PURPOSE: p21 is a direct p53 response gene. Although several studies have correlated p21 and p53 expression, only one has evaluated p21 expression as a function of sequenced p53 gene mutation. We hypothesize that such an analysis may be useful in prognosticating outcome for individuals diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: DNA from the primary ovarian cancers of 267 patients was studied. p53 mutations were directly sequenced. Two percent or greater nuclear staining with WAF1/CIP1 monoclonal antibody was determined by a hazard ratio analysis to constitute positive p21 expression. RESULTS: Positive p21 nuclear staining occurred more frequently in p53 wild-type ovarian tumors than tumors found to have a p53 mutation (P = 0.001). Positive p21 staining conferred an overall survival advantage (P = 0.02). p21 expression in cancers with p53 missense mutations was not prognostic but did show a strong trend toward significance in the wild-type p53 subset (P = 0.056). Surprisingly, positive p21 staining reflected compromised survival for individuals with p53-null ovarian cancers (P = 0.005). The mean expression level for p21-positive stains in the wild-type group was greater than in null p53 cancers (23 versus 11%; P = 0.001). A Cox multivariable analysis revealed p21 to be a strong independent prognostic factor in p53-null ovarian cancer (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: p21 expression is closely related to sequenced p53 mutations. This is the first study of positive p21 staining as an independent poor prognostic factor in p53-null ovarian cancer. A dual role for p21 activity, dependent on levels of expression, appears to explain these paradoxical results and is consistent with a complex model for regulation of p21.
PURPOSE:p21 is a direct p53 response gene. Although several studies have correlated p21 and p53 expression, only one has evaluated p21 expression as a function of sequenced p53 gene mutation. We hypothesize that such an analysis may be useful in prognosticating outcome for individuals diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: DNA from the primary ovarian cancers of 267 patients was studied. p53 mutations were directly sequenced. Two percent or greater nuclear staining with WAF1/CIP1 monoclonal antibody was determined by a hazard ratio analysis to constitute positive p21 expression. RESULTS: Positive p21 nuclear staining occurred more frequently in p53 wild-type ovarian tumors than tumors found to have a p53 mutation (P = 0.001). Positive p21 staining conferred an overall survival advantage (P = 0.02). p21 expression in cancers with p53 missense mutations was not prognostic but did show a strong trend toward significance in the wild-type p53 subset (P = 0.056). Surprisingly, positive p21 staining reflected compromised survival for individuals with p53-null ovarian cancers (P = 0.005). The mean expression level for p21-positive stains in the wild-type group was greater than in null p53cancers (23 versus 11%; P = 0.001). A Cox multivariable analysis revealed p21 to be a strong independent prognostic factor in p53-null ovarian cancer (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION:p21 expression is closely related to sequenced p53 mutations. This is the first study of positive p21 staining as an independent poor prognostic factor in p53-null ovarian cancer. A dual role for p21 activity, dependent on levels of expression, appears to explain these paradoxical results and is consistent with a complex model for regulation of p21.
Authors: Jane N Winter; Shuli Li; Vikas Aurora; Daina Variakojis; Beverly Nelson; Maryla Krajewska; Lijun Zhang; Thomas M Habermann; Richard I Fisher; William R Macon; Mukesh Chhanabhai; Raymond E Felgar; Eric D Hsi; L Jeffrey Medeiros; James K Weick; Edie A Weller; Ari Melnick; John C Reed; Sandra J Horning; Randy D Gascoyne Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2010-04-06 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Annette Schmider-Ross; Olaf Pirsig; Elisabeth Gottschalk; Carsten Denkert; Werner Lichtenegger; Angela Reles Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2005-11-19 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Jeng-Feng Chiou; Alexander T H Wu; Wei-Tin Wang; Tsu-Hsiang Kuo; Juri G Gelovani; I-Hsin Lin; Chih-Hsiung Wu; Wen-Ta Chiu; Win-Ping Deng Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2011-03-13 Impact factor: 2.629
Authors: Pavla Brachova; Samuel R Mueting; Matthew J Carlson; Michael J Goodheart; Anna M Button; Sarah L Mott; Donghai Dai; Kristina W Thiel; Eric J Devor; Kimberly K Leslie Journal: Int J Oncol Date: 2014-11-11 Impact factor: 5.650