BACKGROUND: Intratumorous hypoxia triggers a broad cellular response mediated by the transcription factor hypoxia inducible factor 1 (HIF-1). HIF-1alpha concentrations increase during breast carcinogenesis, and are associated with poor prognosis. An earlier study noted two HIF-1alpha overexpression patterns: diffuse scattered throughout the tissue and confined to perinecrotic cells. AIMS: To investigate the prognostic impact of these different HIF-1alpha overexpression patterns in relation to its downstream effectors carbonic anhydrase (CA) IX and glucose transporter 1 (GLUT-1). METHODS: HIF-1alpha, CA IX, and GLUT-1 expression was studied by immunohistochemistry, including double staining for CA IX and HIF-1alpha. Clinical data included disease free survival, lymph node status, and tumour size. RESULTS: HIF-1alpha overexpression (44% of cases) had a perinecrotic (13.5%) or diffuse staining pattern (30.5%). CA IX expression was detectable in 12.5% of breast cancers, whereas GLUT-1 expression was seen in 29%, with both showing perinecrotic membrane staining. Perinecrotic HIF-1alpha overexpression was highly associated with CA IX and GLUT-1 overexpression, and double staining for HIF-1alpha and CA IX showed strong expression in the same cells. Diffusely overexpressed HIF-1alpha was not associated with CA IX or GLUT-1 expression. Patients with diffuse HIF-1alpha staining had a significantly better prognosis than patients with perinecrotically overexpressed HIF-1alpha. CONCLUSIONS: Different regulation pathways of HIF-1alpha overexpression exist in breast cancer: (1) hypoxia induced, perinecrotic HIF-1alpha overexpression with strong expression of hypoxia associated genes (CA IX and GLUT-1), which is associated with a poor prognosis; and (2) diffuse HIF-1alpha overexpression lacking major hypoxia associated downstream effects, resulting in a more favourable prognosis.
BACKGROUND: Intratumorous hypoxia triggers a broad cellular response mediated by the transcription factor hypoxia inducible factor 1 (HIF-1). HIF-1alpha concentrations increase during breast carcinogenesis, and are associated with poor prognosis. An earlier study noted two HIF-1alpha overexpression patterns: diffuse scattered throughout the tissue and confined to perinecrotic cells. AIMS: To investigate the prognostic impact of these different HIF-1alpha overexpression patterns in relation to its downstream effectors carbonic anhydrase (CA) IX and glucose transporter 1 (GLUT-1). METHODS:HIF-1alpha, CA IX, and GLUT-1 expression was studied by immunohistochemistry, including double staining for CA IX and HIF-1alpha. Clinical data included disease free survival, lymph node status, and tumour size. RESULTS:HIF-1alpha overexpression (44% of cases) had a perinecrotic (13.5%) or diffuse staining pattern (30.5%). CA IX expression was detectable in 12.5% of breast cancers, whereas GLUT-1 expression was seen in 29%, with both showing perinecrotic membrane staining. Perinecrotic HIF-1alpha overexpression was highly associated with CA IX and GLUT-1 overexpression, and double staining for HIF-1alpha and CA IX showed strong expression in the same cells. Diffusely overexpressed HIF-1alpha was not associated with CA IX or GLUT-1 expression. Patients with diffuse HIF-1alpha staining had a significantly better prognosis than patients with perinecrotically overexpressed HIF-1alpha. CONCLUSIONS: Different regulation pathways of HIF-1alpha overexpression exist in breast cancer: (1) hypoxia induced, perinecrotic HIF-1alpha overexpression with strong expression of hypoxia associated genes (CA IX and GLUT-1), which is associated with a poor prognosis; and (2) diffuse HIF-1alpha overexpression lacking major hypoxia associated downstream effects, resulting in a more favourable prognosis.
Authors: C C Wykoff; N J Beasley; P H Watson; K J Turner; J Pastorek; A Sibtain; G D Wilson; H Turley; K L Talks; P H Maxwell; C W Pugh; P J Ratcliffe; A L Harris Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2000-12-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: R Bos; H Zhong; C F Hanrahan; E C Mommers; G L Semenza; H M Pinedo; M D Abeloff; J W Simons; P J van Diest; E van der Wall Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2001-02-21 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: H Zhong; A M De Marzo; E Laughner; M Lim; D A Hilton; D Zagzag; P Buechler; W B Isaacs; G L Semenza; J W Simons Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1999-11-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: R Michalides; H van Tinteren; A Balkenende; J B Vermorken; J Benraadt; J Huldij; P van Diest Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2002-02-01 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Narges K Tafreshi; Marilyn M Bui; Kellsey Bishop; Mark C Lloyd; Steven A Enkemann; Alexis S Lopez; Dominique Abrahams; Bradford W Carter; Josef Vagner; Stephen R Grobmyer; Stephen R Gobmyer; Robert J Gillies; David L Morse Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-10-20 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Laura M S Seeber; Nicole Horrée; Petra van der Groep; Elsken van der Wall; René H M Verheijen; Paul J van Diest Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2010-06-19 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Esther A Koop; Theo van Laar; Dick F van Wichen; Roel A de Weger; Elsken van der Wall; Paul J van Diest Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2009-06-09 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: K Ameri; R Luong; H Zhang; A A Powell; K D Montgomery; I Espinosa; D M Bouley; A L Harris; S S Jeffrey Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-01-05 Impact factor: 7.640