effector T cells and their subsequent elimination of tumor cells [3]. Moreover, many patients develop adverse events that prevent them from continuing treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors [4], and these inhibitors have led to a rapid increase in the cost of cancer care [5]. Thus, the development of novel and cost-effective intervention strategies is urgently needed to improve the outcomes of patients with PC.
Scientists obtained evidence that the active form of vitamin D (1, 25-dihydroxy vitamin D3 [1, 25(OH)2D3], also called calcitriol) is a hormone that not only regulates calcium–phosphate homeostasis but also has pleiotropic effects on the regulation of cell proliferation and differentiation and on antimicrobial and immune responses [6,7]. Numerous epidemiological and clinical observational studies suggest that a higher intake of vitamin D is associated with a lower risk of cancer including PC [8,9,10,11], although a few studies contradict these findings [12], and vitamin D deficiency is prevalent among PC patients [13]. Higher levels of blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] are associated with longer survival duration in patients with PC [14]. Experimental evidence indicates that vitamin D exerts anticancer effects by inhibiting cancer cell proliferation, inducing apoptosis and differentiation and potentiating chemo- or radiotherapy in various cancers [15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. Interestingly, experimental data also demonstrate that vitamin D regulates the tumor microenvironment, particularly cancer-associated fibroblast reprogramming, to facilitate tumor repression [20,22]. Moreover, vitamin D was found to decrease the risk of colitis, a common side effect of checkpoint inhibitors [23].
While many challenges remain to be resolved, these lines of evidence suggest the promising use of vitamin D as an additional cost-effective agent for fighting PC.

2. Vitamin D Sources, Metabolism, and Signaling

Vitamin D is the common name of a group of fat-soluble secosteroids with two major forms in humans, vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol) and vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol). Vitamin D3 is generated in the skin after exposure to ultraviolet B (UVB) light via a process that involves photolysis of cutaneous 7-dehydrocholesterol. Vitamin D is also found in some foods, D3 in animal sources and D2 in plant and fungi sources, or can be taken as a supplement. Dietary sources of vitamin D are biologically inert, however, and must undergo two hydroxylations for activation in the body.
Carried by vitamin D binding proteins (VDBP) in the bloodstream, vitamin D reaches the liver, where it is hydroxylated by sterol 27-hydroxylase (CYP27A1) and converted to 25(OH)D, the most stable vitamin D metabolite with a serum circulation half-life of 15 days [24]. Thus, the serum concentration of 25(OH)D is used as a biomarker to determine the vitamin D status of a person [25]. There is a lack of consensus, however, regarding the optimal concentration of vitamin D in the blood. In the United States, an expert committee of the Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine categorized the serum 25(OH)D levels as follows: deficiency, less than 30 nmol/L (12 ng/mL); inadequacy, between 30 nmol/L (12 ng/mL) and 50 nmol/L (20 ng/mL); normal, between 50 nmol/L (20 ng/mL) and 125 nmol/L (50 ng/mL); and high, higher than 125 nmol/L (50 ng/mL) [24]. The Endocrine Society defines the serum 25-(OH)D levels differently: deficiency, less than 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L); insufficiency, 21–29 ng/mL (52 to 72 nmol/L) [26]. These cut-offs are based on the levels of parathyroid hormone and the activity of the intestinal calcium transporter that normalizes 25-(OH)D levels [27,28,29]. It should be noted that the total vitamin D concentration in blood is influenced by many factors, such as age, dietary habits, intestinal absorption capacity, liver and kidney functions, sex steroid levels (in particular estrogens), and genetic background [30,31]. Therefore, one should be cautious in defining the vitamin D status of a subject.
25(OH)D is further activated in the kidneys by 1α-hydroxylase (CYP27B1) to 1,25(OH)2D, which is the biologically active form of vitamin D and the high-affinity ligand of the steroid hormone nuclear vitamin D receptor (VDR) transcription factor. 1,25(OH)2D is subsequently catabolized by CYP24A1 to their inactive forms 24,25(OH)2D and 1,24,25(OH)3D (or 1,23,25(OH)3D) [32]. The expression of CYP24A1 is highly induced by 1, 25(OH)2D, thus, forming a feed-back loop to limit vitamin D over-activation.
A wide variety of cells including gut epithelia, immune cells, and cancer cells express both CYP27B1 and VDR, which provides the molecular basis for 1,25(OH)2D to exert its multifunctional role in the human body (Figure 1) [6,7]. 1,25(OH)2D ligand-activated VDR binds to more than 10,000 loci within the human genome, regulating the transcriptional expression of approximately 1000 target genes in many different cell types including epithelial cells, fibroblasts, and almost all the cells of the immune system [33,34]. Accumulating evidence shows that a low circulating 25(OH)D level is associated with an increased risk of developing several different diseases including those associated with chronic inflammation [35,36]. The connection of low serum 25(OH)D with chronic inflammation raised the question of whether low serum 25(OH)D is a cause or a consequence of chronic inflammation given the broad influence of vitamin D on immune cell functions [35,36,37]. Some experts now believe that low serum 25(OH)D is most likely an effect of chronic inflammation rather than the cause [36,38]; however, further studies are needed to answer this question [37]. Additionally, vitamin D deficiency is highly prevalent in patients with newly diagnosed cancer [39,40,41]. In order to maximize the beneficial effects of vitamin D for health, it is suggested to increase the intake of vitamin D and/or exposure of sunlight to maintain serum 25(OH)D at least at 30 ng/mL (75 nmol/L) and preferably at 40–60 ng/mL (100–150 nmol/L) [35,42,43,44].
Because excessive sun exposure can damage the skin and cause skin cancer, acquiring vitamin D via sunlight should be undertaken with caution. Moreover, only a few foods, such as fatty fish, fortified milk, eggs, and mushrooms, contain substantial amounts of vitamin D. Therefore, direct supplementation with vitamin D3 (800–4000 IU, i.e., 20−100 μg/day) is often needed to boost serum 25(OH)D levels to 30–60 ng/mL (75–150 nmol/L) [45]. It was shown that oral intake of 25(OH)D3 (calcifediol) has advantages over vitamin D3, and vitamin D3 is more effective than vitamin D2 in increasing serum levels of 25(OH)D [46,47,48,49,50]. Generally, picomolar concentrations of 1, 25(OH)2D3 are sufficient to maintain calcium–phosphate homeostasis. However, for cancer prevention or treatment, higher dosages of vitamin D are required, which may increase the risk of hypercalcemia. Notably, 1, 25(OH)2D3 is unstable and easily converted into its inactive forms by CYP24A1, thus limiting the efficacy of 1, 25(OH)2D3 as a therapeutic agent.
To improve the safety and efficacy of 1, 25(OH)2D3, many vitamin D analogues were developed and tested in clinical trials [51,52]. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the genes related to vitamin D metabolism or in VDR may affect serum 25(OH)D levels or individual responsiveness to vitamin D supplementation and are associated with the development and progression of some diseases [35,53].

