Expression of Tumour-Associated MUC1 Is a Poor Prognostic Marker in Breast Cancer in Kumasi, Ghana.
Journal
Journal of oncology
ISSN: 1687-8450
Titre abrégé: J Oncol
Pays: Egypt
ID NLM: 101496537
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
22
01
2020
revised:
23
03
2020
accepted:
02
04
2020
entrez:
8
5
2020
pubmed:
8
5
2020
medline:
8
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Immunohistochemical assessment of breast cancer and stratification into the basic molecular subtypes afford a much deeper insight into the biology of breast cancer, while presenting with opportunities to exploit personalized, targeted treatment. Traditionally, the oestrogen, progesterone, and epidermal growth factor receptors are assessed. MUC1, a transmembrane mucin, has been demonstrated a potential prognostic and metastatic marker in breast cancer. However, there have been a limited number of studies addressing the predictive and prognostic features of MUC1 in African breast cancer. This study aims at addressing the expression profiles of MUC1 and other biomarkers in Ghanaian breast cancer and determines its predictive and prognostic characteristics, in relation to other clinicopathological features. Haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) slides of breast cancer cases were reviewed and 203 suitable cases were selected for tissue microarray (TMA) construction and immunohistochemistry. Anti-ER, PR, HER2, Ki-67, and MUC1 antibodies were used. Results from the immunostaining were analysed using SPSS version 23. About 59% of cases expressed MUC1. Majority of cases in the study showed a lack of expression of all three traditional markers (29% expressed ER, 10.9% PR, and 20.7% HER2). Ki-67 index were 62.1% (low), 16.5% (moderate), and 21.4% (high). MUC1 expressions among the molecular classes were luminal A (60.7%), luminal B (68.8%), HER2 overexpression (87.5%), and triple negative (56.6%). There were significant associations between MUC1 and HER2 overexpression ( The high proportion of breast cancer cases expressing MUC1, as well as its association with the two most aggressive molecular classes, indicate a substantial role in the biology of breast cancer in our cohort, and it is an indication of poor prognosis.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Immunohistochemical assessment of breast cancer and stratification into the basic molecular subtypes afford a much deeper insight into the biology of breast cancer, while presenting with opportunities to exploit personalized, targeted treatment. Traditionally, the oestrogen, progesterone, and epidermal growth factor receptors are assessed. MUC1, a transmembrane mucin, has been demonstrated a potential prognostic and metastatic marker in breast cancer. However, there have been a limited number of studies addressing the predictive and prognostic features of MUC1 in African breast cancer. This study aims at addressing the expression profiles of MUC1 and other biomarkers in Ghanaian breast cancer and determines its predictive and prognostic characteristics, in relation to other clinicopathological features.
METHODS
METHODS
Haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) slides of breast cancer cases were reviewed and 203 suitable cases were selected for tissue microarray (TMA) construction and immunohistochemistry. Anti-ER, PR, HER2, Ki-67, and MUC1 antibodies were used. Results from the immunostaining were analysed using SPSS version 23.
RESULTS
RESULTS
About 59% of cases expressed MUC1. Majority of cases in the study showed a lack of expression of all three traditional markers (29% expressed ER, 10.9% PR, and 20.7% HER2). Ki-67 index were 62.1% (low), 16.5% (moderate), and 21.4% (high). MUC1 expressions among the molecular classes were luminal A (60.7%), luminal B (68.8%), HER2 overexpression (87.5%), and triple negative (56.6%). There were significant associations between MUC1 and HER2 overexpression (
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The high proportion of breast cancer cases expressing MUC1, as well as its association with the two most aggressive molecular classes, indicate a substantial role in the biology of breast cancer in our cohort, and it is an indication of poor prognosis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32377198
doi: 10.1155/2020/9752952
pmc: PMC7193303
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
9752952Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 E. Atta Manu et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Références
Br J Cancer. 2013 Mar 19;108(5):1042-51
pubmed: 23462719
APMIS. 2016 Nov;124(11):913-924
pubmed: 27538373
J Clin Diagn Res. 2017 Apr;11(4):EC30-EC34
pubmed: 28571146
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016 Nov;13(11):674-690
pubmed: 27184417
Curr Med Chem. 2019;26(3):554-563
pubmed: 28820070
Am J Cancer Res. 2015 Sep 15;5(10):2929-43
pubmed: 26693050
Curr Med Chem. 2011;18(4):513-22
pubmed: 21143113
Lancet. 2015 Mar 14;385(9972):977-1010
pubmed: 25467588
CA Cancer J Clin. 2016 Jan-Feb;66(1):7-30
pubmed: 26742998
Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2015 Dec 15;418 Pt 3:240-4
pubmed: 25433206
BMC Clin Pathol. 2015 Jul 09;15:14
pubmed: 26161039
Histopathology. 2007 Sep;51(3):322-35
pubmed: 17645748
Cell Mol Life Sci. 2015 Dec;72(23):4475-500
pubmed: 26294353
Eur J Cancer. 2015 Oct;51(15):2191-2205
pubmed: 26421822
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Feb;162(1):105-114
pubmed: 28025716
Lancet. 2017 Jun 17;389(10087):2430-2442
pubmed: 27939063
Clin Med Insights Pathol. 2015 Dec 21;8:23-31
pubmed: 26740749
Mod Pathol. 2005 Oct;18(10):1295-304
pubmed: 15976813
CA Cancer J Clin. 2016 Jul;66(4):271-89
pubmed: 27253694
Pathobiology. 2016;83(1):24-32
pubmed: 26730581
Pathobiology. 2012;79(3):144-53
pubmed: 22269464
Breast J. 2015 Nov-Dec;21(6):627-33
pubmed: 26547900
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014 Apr;144(3):467-78
pubmed: 24604092
Breast J. 2015 Mar-Apr;21(2):133-9
pubmed: 25639288
Oncogenesis. 2014 Jun 30;3:e107
pubmed: 24979278
Breast. 2018 Jun;39:80-88
pubmed: 29631097
Infect Agent Cancer. 2017 Feb 14;12:13
pubmed: 28228841
Vaccines (Basel). 2016 Jul 26;4(3):
pubmed: 27472370
Cancer Biol Ther. 2007 Apr;6(4):481-6
pubmed: 18027437
J Breast Cancer. 2013 Jun;16(2):152-8
pubmed: 23843846
Nat Commun. 2018 Oct 16;9(1):4181
pubmed: 30327465
Cancer Res. 2001 Jun 15;61(12):4744-9
pubmed: 11406546
Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Sep 1;15(17):5323-37
pubmed: 19723653
Trends Mol Med. 2014 Jun;20(6):332-42
pubmed: 24667139
N Engl J Med. 2017 Jul 13;377(2):122-131
pubmed: 28581356
Am J Clin Pathol. 2004 Jul;122(1):61-9
pubmed: 15272531
Int J Cancer. 2015 Oct 1;137(7):1652-60
pubmed: 25787775
CA Cancer J Clin. 2014 Jan-Feb;64(1):52-62
pubmed: 24114568
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593
Hum Pathol. 2013 Oct;44(10):2159-66
pubmed: 23845471