Literature DB >> 14871819

Improved grading of breast adenocarcinomas based on genomic instability.

Ulrike Kronenwett1, Sören Huwendiek, Carin Ostring, Neil Portwood, Uwe J Roblick, Yudi Pawitan, Ayodele Alaiya, Roland Sennerstam, Anders Zetterberg, Gert Auer.   

Abstract

Numerous investigations have shown that in primary breast adenocarcinomas DNA aneuploidy in contrast to DNA diploidy indicates high malignancy potential. On the basis of the study of 104 breast carcinomas, we describe a subtype of aneuploidy, which demonstrates a low degree of malignancy. In image cytometric DNA histograms, this subtype possessed a low percentage (< or = 8.8%) of nonmodal DNA values as measured by the stemline scatter index (SSI), which is defined as sum of the percentage of cells in the S-phase region, the G(2) exceeding rate and the coefficient of variation of the tumor stemline. The cut point of SSI = 8.8% (P = 0.03) enabled us to also subdivide diploid and tetraploid tumors into clinically low and high malignant variants. One possible reason for aneuploidy is impaired distribution of chromosomes at mitosis caused by numerical or structural centrosome aberrations. Cyclins A and E seem to be involved in centrosome duplication. Real-time quantitative PCR measurements of cyclin A and E transcript levels and immunohistochemical determination of cyclin A protein expression showed statistically significantly increased values in the tumors with a high SSI (>8.8%), compared with those with a low SSI. A pilot study demonstrated centrosomal aberrations in an average of 9.6% of the measured cells in four aneuploid carcinomas with high SSI values and in an average of 2.5% of the cells in three aneuploid and three diploid tumors with low SSI. Our data indicate that the SSI, most likely reflecting the degree of genomic instability, allows additional classifying of the known aneuploid, diploid, and tetraploid categories of primary breast adenocarcinomas into low and high malignant subtypes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14871819     DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-03-2451

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Res        ISSN: 0008-5472            Impact factor:   12.701


  43 in total

1.  Genome Instability Profiles Predict Disease Outcome in a Cohort of 4,003 Patients with Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Annette Lischka; Natalie Doberstein; Sandra Freitag-Wolf; Ayla Koçak; Timo Gemoll; Kerstin Heselmeyer-Haddad; Thomas Ried; Gert Auer; Jens K Habermann
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 2.  Cancer chromosomal instability: therapeutic and diagnostic challenges.

Authors:  Nicholas McGranahan; Rebecca A Burrell; David Endesfelder; Marco R Novelli; Charles Swanton
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 8.807

3.  Metaplastic esophageal columnar epithelium without goblet cells shows DNA content abnormalities similar to goblet cell-containing epithelium.

Authors:  Weitian Liu; Hejin Hahn; Robert D Odze; Raj K Goyal
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 4.  Mitosis as an anti-cancer drug target.

Authors:  Anna-Leena Salmela; Marko J Kallio
Journal:  Chromosoma       Date:  2013-06-18       Impact factor: 4.316

5.  Aneuploidy, TP53 mutation, and amplification of MYC correlate with increased intratumor heterogeneity and poor prognosis of breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Johanna Oltmann; Kerstin Heselmeyer-Haddad; Leanora S Hernandez; Rüdiger Meyer; Irianna Torres; Yue Hu; Natalie Doberstein; J Keith Killian; David Petersen; Yuelin Jack Zhu; Daniel C Edelman; Paul S Meltzer; Russell Schwartz; E Michael Gertz; Alejandro A Schäffer; Gert Auer; Jens K Habermann; Thomas Ried
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 5.006

Review 6.  The consequences of chromosomal aneuploidy on the transcriptome of cancer cells.

Authors:  Thomas Ried; Yue Hu; Michael J Difilippantonio; B Michael Ghadimi; Marian Grade; Jordi Camps
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2012-03-06

7.  Protein profiling of genomic instability in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Timo Gemoll; Jens K Habermann; Johanna Lahmann; Silke Szymczak; Caroline Lundgren; Nana K Bündgen; Thomas Jungbluth; Britta Nordström; Susanne Becker; Marta I Lomnytska; Hans-Peter Bruch; Andreas Ziegler; Ulf Hellman; Gert Auer; Uwe J Roblick; Hans Jörnvall
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2011-07-08       Impact factor: 9.261

8.  Prognostic value of proliferation markers expression in breast cancer.

Authors:  Natalija Dedić Plavetić; Jasminka Jakić-Razumović; Ana Kulić; Damir Vrbanec
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 3.064

9.  Chromosomal instability determines taxane response.

Authors:  Charles Swanton; Barbara Nicke; Marion Schuett; Aron C Eklund; Charlotte Ng; Qiyuan Li; Thomas Hardcastle; Alvin Lee; Rajat Roy; Philip East; Maik Kschischo; David Endesfelder; Paul Wylie; Se Nyun Kim; Jie-Guang Chen; Michael Howell; Thomas Ried; Jens K Habermann; Gert Auer; James D Brenton; Zoltan Szallasi; Julian Downward
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 10.  Mitotic chromosomal instability and cancer: mouse modelling of the human disease.

Authors:  Juan-Manuel Schvartzman; Rocio Sotillo; Robert Benezra
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 60.716

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.