3. Vitamin D and Pancreatic Cancer Risk and Incidence

Researchers examined the role of sunlight or UVB irradiance and vitamin D in cancer risk and progression in geographical ecological studies; in observational studies related to UVB irradiation, oral vitamin D intake, and serum 25(OH)D concentration; and in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). An early clue linking UVB irradiation to the inverse risk of PC was the finding that the incidence of PC in northern latitudes is 3- to 4-times higher than that in areas closer to the equator [54]. This difference was attributed to sunlight or UVB exposure that triggers vitamin D synthesis in humans. Globally, countries in both hemispheres with lower UVB irradiance have a higher incidence of PC, with some exceptions [55]. Similarly, low solar radiation and low temperature were associated with an increased risk of PC in Japan [56].
Consistently, higher intake of vitamin D is associated with a lower risk of PC in prospective studies of cohorts including 46,771 men and 75,427 women with over 16 years of follow-up [9]; this notion was also supported by a study of Harvard cohorts [57]. However, in a prospective, nested case–control study that included alpha-tocopherol, beta-carotene cancer prevention in a cohort of male Finnish smokers, subjects with higher pre-diagnostic serum 25(OH)D concentrations had a significantly higher (three fold) risk of PC compared with those with lower concentrations [12]. There are concerns about the studies from this cohort because the serum 25(OH)D concentrations in the subjects may have changed considerably over the 16.7 years of follow-up. Furthermore, the incidence of colon cancer was positively associated with serum 25(OH)D concentration in the cohort, and many other studies showed an inverse correlation [58,59,60,61,62]. The same group, in a nested case–control study in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Screening Trial (PLCO) cohort [63], did not find a strong positive association between 25(OH)D and PC risk. More recently, a pooled analysis of nested case–control studies with 451 cases and 1167 controls from 5 cohorts supported an inverse association, i.e., higher circulating 25(OH)D levels were associated with a lower risk of PC [64]. One meta-analysis of observational studies that included 25 correlative studies with a total of 1,214,995 subjects found that taking vitamins, particularly vitamin D and vitamin B12, decreased the risk of PC [65], but another meta-analysis found no significant associations between vitamin D intake or plasma 25(OH)D levels and PC risk [66]. Another pooled analysis of vitamin D intake from multiple sources (dietary, supplementary, and total) and risk of PC using data from nine case–control studies from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case–Control Consortium (PanC4) found that the increase in dietary intake of vitamin D was associated with an increase in PC risk [67].
These inconsistent results regarding vitamin D status and risk of PC highlight the need for a causal RCT study of vitamin D supplementation. Given that PC is a relatively rare cancer, no such study has been undertaken, but the effects of vitamin D supplementation on total cancer incidence are still informative. A nationwide, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol, 2000 IU/day) and omega-3 fatty acids (1 g/day) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer among men aged 50 and older and women aged 55 and older was conducted in the United States (VITAL, NCT01169259). Among the 25,871 participants, with a median follow-up of 5.3 years, supplementation of vitamin D did not result in a lower incidence of invasive cancer compared with placebo [68], but it did reduce the incidence of advanced (metastatic or fatal) cancer in the overall cohort [69]. In an RCT for prevention of colorectal adenomas, daily supplementation with vitamin D3 (1000 IU), calcium (1200 mg), or both after removal of colorectal adenomas had no significant effect on reducing the risk of recurrent colorectal adenomas over a period of 3 to 5 years [70]. These results are similar to those in two recent meta-analyses that included the VITAL and other recent vitamin D trials [71]. SNPs in VDR gene are reported to influence the efficiency of vitamin D3 supplementation for preventing advanced colorectal adenomas in an RCT study [72]. Similarly, several SNPs in vitamin D metabolic and VDR signaling pathways are reported to be associated with PC risk (Table 1). However, most studies were conducted in specific geographical regions or in limited numbers of subjects with specific ethnic backgrounds. Thus, the conclusions are inconclusive among different reports. It is possible that differences in SNPs and other genetic variants may contribute to the variability in the efficacy of vitamin D supplementation such as that in the VITAL study. Further study is needed to identify which individuals may have a net benefit from vitamin D supplementation [71,73,74].

4. Vitamin D and Pancreatic Cancer Survival and Mortality

There is increasing evidence at different levels to support the beneficial effect of vitamin D on PC survival. Several studies investigated the impact of sunlight or UVB exposure on PC mortality. An ecological and multifactorial study examined the mortality rates of Caucasian Americans for 1950–1969 and 1970–1994 and found that UVB exposure was inversely correlated to cancer mortality of 15 cancers including PC [75]. Another study showed that increased exposure to sunlight improved overall survival in patients with PC in Turkey [76]. In another study, vitamin D insufficiency and deficiency were prevalent among patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and a 25(OH)D level of less than 20 ng/mL in PC patients with stage III and IV disease was associated with poor prognosis [77].
However, in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 80,303 cohort study, the baseline 25(OH)D levels in patients with advanced PC receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were not associated with survival [13], which suggests that vitamin D has a limited impact on prognosis in advanced stage disease. However, this study had significant limitations, including having only a small number of patients who had sufficient 25(OH)D levels, which diminished the power to examine the association between 25(OH)D levels and outcomes. Moreover, baseline 25(OH)D levels in cancer patients may not be representative of levels throughout their illness but rather could reflect inadequate nutrition and/or outdoor activity resulting from the recent onset of illness and/or burden of cancer [13].
In another study analyzing PC survival among 493 patients from 5 prospective US cohorts who were diagnosed with PC from 1984 to 2008, the patients who had sufficient pre-diagnostic plasma levels of 25(OH)D had longer overall survival [14]. Similarly, pre-treatment serum vitamin D deficiency was associated with increased inflammatory biomarkers and short overall survival in PC patients in a prospective study [78]. Additionally, a recent meta-analysis also indicated that high plasma 25(OH)D levels were significantly associated with improved survival in PC patients [66].
An RCT of vitamin D supplementation is the gold standard by which to determine the causality of vitamin D in cancer survival and mortality, but currently there are no results from such trials in PC. A case report described a female PC patient who errantly took very high doses of vitamin D at 50,000 U daily for a 10-month period, achieving a serum 25(OH)D level of >150 ng/mL, with no appreciable side effects. Although it is uncertain whether it was related to vitamin D supplementation, her disease was stable for 8 months off of conventional treatment [79]. In an updated meta-analysis of 5 RCTs analyzing total cancer mortality, a total of 1591 deaths were recorded during 3–10 years of follow-up. In the intervention group, 54–135 nmol/L of circulating 25(OH)D was attained, and it was found that vitamin D supplementation significantly reduced total cancer mortality [80]. Two additional meta-analyses of RCTs of vitamin D supplementation also support this notion [71,73].
Significantly, in combination with genome-wide screening and experimental validation, VDR was identified as a novel determinant of survival in PC patients [81], and the rs2853564 variant in VDR interacted with high pre-treatment levels of 25(OH)D and with gemcitabine treatment to confer longer overall survival of PC patients [81] (Table 1).
Collectively, the results from these observational and clinical studies, together with recent laboratory-based evidence [19,20,82,83], provide a rationale for using vitamin D or its analogues as an economical agent in combination with chemo- or immunotherapy for PC treatment. Several clinical trials of vitamin D (or its analogue paricalcitol) alone or in combination with other treatments for PC are ongoing (Table 2).

