Tubo-Ovarian Transitional Cell Carcinoma and High-grade Serous Carcinoma Show Subtly Different Immunohistochemistry Profiles
Tubo-Ovarian Transitional Cell Carcinoma and High-grade Serous Carcinoma Show Subtly Different Immunohistochemistry Profiles
复制标题
输卵管卵巢移行细胞癌和高级别浆液性癌的免疫组织化学特征略有不同
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
F. Kommoss
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Magrill;A. Karnezis;B. Tessier;A. Talhouk;S. Kommoss;D. Cochrane;C. Chow;A. Cheng;R. Soslow;S. Hauptmann;A. du Bois;J. Pfisterer;C. Gilks;D. Huntsman;F. Kommoss
在目前的世界卫生组织分类中，输卵管卵巢移行细胞癌（TCC）与高级别浆液性癌（HGSC）归为一类。TCC与BRCA突变相关，与HGSC相比预后更好。以前研究TCC免疫组织化学特征的论文研究了有限数量的样本。目前还没有反映TCC和HGSC之间生物学差异的标志物。我们收集了大量的TCC队列，以确定TCC和HGSC是否可以通过免疫组织化学区分。以89例TCC和232例常规HGSC为对照，构建组织微阵列。对HGSC和尿路上皮肿瘤常规标志物PAX8、WT1、p53、p16、ER、p63、GATA3进行免疫组化、评分并进行统计学分析。使用临床实践中常用的评分截止值，所有标记物的TCC免疫组织化学特征与HGSC无法区分。然而，更详细的评分标准显示，两组肿瘤在ER、PAX8和WT1方面存在统计学差异。HGSC中PAX8 （P分别为0.004和0.001）和WT1 （P分别为0.002和0.002）的染色更加弥漫性和强烈；相反，TCC对ER的染色更强烈（P=0.007）。因此，TCC和HGSC在免疫组织化学谱上显示出细微的差异，这可能反映了潜在的（epi）遗传差异。使用蛋白质组学分析的进一步研究将集中于鉴定可能作为TCC样分化标志物的差异表达蛋白，这可能有助于解释TCC和HGSC之间的生物学差异，并可能识别其他预后较好的HGSC病例。
Tubo-ovarian transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) is grouped with high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) in the current World Health Organization classification. TCC is associated with BRCA mutations and a better prognosis compared with HGSC. Previous papers examining the immunohistochemical features of TCC have studied limited numbers of samples. No marker reflecting the biological difference between TCC and HGSC is known. We collected a large cohort of TCC to determine whether TCC and HGSC could be distinguished by immunohistochemistry. A tissue microarray was built from 89 TCC and a control cohort of 232 conventional HGSC. Immunohistochemistry was performed, scored, and statistically analyzed for routine markers of HGSC and urothelial tumors: PAX8, WT1, p53, p16, ER, p63, and GATA3. Using scoring cutoffs commonly employed in clinical practice, the immunohistochemical profile of TCC was indistinguishable from HGSC for all markers. However, more detailed scoring criteria revealed statistically significant differences between the 2 groups of tumors with respect to ER, PAX8, and WT1. HGSC showed more diffuse and intense staining for PAX8 (P=0.004 and 0.001, respectively) and WT1 (P=0.002 and 0.002, respectively); conversely, TCC showed more intense staining for ER (P=0.007). TCC and HGSC therefore show subtle differences in their immunohistochemical profiles which might reflect underlying (epi)genetic differences. Further studies using proteomic analysis will focus on the identification of differentially expressed proteins that might serve as markers of TCC-like differentiation, which could help explain biologic differences between TCC and HGSC and might identify other cases of HGSC with a better prognosis.
登录
查看更多内容
激素受体表达和卵巢癌存活：卵巢肿瘤组织分析联盟研究。
DOI：
10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70253-5
发表时间：
2013-08
期刊：
The Lancet. Oncology
影响因子：
--
作者：
Sieh W;Köbel M;Longacre TA;Bowtell DD;deFazio A;Goodman MT;Høgdall E;Deen S;Wentzensen N;Moysich KB;Brenton JD;Clarke BA;Menon U;Gilks CB;Kim A;Madore J;Fereday S;George J;Galletta L;Lurie G;Wilkens LR;Carney ME;Thompson PJ;Matsuno RK;Kjær SK;Jensen A;Høgdall C;Kalli KR;Fridley BL;Keeney GL;Vierkant RA;Cunningham JM;Brinton LA;Yang HP;Sherman ME;García-Closas M;Lissowska J;Odunsi K;Morrison C;Lele S;Bshara W;Sucheston L;Jimenez-Linan M;Driver K;Alsop J;Mack M;McGuire V;Rothstein JH;Rosen BP;Bernardini MQ;Mackay H;Oza A;Wozniak EL;Benjamin E;Gentry-Maharaj A;Gayther SA;Tinker AV;Prentice LM;Chow C;Anglesio MS;Johnatty SE;Chenevix-Trench G;Whittemore AS;Pharoah PD;Goode EL;Huntsman DG;Ramus SJ
通讯作者：
Ramus SJ
BRCA1和BRCA2突变之间的关联以及侵入性上皮卵巢癌女性的生存。
影响因子：
120.7
作者：
Bolton, Kelly L.;Chenevix-Trench, Georgia;Goh, Cindy;Sadetzki, Siegal;Ramus, Susan J.;Karlan, Beth Y.;Lambrechts, Diether;Despierre, Evelyn;Barrowdale, Daniel;McGuffog, Lesley;Healey, Sue;Easton, Douglas F.;Sinilnikova, Olga;Benitez, Javier;Garcia, Maria J.;Neuhausen, Susan;Gail, Mitchell H.;Hartge, Patricia;Peock, Susan;Frost, Debra;Evans, Gareth;Eeles, Rosalind;Godwin, Andrew K.;Daly, Mary B.;Kwong, Ava;Ma, Edmond S. K.;Lazaro, Conxi;Blanco, Ignacio;Montagna, Marco;D'Andrea, Emma;Nicoletto, Maria Ornella;Johnatty, Sharon E.;Krueger, Susanne;Jensen, Allan;Hogdall, Estrid;Goode, Ellen L.;Fridley, Brooke L.;Loud, Jennifer T.;Greene, Mark H.;Mai, Phuong L.;Chetrit, Angela;Lubin, Flora;Hirsh-Yechezkel, Galit;Glendon, Gord;Andrulis, Irene L.;Toland, Amanda E.;Senter, Leigha;Gore, Martin E.;Gourley, Charlie;Michie, Caroline O.;Song, Honglin;Tyrer, Jonathan;Whittemore, Alice S.;McGuire, Valerie;Sieh, Weiva;Kristoffersson, Ulf;Olsson, Hakan;Borg, Ake;Levine, Douglas A.;Steele, Linda;Beattie, Mary S.;Chan, Salina;Nussbaum, Robert L.;Moysich, Kirsten B.;Gross, Jenny;Cass, Ilana;Walsh, Christine;Li, Andrew J.;Leuchter, Ronald;Gordon, Ora;Garcia-Closas, Montserrat;Gayther, Simon A.;Chanock, Stephen J.;Antoniou, Antonis C.;Pharoah, Paul D. P.
通讯作者：
Pharoah, Paul D. P.
影响因子：
4.7
作者：
Hwang WT;Adams SF;Tahirovic E;Hagemann IS;Coukos G
通讯作者：
Coukos G
影响因子：
158.5
作者：
Zhang, L;Conejo-Garcia, JR;Coukos, G
通讯作者：
Coukos, G