5. Future Directions

In order to causally define the impact of vitamin D on PC and optimize the beneficial effort of vitamin D for PC treatment, several challenges must be addressed.
First, although clinical evidence has been accumulating, we have not yet obtained definitive evidence that vitamin D supplementation can effectively improve survival of PC patients or reduce the risk of PC in particular populations. Thus, confirmatory RCTs that include more participants with longer follow-up periods are needed [84]. Given that there were contradictory findings regarding the effect of vitamin D on PC risk and survival and that supplementation of calcium and vitamin D, for example, increased the risk of serrated polyps, important precursors of colorectal cancer, in an RCT [12,85], it is important to elucidate the specific role of vitamin D/VDR signaling in the different stages of PC—initiation, progression, maintenance, and metastasis. These results may help to understand the variability in response to vitamin D with respect to the risk, survival, and mortality and to establish the optimal timing and dosage of vitamin D to achieve the largest benefit in the clinical setting. The effects of vitamin D on other tumors must also be clarified.
Second, there is no established agreement on the adequate serum level of vitamin D needed for prevention or anti-malignancy effects [22]. The results of meta-analyses support achieving circulating levels of 25(OH)D in the range of 54–135 nmol/L to reduce cancer mortality, but some experts argue that the level should be as high as 100–125 nmol/L (40 to 50 ng/mL) [86]. To achieve such a level of 125 nmol/L, oral supplementation of 4000 IU/day of vitamin D or 2000 IU/day plus exposure of 50% of the body surface to sun for 12 min every day is recommended [86].
Both the supplementation and the clinical uses of high doses of vitamin D have been limited because of the potential occurrence of hypercalcemia. However, over the past few years, hundreds of synthetic vitamin D analogues, which do not affect calcium level but still maintain the antiproliferative and immunomodulatory properties of the active form of vitamin D, have been developed [87,88]. Thus far, very few of these analogues have been studied in clinical trials for PC prevention or treatment. Further studies are needed to optimize the dosage of vitamin D and facilitate the application of vitamin D analogues in clinical settings.
Third, vitamin D and its analogues exert their functions through binding VDR to regulate downstream target gene expression. Clinical trials of vitamin D or its analogues as therapeutic agents for resectable PC should not only use serum levels of vitamin D as a biomarker but also take into account information about the histopathological characteristics of PC. For example, the status of tumor differentiation, severity of desmoplastic reaction, levels of VDR and CYP24A1 expression, and the status of p53 mutation and VDR SNPs should also be considered in the experimental design and data interpretation, since these factors were reported to affect vitamin D/VDR signaling and treatment response [19,74,81,84,89,90]. Accurately recording these important parameters will allow vitamin D-centered therapies to be applied with greater precision.
Fourth, immune therapy represents a paradigm shift in cancer treatment, but its efficacy for PC has been largely disappointing [91,92]. With the demonstration that VDR mediates the profound inhibition of pancreatic stellate cell activation and desmoplastic reaction, thereby enabling therapeutic response [20], it seems likely that among the multiplicity of actions of vitamin D, the immunomodulatory effects of vitamin D on both innate and adaptive immunity may ultimately be the most advantageous for PC therapies [93]. For example, expression of functional IL-17 receptors on pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) induced by KrasG12D and infiltration of the pancreatic stroma by IL-17-producing immune cells induce stem cells features of PanIN and pancreatic cancer cells and accelerate PanIN initiation and progression to invasive tumor [94,95]. Elevated IL-17 production triggers and sustains PC immunosuppression by recruiting neutrophils and excluding cytotoxic CD8+ T cells from tumors and renders PC resistant to checkpoint immunotherapy [96]. Vitamin D/VDR signaling significantly suppresses Th17 cell differentiation and transcriptionally inhibits IL-17 expression [97,98,99]. Additionally, vitamin D was found to increase tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T cells and decrease tumor growth in a breast cancer model [100]. 1,25(OH)2D signaling through the VDR significantly decreases the immunosuppressive capability of myeloid-derived suppressor cell tumor infiltration [101], which is one of the reasons for the inefficiency of checkpoint immunotherapy in PC. However, in a recent study, it was shown that the vitamin D analogue calcipotriol reduced T cell-mediated immunity in 2D and 3D cell culture models, while at the same time, it also reduced the tumor supportive activity of cancer-associated fibroblasts [102]. This study reminds us that the biological effects of vitamin D may be diverse on different cell types or stromal components. Therefore, the net effects of vitamin D should be carefully evaluated in future clinical trials.
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can induce severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs), with common gastrointestinal side effects, including diarrhea and colitis, occurring in up to 30% of patients [103]. The vitamin D/VDR pathway is known to play a role in chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, such as inflammatory bowel disease, by regulating junctional proteins and inflammatory cytokines [104]. More broadly, many in vitro and in vivo studies revealed that vitamin D and its analogues are effective in reducing systemic or local tissue inflammation [105]. A recent report showed that vitamin D intake is associated with a decreased risk of checkpoint inhibitor-induced colitis [23], possibly owing to the inhibition of IL-17 expression [106]. Thus, it is possible that the administration of vitamin D or its analogues may significantly improve the efficacy of checkpoint immunotherapy and mitigate the irAEs in PC.
Fifth, the gut microbiome represents the collective genetic material within microbiota residing in the human intestinal tract. There is increasing evidence suggesting that gut microbiota play an important role in human health, as well as in the natural history of diseases including cancer and in the therapeutic response [107]. The potential mechanisms of these effects include the involvement of microbiota in the metabolism of nutrients and microbiota-immune system interaction and education [108,109]. An analysis of whole-genome and transcriptome sequencing data from The Cancer Genome Atlas of 33 types of cancer found unique microbial signatures in tissue and blood within and between most major types of cancer [110]. In PC, recent studies showed that both human and mouse pancreatic tumors have distinct microbiome landscapes compared with the normal pancreas [111]. For example, microbiome composition in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients with long-term survival displayed high tumor microbial diversity and immunoactivation, and a tumoral microbiome signature could predict patients’ survival [112]. The gut microbiome can modulate the PC tumor microbiome, indicating crosstalk between the two microbiomes [112]. Ablation of the tumor microbiome with antibodies reshaped the tumor microenvironment, including reducing myeloid-derived suppressor cells, increasing M1 macrophage differentiation and promoting TH1 differentiation of CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T-cell activation, and protected against the progression of preinvasive and invasive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, whereas transfer of bacteria from PC patients, but not healthy control subjects, reversed this protective effect [111]. Thus, it is clinically important to identify factors that influence the gut microbiome and develop strategies that manipulate the microbiome to improve the efficiency of immune therapy in PC patients [107].
Vitamin D is known to have an antimicrobial function through activation of immune cells to produce antimicrobial peptides [6,113]. VDR is highly expressed in gut epithetical cells, and vitamin D/VDR signaling plays an important role in regulating gut epithelial proliferation and barrier function as well as the gut microbiome [114,115,116,117]. Distinct effects on fecal microbiota were found in a randomized clinical trial of vitamin D supplementation [118], and higher serum 25(OH)D levels were associated with an increase in beneficial bacteria and a decrease in pathogenic bacteria. A dose-dependent increase in bacteria associated with decreased inflammatory bowel disease activity was observed after various doses of oral vitamin D3 supplementation [119]. Lack of the Vdr gene caused dysbiosis and promoted tumorigenesis in the intestine in a mouse model [116,120]. However, it remains unknown whether and how vitamin D/VDR signaling affects the PC microbiome and PC development and progression. How best to harness vitamin D’s antimicrobial and regulatory effect on gut microbiota to improve therapeutic efficacy in PC deserves further exploration.
Sixth, VDR displays broad tissue expression, including in pancreatic tissue, but its expression level in pancreatic epithelial cells is relatively low compared to that in gut epithelial cells. Over the past few decades, we have learned much about the functional role of vitamin D/VDR signaling in PC experimentally. For example, reduced VDR expression in pancreatic tumor tissue correlates with poor differentiation, tumor progression, and short survival duration of the patients, and treatment of pancreatic cancer cells with vitamin D or its analogues induces cell cycle arrest and apoptosis and suppresses cancer stemness in vitro and tumorigenesis in vivo [17,121]. More significantly, treatment with vitamin D or its analogue calcipotriol induces stromal reprogramming and potentiates PC response to chemoradiotherapy [19,20].
Fundamental questions remain regarding vitamin D/VDR signaling in PC: (1) How is VDR signaling involved in acinar-to-ductal metaplasia and early PC, given the critical function of vitamin D/VDR in the regulation of cell differentiation? (2) What molecular mechanisms underpin the reduction or loss of VDR expression during PC progression [122]? (3) What are the specific molecular targets through which vitamin D/VDR signaling exerts its antitumor activity in PC cells? (4) How does vitamin D/VDR signaling mediate the cross-talk between tumor cells and stromal cells to shape the tumor microenvironment and influence tumor progression and therapeutic response? With a Vdr-knockout mouse model and CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing, as well as the technical advances in gene/mRNA/16S ribosomal sequencing, we should be able to address these questions and obtain definitive evidence to determine whether vitamin D is effective for the prevention or/and treatment of PC and to develop mechanism-based, effective therapeutic strategies to improve the outcomes of PC.
In summary, vitamin D suppresses the pleiotropic hallmarks of cancer, and despite the current challenges, accumulating evidence supports the rationale of using vitamin D or its analogues as a cost-effective agent for PC intervention.

Author Contributions

Conception and design, manuscript writing and revision: D.W., X.Z., and L.W. Conceptual feedback and manuscript revision: R.S.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The work was supported in part by grants from the Elsa U. Pardee Foundation, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Duncan Family Institute for Cancer Prevention and Risk Assessment, the MD Anderson Cancer Center Institutional Research program, and the Texas Medical Center Digestive Disease Center Pilot Research Program (to D. Wei), and from the National Cancer Institute (R01 CA198090) (to R. Bresalier).

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dawn Chalaire, Scientific Editor, Research Medical Library, MD Anderson Cancer Center, for helpful language editing comments. The authors thank Wei Li for the graphic art illustrating vitamin D synthesis and biological signaling.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

  1. Rahib, L.; Smith, B.D.; Aizenberg, R.; Rosenzweig, A.B.; Fleshman, J.M.; Matrisian, L.M. Projecting cancer incidence and deaths to 2030: The unexpected burden of thyroid, liver, and pancreas cancers in the United States. Cancer Res. 2014, 74, 2913–2921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Society, A.C. Cancer Facts & Figures; American Cancer Society: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  3. Stromnes, I.M.; Hulbert, A.; Pierce, R.H.; Greenberg, P.D.; Hingorani, S.R. T-cell Localization, Activation, and Clonal Expansion in Human Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2017, 5, 978–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Wang, Y.; Zhou, S.; Yang, F.; Qi, X.; Wang, X.; Guan, X.; Shen, C.; Duma, N.; Vera Aguilera, J.; Chintakuntlawar, A.; et al. Treatment-Related Adverse Events of PD-1 and PD-L1 Inhibitors in Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2019, 5, 1008–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Young, R.C. Value-Based Cancer Care. N. Engl. J. Med. 2015, 373, 2593–2595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Golpour, A.; Bereswill, S.; Heimesaat, M.M. Antimicrobial and Immune-Modulatory Effects of Vitamin D Provide Promising Antibiotics-Independent Approaches to Tackle Bacterial Infections—Lessons Learnt from a Literature Survey. Eur. J. Microbiol. Immunol. 2019, 9, 80–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pike, J.W.; Christakos, S. Biology and Mechanisms of Action of the Vitamin D Hormone. Endocrinol. Metab. Clin. N. Am. 2017, 46, 815–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Kim, H.; Giovannucci, E. Vitamin D Status and Cancer Incidence, Survival, and Mortality. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 2020, 1268, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Skinner, H.G.; Michaud, D.S.; Giovannucci, E.; Willett, W.C.; Colditz, G.A.; Fuchs, C.S. Vitamin D intake and the risk for pancreatic cancer in two cohort studies. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2006, 15, 1688–1695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  10. Altieri, B.; Grant, W.B.; Della Casa, S.; Orio, F.; Pontecorvi, A.; Colao, A.; Sarno, G.; Muscogiuri, G. Vitamin D and pancreas: The role of sunshine vitamin in the pathogenesis of diabetes mellitus and pancreatic cancer. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017, 57, 3472–3488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sluyter, J.D.; Manson, J.E.; Scragg, R. Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta-Analyses. JBMR Plus 2021, 5, e10420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Stolzenberg-Solomon, R.Z.; Vieth, R.; Azad, A.; Pietinen, P.; Taylor, P.R.; Virtamo, J.; Albanes, D. A prospective nested case-control study of vitamin D status and pancreatic cancer risk in male smokers. Cancer Res. 2006, 66, 10213–10219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Van Loon, K.; Owzar, K.; Jiang, C.; Kindler, H.L.; Mulcahy, M.F.; Niedzwiecki, D.; O’Reilly, E.M.; Fuchs, C.; Innocenti, F.; Venook, A.P. 25-Hydroxyvitamin D levels and survival in advanced pancreatic cancer: Findings from CALGB 80303 (Alliance). J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2014, 106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Yuan, C.; Qian, Z.R.; Babic, A.; Morales-Oyarvide, V.; Rubinson, D.A.; Kraft, P.; Ng, K.; Bao, Y.; Giovannucci, E.L.; Ogino, S.; et al. Prediagnostic Plasma 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and Pancreatic Cancer Survival. J. Clin. Oncol. 2016, 34, 2899–2905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Chirumbolo, S. Possible role of vitamin D3 on the adipocyte/fibroblast trans-differentiation mediated by pancreas cancer. Curr. Health Sci. J. 2015, 41, 5–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kong, F.; Li, L.; Wang, G.; Deng, X.; Li, Z.; Kong, X. VDR signaling inhibits cancer-associated-fibroblasts’ release of exosomal miR-10a-5p and limits their supportive effects on pancreatic cancer cells. Gut 2019, 68, 950–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Li, Z.; Jia, Z.; Gao, Y.; Xie, D.; Wei, D.; Cui, J.; Mishra, L.; Huang, S.; Zhang, Y.; Xie, K. Activation of vitamin D receptor signaling downregulates the expression of nuclear FOXM1 protein and suppresses pancreatic cancer cell stemness. Clin. Cancer Res. 2015, 21, 844–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Mukai, Y.; Eguchi, H. ASO Author Reflections: Regulation of Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma by Vitamin D Supplementation. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2018, 25, 816–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Mukai, Y.; Yamada, D.; Eguchi, H.; Iwagami, Y.; Asaoka, T.; Noda, T.; Kawamoto, K.; Gotoh, K.; Kobayashi, S.; Takeda, Y.; et al. Vitamin D Supplementation is a Promising Therapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma in Conjunction with Current Chemoradiation Therapy. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2018, 25, 1868–1879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Sherman, M.H.; Yu, R.T.; Engle, D.D.; Ding, N.; Atkins, A.R.; Tiriac, H.; Collisson, E.A.; Connor, F.; Van Dyke, T.; Kozlov, S.; et al. Vitamin D receptor-mediated stromal reprogramming suppresses pancreatitis and enhances pancreatic cancer therapy. Cell 2014, 159, 80–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. Iqbal, S.; Naseem, I. Pancreatic cancer control: Is vitamin D the answer? Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 2016, 25, 188–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Wu, X.; Hu, W.; Lu, L.; Zhao, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Xiao, Z.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, H.; Li, X.; Li, W.; et al. Repurposing vitamin D for treatment of human malignancies via targeting tumor microenvironment. Acta Pharm. Sin. B 2019, 9, 203–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Grover, S.; Dougan, M.; Tyan, K.; Giobbie-Hurder, A.; Blum, S.M.; Ishizuka, J.; Qazi, T.; Elias, R.; Vora, K.B.; Ruan, A.B.; et al. Vitamin D intake is associated with decreased risk of immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced colitis. Cancer 2020, 126, 3758–3767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee to Review Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin D and Calcium. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
  25. Zerwekh, J.E. Blood biomarkers of vitamin D status. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2008, 87, 1087s–1091s. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Holick, M.F.; Binkley, N.C.; Bischoff-Ferrari, H.A.; Gordon, C.M.; Hanley, D.A.; Heaney, R.P.; Murad, M.H.; Weaver, C.M. Evaluation, treatment, and prevention of vitamin D deficiency: An Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2011, 96, 1911–1930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Bischoff-Ferrari, H.A.; Giovannucci, E.; Willett, W.C.; Dietrich, T.; Dawson-Hughes, B. Estimation of optimal serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D for multiple health outcomes. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2006, 84, 18–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Heaney, R.P.; Dowell, M.S.; Hale, C.A.; Bendich, A. Calcium absorption varies within the reference range for serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D. J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 2003, 22, 142–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Serdar, M.A.; Batu Can, B.; Kilercik, M.; Durer, Z.A.; Aksungar, F.B.; Serteser, M.; Coskun, A.; Ozpinar, A.; Unsal, I. Analysis of Changes in Parathyroid Hormone and 25 (OH) Vitamin D Levels with Respect to Age, Gender and Season: A Data Mining Study. J. Med. Biochem. 2017, 36, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  30. Chirumbolo, S. Commentary: Vitamin D and Pancreatic Cancer: A Pooled Analysis from the Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium. Front. Oncol. 2015, 5, 160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Tsuprykov, O.; Chen, X.; Hocher, C.F.; Skoblo, R.; Lianghong, Y.; Hocher, B. Why should we measure free 25(OH) vitamin D? J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2018, 180, 87–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Bikle, D.D. Vitamin D: Newer Concepts of Its Metabolism and Function at the Basic and Clinical Level. J. Endocr. Soc. 2020, 4, bvz038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Carlberg, C.; Muñoz, A. An update on vitamin D signaling and cancer. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Dimitrov, V.; Barbier, C.; Ismailova, A.; Wang, Y.; Dmowski, K.; Salehi-Tabar, R.; Memari, B.; Groulx-Boivin, E.; White, J.H. Vitamin D-regulated Gene Expression Profiles: Species-specificity and Cell-specific Effects on Metabolism and Immunity. Endocrinology 2021, 162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Charoenngam, N.; Holick, M.F. Immunologic Effects of Vitamin D on Human Health and Disease. Nutrients 2020, 12, 2097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Mangin, M.; Sinha, R.; Fincher, K. Inflammation and vitamin D: The infection connection. Inflamm. Res. 2014, 63, 803–819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  37. Yin, K.; Agrawal, D.K. Vitamin D and inflammatory diseases. J. Inflamm. Res. 2014, 7, 69–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Autier, P.; Boniol, M.; Pizot, C.; Mullie, P. Vitamin D status and ill health: A systematic review. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014, 2, 76–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Alkan, A.; Köksoy, E.B. Vitamin D deficiency in cancer patients and predictors for screening (D-ONC study). Curr. Probl. Cancer 2019, 43, 421–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Calmarza, P.; Sanz París, A.; Prieto López, C.; Llorente Barrio, M.; Boj Carceller, D. Vitamin D levels in patients with recent cancer diagnosis. Nutr. Hosp. 2018, 35, 903–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Seyedalipour, F.; Mansouri, A.; Vaezi, M.; Gholami, K.; Heidari, K.; Hadjibabaie, M.; Ghavamzadeh, A. High Prevalence of Vitamin D Deficiency in Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients and Its Adverse Outcome. Int. J. Hematol. Oncol. Stem Cell Res. 2017, 11, 209–216. [Google Scholar]
  42. Holick, M.F. The vitamin D deficiency pandemic: Approaches for diagnosis, treatment and prevention. Rev. Endocr. Metab. Disord. 2017, 18, 153–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Holick, M.F.; Chen, T.C. Vitamin D deficiency: A worldwide problem with health consequences. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2008, 87, 1080s–1086s. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Holick, M.F. Sunlight “D” ilemma: Risk of skin cancer or bone disease and muscle weakness. Lancet 2001, 357, 4–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Dawson-Hughes, B.; Heaney, R.P.; Holick, M.F.; Lips, P.; Meunier, P.J.; Vieth, R. Estimates of optimal vitamin D status. Osteoporos. Int. 2005, 16, 713–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Guo, J.; Lovegrove, J.A.; Givens, D.I. 25(OH)D3-enriched or fortified foods are more efficient at tackling inadequate vitamin D status than vitamin D3. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 2018, 77, 282–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  47. Quesada-Gomez, J.M.; Bouillon, R. Is calcifediol better than cholecalciferol for vitamin D supplementation? Osteoporos. Int. 2018, 29, 1697–1711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Tangpricha, V. Vitamin D in food and supplements. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2012, 95, 1299–1300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Tripkovic, L.; Lambert, H.; Hart, K.; Smith, C.P.; Bucca, G.; Penson, S.; Chope, G.; Hyppönen, E.; Berry, J.; Vieth, R.; et al. Comparison of vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 supplementation in raising serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D status: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2012, 95, 1357–1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  50. Tripkovic, L.; Wilson, L.R.; Hart, K.; Johnsen, S.; de Lusignan, S.; Smith, C.P.; Bucca, G.; Penson, S.; Chope, G.; Elliott, R.; et al. Daily supplementation with 15 μg vitamin D(2) compared with vitamin D(3) to increase wintertime 25-hydroxyvitamin D status in healthy South Asian and white European women: A 12-wk randomized, placebo-controlled food-fortification trial. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2017, 106, 481–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  51. Mazzaferro, S.; Goldsmith, D.; Larsson, T.E.; Massy, Z.A.; Cozzolino, M. Vitamin D metabolites and/or analogs: Which D for which patient? Curr. Vasc. Pharmacol. 2014, 12, 339–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Wu-Wong, J.R.; Tian, J.; Goltzman, D. Vitamin D analogs as therapeutic agents: A clinical study update. Curr. Opin. Investig. Drugs 2004, 5, 320–326. [Google Scholar]
  53. Barry, E.L.; Rees, J.R.; Peacock, J.L.; Mott, L.A.; Amos, C.I.; Bostick, R.M.; Figueiredo, J.C.; Ahnen, D.J.; Bresalier, R.S.; Burke, C.A.; et al. Genetic variants in CYP2R1, CYP24A1, and VDR modify the efficacy of vitamin D3 supplementation for increasing serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels in a randomized controlled trial. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2014, 99, E2133–E2137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Bray, F.; Colombet, M.; Mery, L.; Piñeros, M.; Znaor, A.; Zanetti, R.; Ferlay, J. Cancer Incidence in Five Continents; IARC Scientific Publicaitons: Lyon, France, 2007; Volume 9. [Google Scholar]
  55. Mohr, S.B.; Garland, C.F.; Gorham, E.D.; Grant, W.B.; Garland, F.C. Ultraviolet B irradiance and vitamin D status are inversely associated with incidence rates of pancreatic cancer worldwide. Pancreas 2010, 39, 669–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Kinoshita, S.; Wagatsuma, Y.; Okada, M. Geographical distribution for malignant neoplasm of the pancreas in relation to selected climatic factors in Japan. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2007, 6, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Giovannucci, E. Vitamin D and cancer incidence in the Harvard cohorts. Ann. Epidemiol. 2009, 19, 84–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Feldman, D.; Krishnan, A.V.; Swami, S.; Giovannucci, E.; Feldman, B.J. The role of vitamin D in reducing cancer risk and progression. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2014, 14, 342–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Grant, W.B. Effect of interval between serum draw and follow-up period on relative risk of cancer incidence with respect to 25-hydroxyvitamin D level: Implications for meta-analyses and setting vitamin D guidelines. Derm. Endocrinol. 2011, 3, 199–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Ma, Y.; Zhang, P.; Wang, F.; Yang, J.; Liu, Z.; Qin, H. Association between vitamin D and risk of colorectal cancer: A systematic review of prospective studies. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011, 29, 3775–3782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Michaud, D.S. Vitamin D and pancreatic cancer risk in the alpha-tocopherol, beta-carotene cancer prevention cohort. Cancer Res. 2006, 66, 9802–9803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Song, M.; Nishihara, R.; Wang, M.; Chan, A.T.; Qian, Z.R.; Inamura, K.; Zhang, X.; Ng, K.; Kim, S.A.; Mima, K.; et al. Plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D and colorectal cancer risk according to tumour immunity status. Gut 2016, 65, 296–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Stolzenberg-Solomon, R.Z.; Hayes, R.B.; Horst, R.L.; Anderson, K.E.; Hollis, B.W.; Silverman, D.T. Serum vitamin D and risk of pancreatic cancer in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian screening trial. Cancer Res. 2009, 69, 1439–1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Wolpin, B.M.; Ng, K.; Bao, Y.; Kraft, P.; Stampfer, M.J.; Michaud, D.S.; Ma, J.; Buring, J.E.; Sesso, H.D.; Lee, I.M.; et al. Plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D and risk of pancreatic cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2012, 21, 82–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Liu, Y.; Wang, X.; Sun, X.; Lu, S.; Liu, S. Vitamin intake and pancreatic cancer risk reduction: A meta-analysis of observational studies. Medicine 2018, 97, e0114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Zhang, X.; Huang, X.Z.; Chen, W.J.; Wu, J.; Chen, Y.; Wu, C.C.; Wang, Z.N. Plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels, vitamin D intake, and pancreatic cancer risk or mortality: A meta-analysis. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 64395–64406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Waterhouse, M.; Risch, H.A.; Bosetti, C.; Anderson, K.E.; Petersen, G.M.; Bamlet, W.R.; Cotterchio, M.; Cleary, S.P.; Ibiebele, T.I.; La Vecchia, C.; et al. Vitamin D and pancreatic cancer: A pooled analysis from the Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium. Ann. Oncol. 2016, 27, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Manson, J.E.; Cook, N.R.; Lee, I.M.; Christen, W.; Bassuk, S.S.; Mora, S.; Gibson, H.; Gordon, D.; Copeland, T.; D’Agostino, D.; et al. Vitamin D Supplements and Prevention of Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 2019, 380, 33–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Chandler, P.D.; Chen, W.Y.; Ajala, O.N.; Hazra, A.; Cook, N.; Bubes, V.; Lee, I.M.; Giovannucci, E.L.; Willett, W.; Buring, J.E.; et al. Effect of Vitamin D3 Supplements on Development of Advanced Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the VITAL Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw. Open 2020, 3, e2025850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Baron, J.A.; Barry, E.L.; Mott, L.A.; Rees, J.R.; Sandler, R.S.; Snover, D.C.; Bostick, R.M.; Ivanova, A.; Cole, B.F.; Ahnen, D.J.; et al. A Trial of Calcium and Vitamin D for the Prevention of Colorectal Adenomas. N. Engl. J. Med. 2015, 373, 1519–1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Manson, J.E.; Bassuk, S.S.; Buring, J.E. Principal results of the VITamin D and OmegA-3 TriaL (VITAL) and updated meta-analyses of relevant vitamin D trials. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2020, 198, 105522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Barry, E.L.; Peacock, J.L.; Rees, J.R.; Bostick, R.M.; Robertson, D.J.; Bresalier, R.S.; Baron, J.A. Vitamin D Receptor Genotype, Vitamin D3 Supplementation, and Risk of Colorectal Adenomas: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2017, 3, 628–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  73. Haykal, T.; Samji, V.; Zayed, Y.; Gakhal, I.; Dhillon, H.; Kheiri, B.; Kerbage, J.; Veerapaneni, V.; Obeid, M.; Danish, R.; et al. The role of vitamin D supplementation for primary prevention of cancer: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J. Community Hosp. Intern. Med. Perspect. 2019, 9, 480–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  74. Young, M.R.I.; Xiong, Y. Influence of vitamin D on cancer risk and treatment: Why the variability? Trends Cancer Res. 2018, 13, 43–53. [Google Scholar]
  75. Grant, W.B.; Garland, C.F. The association of solar ultraviolet B (UVB) with reducing risk of cancer: Multifactorial ecologic analysis of geographic variation in age-adjusted cancer mortality rates. Anticancer Res. 2006, 26, 2687–2699. [Google Scholar]
  76. Eryilmaz, M.K.; Mutui, H.; Gunduz, S.; Uysal, M.; Musri, F.Y.; Coskun, H.S. More sunlight exposure may improve the overall survival in patients with pancreas cancer. J. Oncol. Sci. 2015, 2, 4. [Google Scholar]
  77. Cho, M.; Peddi, P.F.; Ding, K.; Chen, L.; Thomas, D.; Wang, J.; Lockhart, A.C.; Tan, B.; Wang-Gillam, A. Vitamin D deficiency and prognostics among patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J. Transl. Med. 2013, 11, 206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  78. Rasmussen, L.S.; Yilmaz, M.K.; Falkmer, U.G.; Poulsen, L.; Bøgsted, M.; Christensen, H.S.; Bojesen, S.E.; Jensen, B.V.; Chen, I.M.; Johansen, A.Z.; et al. Pre-treatment serum vitamin D deficiency is associated with increased inflammatory biomarkers and short overall survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. Eur. J. Cancer 2020, 144, 72–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Cannon, T.L.; Ford, J.; Hester, D.; Trump, D.L. The Incidental Use of High-Dose Vitamin D3 in Pancreatic Cancer. Case Rep. Pancreat. Cancer 2016, 2, 32–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Keum, N.; Lee, D.H.; Greenwood, D.C.; Manson, J.E.; Giovannucci, E. Vitamin D supplementation and total cancer incidence and mortality: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann. Oncol. 2019, 30, 733–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Innocenti, F.; Owzar, K.; Jiang, C.; Etheridge, A.S.; Gordân, R.; Sibley, A.B.; Mulkey, F.; Niedzwiecki, D.; Glubb, D.; Neel, N.; et al. The vitamin D receptor gene as a determinant of survival in pancreatic cancer patients: Genomic analysis and experimental validation. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0202272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Kang, Z.; Wang, C.; Tong, Y.; Li, Y.; Gao, Y.; Hou, S.; Hao, M.; Han, X.; Wang, B.; Wang, Q.; et al. Novel Nonsecosteroidal Vitamin D Receptor Modulator Combined with Gemcitabine Enhances Pancreatic Cancer Therapy through Remodeling of the Tumor Microenvironment. J. Med. Chem. 2021, 64, 629–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Yu, W.D.; Ma, Y.; Flynn, G.; Muindi, J.R.; Kong, R.X.; Trump, D.L.; Johnson, C.S. Calcitriol enhances gemcitabine anti-tumor activity in vitro and in vivo by promoting apoptosis in a human pancreatic carcinoma model system. Cell Cycle 2010, 9, 3022–3029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Akutsu, T.; Kitamura, H.; Himeiwa, S.; Kitada, S.; Akasu, T.; Urashima, M. Vitamin D and Cancer Survival: Does Vitamin D Supplementation Improve the Survival of Patients with Cancer? Curr. Oncol. Rep. 2020, 22, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Crockett, S.D.; Barry, E.L.; Mott, L.A.; Ahnen, D.J.; Robertson, D.J.; Anderson, J.C.; Wallace, K.; Burke, C.A.; Bresalier, R.S.; Figueiredo, J.C.; et al. Calcium and vitamin D supplementation and increased risk of serrated polyps: Results from a randomised clinical trial. Gut 2019, 68, 475–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Garland, C.F.; Gorham, E.D.; Mohr, S.B.; Grant, W.B.; Giovannucci, E.L.; Lipkin, M.; Newmark, H.; Holick, M.F.; Garland, F.C. Vitamin D and prevention of breast cancer: Pooled analysis. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2007, 103, 708–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Maestro, M.A.; Molnár, F.; Carlberg, C. Vitamin D and Its Synthetic Analogs. J. Med. Chem. 2019, 62, 6854–6875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Verstuyf, A.; Segaert, S.; Verlinden, L.; Bouillon, R.; Mathieu, C. Recent developments in the use of vitamin D analogues. Expert Opin. Investig. Drugs 2000, 9, 443–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Hummel, D.; Aggarwal, A.; Borka, K.; Bajna, E.; Kállay, E.; Horváth, H.C. The vitamin D system is deregulated in pancreatic diseases. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2014, 144 Pt B, 402–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Reichrath, J.; Reichrath, S.; Vogt, T.; Römer, K. Crosstalk Between Vitamin D and p53 Signaling in Cancer: An Update. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 2020, 1268, 307–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Esfahani, K.; Roudaia, L.; Buhlaiga, N.; Del Rincon, S.V.; Papneja, N.; Miller, W.H., Jr. A review of cancer immunotherapy: From the past, to the present, to the future. Curr. Oncol. 2020, 27, S87–S97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Schizas, D.; Charalampakis, N.; Kole, C.; Economopoulou, P.; Koustas, E.; Gkotsis, E.; Ziogas, D.; Psyrri, A.; Karamouzis, M.V. Immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer: A 2020 update. Cancer Treat. Rev. 2020, 86, 102016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Campbell, M.J.; Trump, D.L. Vitamin D Receptor Signaling and Cancer. Endocrinol. Metab. Clin. N. Am. 2017, 46, 1009–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. McAllister, F.; Bailey, J.M.; Alsina, J.; Nirschl, C.J.; Sharma, R.; Fan, H.; Rattigan, Y.; Roeser, J.C.; Lankapalli, R.H.; Zhang, H.; et al. Oncogenic Kras activates a hematopoietic-to-epithelial IL-17 signaling axis in preinvasive pancreatic neoplasia. Cancer Cell 2014, 25, 621–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Zhang, Y.; Zoltan, M.; Riquelme, E.; Xu, H.; Sahin, I.; Castro-Pando, S.; Montiel, M.F.; Chang, K.; Jiang, Z.; Ling, J.; et al. Immune Cell Production of Interleukin 17 Induces Stem Cell Features of Pancreatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia Cells. Gastroenterology 2018, 155, 210–223.e213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Zhang, Y.; Chandra, V.; Riquelme Sanchez, E.; Dutta, P.; Quesada, P.R.; Rakoski, A.; Zoltan, M.; Arora, N.; Baydogan, S.; Horne, W.; et al. Interleukin-17-induced neutrophil extracellular traps mediate resistance to checkpoint blockade in pancreatic cancer. J. Exp. Med. 2020, 217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Fawaz, L.; Mrad, M.F.; Kazan, J.M.; Sayegh, S.; Akika, R.; Khoury, S.J. Comparative effect of 25(OH)D3 and 1,25(OH)2D3 on Th17 cell differentiation. Clin. Immunol. 2016, 166–167, 59–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Joshi, S.; Pantalena, L.C.; Liu, X.K.; Gaffen, S.L.; Liu, H.; Rohowsky-Kochan, C.; Ichiyama, K.; Yoshimura, A.; Steinman, L.; Christakos, S.; et al. 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D(3) ameliorates Th17 autoimmunity via transcriptional modulation of interleukin-17A. Mol. Cell. Biol. 2011, 31, 3653–3669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Sun, D.; Luo, F.; Xing, J.C.; Zhang, F.; Xu, J.Z.; Zhang, Z.H. 1,25(OH)(2) D(3) inhibited Th17 cells differentiation via regulating the NF-κB activity and expression of IL-17. Cell Prolif. 2018, 51, e12461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  100. Karkeni, E.; Morin, S.O.; Bou Tayeh, B.; Goubard, A.; Josselin, E.; Castellano, R.; Fauriat, C.; Guittard, G.; Olive, D.; Nunès, J.A. Vitamin D Controls Tumor Growth and CD8+ T Cell Infiltration in Breast Cancer. Front. Immunol. 2019, 10, 1307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Fleet, J.C.; Burcham, G.N.; Calvert, R.D.; Elzey, B.D.; Ratliff, T.L. 1α, 25 Dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)(2)D) inhibits the T cell suppressive function of myeloid derived suppressor cells (MDSC). J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2020, 198, 105557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Gorchs, L.; Ahmed, S.; Mayer, C.; Knauf, A.; Fernández Moro, C.; Svensson, M.; Heuchel, R.; Rangelova, E.; Bergman, P.; Kaipe, H. The vitamin D analogue calcipotriol promotes an anti-tumorigenic phenotype of human pancreatic CAFs but reduces T cell mediated immunity. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 17444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Prieux-Klotz, C.; Dior, M.; Damotte, D.; Dreanic, J.; Brieau, B.; Brezault, C.; Abitbol, V.; Chaussade, S.; Coriat, R. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Induced Colitis: Diagnosis and Management. Target. Oncol. 2017, 12, 301–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Battistini, C.; Ballan, R.; Herkenhoff, M.E.; Saad, S.M.I.; Sun, J. Vitamin D Modulates Intestinal Microbiota in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 22, 362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Cannell, J.J.; Grant, W.B.; Holick, M.F. Vitamin D and inflammation. Derm. Endocrinol. 2014, 6, e983401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  106. Anderson, R.; Theron, A.J.; Rapoport, B.L. Immunopathogenesis of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Adverse Events: Roles of the Intestinal Microbiome and Th17 Cells. Front. Immunol. 2019, 10, 2254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  107. Gopalakrishnan, V.; Helmink, B.A.; Spencer, C.N.; Reuben, A.; Wargo, J.A. The Influence of the Gut Microbiome on Cancer, Immunity, and Cancer Immunotherapy. Cancer Cell 2018, 33, 570–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  108. Sethi, V.; Vitiello, G.A.; Saxena, D.; Miller, G.; Dudeja, V. The Role of the Microbiome in Immunologic Development and its Implication For Pancreatic Cancer Immunotherapy. Gastroenterology 2019, 156, 2097–2115.e2092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Valdes, A.M.; Walter, J.; Segal, E.; Spector, T.D. Role of the gut microbiota in nutrition and health. BMJ 2018, 361, k2179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Poore, G.D.; Kopylova, E.; Zhu, Q.; Carpenter, C.; Fraraccio, S.; Wandro, S.; Kosciolek, T.; Janssen, S.; Metcalf, J.; Song, S.J.; et al. Microbiome analyses of blood and tissues suggest cancer diagnostic approach. Nature 2020, 579, 567–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Pushalkar, S.; Hundeyin, M.; Daley, D.; Zambirinis, C.P.; Kurz, E.; Mishra, A.; Mohan, N.; Aykut, B.; Usyk, M.; Torres, L.E.; et al. The Pancreatic Cancer Microbiome Promotes Oncogenesis by Induction of Innate and Adaptive Immune Suppression. Cancer Discov. 2018, 8, 403–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  112. Riquelme, E.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Montiel, M.; Zoltan, M.; Dong, W.; Quesada, P.; Sahin, I.; Chandra, V.; San Lucas, A.; et al. Tumor Microbiome Diversity and Composition Influence Pancreatic Cancer Outcomes. Cell 2019, 178, 795–806.e712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Gombart, A.F. The vitamin D-antimicrobial peptide pathway and its role in protection against infection. Future Microbiol. 2009, 4, 1151–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  114. Chatterjee, I.; Lu, R.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Dai, Y.; Xia, Y.; Sun, J. Vitamin D receptor promotes healthy microbial metabolites and microbiome. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 7340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Fakhoury, H.M.A.; Kvietys, P.R.; AlKattan, W.; Anouti, F.A.; Elahi, M.A.; Karras, S.N.; Grant, W.B. Vitamin D and intestinal homeostasis: Barrier, microbiota, and immune modulation. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2020, 200, 105663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Jin, D.; Wu, S.; Zhang, Y.G.; Lu, R.; Xia, Y.; Dong, H.; Sun, J. Lack of Vitamin D Receptor Causes Dysbiosis and Changes the Functions of the Murine Intestinal Microbiome. Clin. Ther. 2015, 37, 996–1009.e1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Sun, J. Dietary vitamin D, vitamin D receptor, and microbiome. Curr. Opin. Clin. Nutr. Metab. Care 2018, 21, 471–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Naderpoor, N.; Mousa, A.; Fernanda Gomez Arango, L.; Barrett, H.L.; Dekker Nitert, M.; de Courten, B. Effect of Vitamin D Supplementation on Faecal Microbiota: A Randomised Clinical Trial. Nutrients 2019, 11, 2888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  119. Charoenngam, N.; Shirvani, A.; Kalajian, T.A.; Song, A.; Holick, M.F. The Effect of Various Doses of Oral Vitamin D(3) Supplementation on Gut Microbiota in Healthy Adults: A Randomized, Double-blinded, Dose-response Study. Anticancer Res. 2020, 40, 551–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Zhang, Y.G.; Lu, R.; Wu, S.; Chatterjee, I.; Zhou, D.; Xia, Y.; Sun, J. Vitamin D Receptor Protects Against Dysbiosis and Tumorigenesis via the JAK/STAT Pathway in Intestine. Cell. Mol. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020, 10, 729–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Wang, K.; Dong, M.; Sheng, W.; Liu, Q.; Yu, D.; Dong, Q.; Li, Q.; Wang, J. Expression of vitamin D receptor as a potential prognostic factor and therapeutic target in pancreatic cancer. Histopathology 2015, 67, 386–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. DeSmet, M.L.; Fleet, J.C. Constitutively active RAS signaling reduces 1,25 dihydroxyvitamin D-mediated gene transcription in intestinal epithelial cells by reducing vitamin D receptor expression. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2017, 173, 194–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cancers 13 02716 g001 550
Figure 1. Vitamin D metabolism and biological functions. Vitamin D is obtained either from precursors in food or produced in the skin from conversion of 7-DHC through sunlight exposure. In the liver, vitamin D3 is hydroxylated to form 25(OH)D3. A second hydroxylation produces the active metabolite 1⍺,25(OH)2D3. This step mainly takes place in the kidney but also in other tissues, such as immune cells and epithelial cells expressing 1⍺-hydroxylase. Vitamin D metabolites are carried by VDBP in the blood circulation. 1⍺,25(OH)2D3 enters cells and binds to VDR, which enables the formation of VDR-RXR complex. This complex translocates into cell nuclei and binds to VDRE to regulate gene expression. Vitamin D has various biological functions in multiple organs and tissues. Active forms of vitamin D are degraded in the kidney as well as other target tissues and finally excreted by urine. 7DHC, 7-dehydrocholesterol; VDBP, vitamin D binding protein; VDR, vitamin D receptor; RXR, retinoid X receptor; VDRE, vitamin D response element.
Figure 1. Vitamin D metabolism and biological functions. Vitamin D is obtained either from precursors in food or produced in the skin from conversion of 7-DHC through sunlight exposure. In the liver, vitamin D3 is hydroxylated to form 25(OH)D3. A second hydroxylation produces the active metabolite 1⍺,25(OH)2D3. This step mainly takes place in the kidney but also in other tissues, such as immune cells and epithelial cells expressing 1⍺-hydroxylase. Vitamin D metabolites are carried by VDBP in the blood circulation. 1⍺,25(OH)2D3 enters cells and binds to VDR, which enables the formation of VDR-RXR complex. This complex translocates into cell nuclei and binds to VDRE to regulate gene expression. Vitamin D has various biological functions in multiple organs and tissues. Active forms of vitamin D are degraded in the kidney as well as other target tissues and finally excreted by urine. 7DHC, 7-dehydrocholesterol; VDBP, vitamin D binding protein; VDR, vitamin D receptor; RXR, retinoid X receptor; VDRE, vitamin D response element.
Cancers 13 02716 g001
Table
Table 1. Relationship of SNPs in vitamin D metabolic and VDR signaling pathways with pancreatic cancer.
Table 1. Relationship of SNPs in vitamin D metabolic and VDR signaling pathways with pancreatic cancer.
Protein NameGene SymbolSNP LocusAllelesLocationAmino Acid VariantRelation to Pancreatic Cancer (PC)Reference PMID
Vitamin D binding proteinGCrs2282679T>GIntronNANo significant correlation26364161, 31467173
rs4588G>A/G>TExonT>M/T>KNo significant correlation
rs7041A>C/A>TExonD>ENo significant correlation
rs1491711C>GIntronNAHeterozygote is associated with PC risk23826131
25-hydroxyvitamin D-1 alpha hydroxylaseCYP27B1rs10877012G>C/G>T5′ promoterNANo association with increased risk for the development of PC
rs4646536A>GIntronNANo association with increased risk for the development of PC
rs703842A>C/A>G/A>T3′ UTRNANo significant correlation25799011
rs1048691C>T3′ UTRNANo significant correlation
25-hydroxyvitamin D 24-hydrolaseCYP24A1rs2585428C>TIntronNASignificantly decrease the risk of PC29254801
rs6127119C>TIntronNATT versus CC genotype is positively associated with PC risk a23826131
Vitamin D receptorVDRrs2228570A>C/A>G/A>TExonM>R / M>T / M>KT allele associates with increased PC risk and tumor pathological differentiation b25616697, 33226370
rs1544410C>A/C>G/C>TIntronNAG allele associates with decreased PC risk and TNM classification c25616697, 32918214
rs2853564G>AIntronNAG allele associates with increased overall survival of PC patients d30107003
a Not statistically significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons; b Start codon variant resulting in a longer protein product; c linkage disequilibrium with the poly(A) microsatellite in 3′ UTR; d G allele affects binding of IRF4 to VDR and VDR transcriptional activity.
Table
Table 2. Representative ongoing clinical trials of vitamin D or its analog combined with other agents for pancreatic cancer treatment.
Table 2. Representative ongoing clinical trials of vitamin D or its analog combined with other agents for pancreatic cancer treatment.
Trial IdentifierAgentsPatient ConditionPatient NumberStudy PhaseDesignStatusLocation
NCT04617067Paricalcitol/Gemcitabine/Nab-paclitaxelAdvanced or metastatic PDAC432Single GroupRecruitingIreland
NCT04524702Paricalcitol/Gemcitabine/Hydroxychloroquine/Nab-paclitaxelAdvanced or metastatic PDAC212Single GroupRecruitingUnited States
NCT04054362Paricalcitol/Paclitaxel protein bound/Cisplatin/GemcitabineUntreated metastatic PDAC142Non-RandomizedRecruitingUnited Kingdom
NCT03883919Paricalcitol/5-FU/Leucovorin/Liposomal IrinotecanAdvanced PDAC progressed on Gemcitabine-based therapy201Non-RandomizedRecruitingUnited States
NCT03520790Paricalcitol/Gemcitabine/Nab-paclitaxelUntreated metastatic PDAC1121/2RandomizedActive,
not recruiting		United States
NCT03519308Paricalcitol/Nivolumab/Nab-Paclitaxel/GemcitabineUntreated resectable PDAC201aRandomizedRecruitingUnited States
NCT03415854Paricalcitol/Cisplatin/Paclitaxel Protein Bound/GemcitabineUntreated metastatic PDAC142Single GroupActive,
not recruiting		United States
NCT03331562Paricalcitol/PembrolizumabMetastatic pancreatic cancer242RandomizedCompletedUnited States
NCT03138720Paricalcitol/Paclitaxel protein bound/Gemcitabine/CisplatinResectable, borderline resectable, or locally advanced (unresectable) PDAC242Single GroupRecruitingUnited States
NCT02930902Paricalcitol/Gemcitabine Hydrochloride/Nab-paclitaxel/PembrolizumabResectable pancreatic cancer101bNon-RandomizedActive,
not recruiting		United States
NCT02754726Paricalcitol/Nivolumab/Albumin-bound paclitaxel/Cisplatin/GemcitabineUntreated metastatic PDAC102Single GroupRecruitingUnited States
NCT03472833High-dose (4000 IU/day)/Standard-dose (800 IU/day) vitamin D3Pancreatic cancer with vitamin D deficiency603RandomizedRecruitingAustria
Note: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, PDAC.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wei, D.; Wang, L.; Zuo, X.; Bresalier, R.S. Vitamin D: Promises on the Horizon and Challenges Ahead for Fighting Pancreatic Cancer. Cancers 2021, 13, 2716. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13112716

AMA Style

Wei D, Wang L, Zuo X, Bresalier RS. Vitamin D: Promises on the Horizon and Challenges Ahead for Fighting Pancreatic Cancer. Cancers. 2021; 13(11):2716. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13112716

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wei, Daoyan, Liang Wang, Xiangsheng Zuo, and Robert S. Bresalier. 2021. "Vitamin D: Promises on the Horizon and Challenges Ahead for Fighting Pancreatic Cancer" Cancers 13, no. 11: 2716. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13112716

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop