Literature DB >> 19439036

FISH and immunohistochemical status of the hepatocyte growth factor receptor (c-Met) in 184 invasive breast tumors.

Alma Carracedo1, Kristof Egervari, Marta Salido, Federico Rojo, Josep M Corominas, Montserrat Arumi, Cristina Corzo, Ignacio Tusquets, Blanca Espinet, Ana Rovira, Joan Albanell, Zoltan Szollosi, Sergi Serrano, Francesc Solé.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19439036      PMCID: PMC2688943          DOI: 10.1186/bcr2239

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res        ISSN: 1465-5411            Impact factor:   6.466


× No keyword cloud information.

In their report, Götte and coworkers [1] analyzed the expression of c-Met in 200 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. They concluded that c-Met could be related to angiogenic and lymphangiogenic factors in ductal carcinoma in situ. On the other hand, Greenberg and coworkers [2] studied 31 patients with ductal infiltrating carcinoma (DIC) to detect c-Met expression in their axillary fluids. They observed a correlation of c-Met expression with increasing tumor size and grade, capillary and lymphatic invasion and lymph node metastasis. We applied the fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) technique using the LSI D7S486/CEP7 commercial probe (Abbott Molecular Inc., Des Plaines, IL, USA), which includes the MET gene, and immunohistochemistry using c-Met monoclonal antibody clone 3D4 (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) to 184 archival invasive breast tumors (93 DIC and 91 lobular carcinomas). We constructed ten tissue microarrays with three replicates per sample. Pearson's chi-squared and Fisher's exact test were used to analyze the results. None of the 155 breast tumors analyzed by FISH presented amplification of MET and 35 cases (22%) had a low grade of polysomy (three to five copies) of chromosome 7. Polysomy was more frequently observed in DIC (25%; P = 0.001). We tried to correlate polysomy of MET in the DIC group with grade, tumor size, lymph node status, clinical stage and expression of HER2, P53, estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR). We observed that the absence of expression of PR was the unique statistically significant variable (P = 0.001). Moreover, the ER+/PR- samples presented the highest rate of polysomy (38%) compared to ER+/PR+ tumors (15%) (Table 1).
Table 1

Results of IHC of c-Met and FISH of LSI D7S486/CEP7 applied to lobular and ductal carcinomas

IHC c-MetFISH METFISH + IHC



NegativePositiveNegativePolysomyPE + P
Carcinoma type
 Lobular57 (76%)18 (24%)61 (81%)15 (19%)5 (7%)
 Ductal (DIC)42 (52%)38 (48%)60 (75%)20 (25%)13 (16%)
DIC type
 ER+/PR+31 (68%)15 (32%)39 (85%)7 (15%)3 (6%)
 ER+/PR-11 (32%)23 (68%)21 (62%)13 (38%)10 (29%)

DIC, ductal infiltrating carcinoma; PE, positive expression; ER, estrogen receptor; FISH, fluorescent in situ hybridization; IHC, immunohistochemistry; P, polysomy; PR, progesterone receptor. In bold we remark the positive FISH and IHQ results for DIC as well as for ER+/PR- tumors

Results of IHC of c-Met and FISH of LSI D7S486/CEP7 applied to lobular and ductal carcinomas DIC, ductal infiltrating carcinoma; PE, positive expression; ER, estrogen receptor; FISH, fluorescent in situ hybridization; IHC, immunohistochemistry; P, polysomy; PR, progesterone receptor. In bold we remark the positive FISH and IHQ results for DIC as well as for ER+/PR- tumors Out of 168 tumors analyzed by immunohistochemistry, 65 (38.7%) presented expression of c-Met. When histological types were compared, the DIC group also showed the highest number of c-Met-positive samples (48%; P = 0.001). From the analysis with the clinico-pathological variables, the negativity for PR was again statistically significant (P = 0.001). The ER+/PR- tumors presented more frequent expression of c-Met (68%) compared to ER+/PR+ tumors (32%) and were correlated with polysomy (P = 0.020) (Table 2).
Table 2

IHC and FISH results of MET according to the status of PR receptor in DIC carcinomas

ER+/PR+ (n = 46)ER+/PR- (n = 34)


IHCIHCIHCIHC
FISH METNegativePositiveNegativePositive
FISH Negative27 (59%)12 (26%)9 (23%)13 (38%)
FISH Polysomy4 (9%)3 (6%)3 (9%)10 (29%)

DIC, ductal infiltrating carcinoma; ER, estrogen receptor; FISH, fluorescent in situ hybridization; IHC, immunohistochemistry; P, polysomy; PR, progesterone receptor. In bold we remark the FISH and IHQ positive results to compare both groups.

IHC and FISH results of MET according to the status of PR receptor in DIC carcinomas DIC, ductal infiltrating carcinoma; ER, estrogen receptor; FISH, fluorescent in situ hybridization; IHC, immunohistochemistry; P, polysomy; PR, progesterone receptor. In bold we remark the FISH and IHQ positive results to compare both groups. We can conclude that amplification of MET in breast cancer is not a common event, as opposed to other cancer subtypes (renal, gastric and lung carcinomas). Although found in breast tumors, it seems that overexpression of c-Met is not mainly due to increassed gene copy number of MET/polysomy7. However, polysomy in the ER+/PR- group could be an important mechanism – although not the only one – responsible for the differential expression observed in this type of DIC. This c-Met overexpression and the presence of polysomy 7 could be important events to be considered with regard to the known poor response to endocrine therapies of ER+/PR- breast tumors. Lack of PR expression in ER+ tumors may be a surrogate marker of aberrant growth factor signaling [3] that could be associated with their more aggressive outcome, as has already been described [4]. Our study suggests that it would be interesting to investigate new therapeutic options for ER+/PR- DIC, which may include c-Met inhibitors.

Abbreviations

DIC: ductal infiltrating carcinoma; ER: estrogen receptor; FISH: fluorescent in situ hybridization; PR: progesterone receptor.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
  4 in total

1.  Estrogen receptor-positive, progesterone receptor-negative breast cancer: association with growth factor receptor expression and tamoxifen resistance.

Authors:  Grazia Arpino; Heidi Weiss; Adrian V Lee; Rachel Schiff; Sabino De Placido; C Kent Osborne; Richard M Elledge
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-09-07       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Molecular profiles of progesterone receptor loss in human breast tumors.

Authors:  Chad J Creighton; C Kent Osborne; Marc J van de Vijver; John A Foekens; Jan G Klijn; Hugo M Horlings; Dimitry Nuyten; Yixin Wang; Yi Zhang; Gary C Chamness; Susan G Hilsenbeck; Adrian V Lee; Rachel Schiff
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2008-04-19       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  An expression signature of syndecan-1 (CD138), E-cadherin and c-met is associated with factors of angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis in ductal breast carcinoma in situ.

Authors:  Martin Götte; Christian Kersting; Isabel Radke; Ludwig Kiesel; Pia Wülfing
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 6.466

4.  Detection of hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor receptor (c-Met) in axillary drainage after operations for breast cancer using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction.

Authors:  Ron Greenberg; Ignat Schwartz; Yehuda Skornick; Ofer Kaplan
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2003-03-06       Impact factor: 6.466

  4 in total
  12 in total

Review 1.  C-MET as a new therapeutic target for the development of novel anticancer drugs.

Authors:  I Cañadas; F Rojo; M Arumí-Uría; A Rovira; J Albanell; E Arriola
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.405

Review 2.  The Met oncogene and basal-like breast cancer: another culprit to watch out for?

Authors:  Stefania Gastaldi; Paolo M Comoglio; Livio Trusolino
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2010-08-23       Impact factor: 6.466

Review 3.  The Therapeutic Potential of Targeting the HGF/cMET Axis in Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Kim Moran-Jones
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 4.074

Review 4.  MET deregulation in breast cancer.

Authors:  Gabriele Minuti; Lorenza Landi
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2015-08

5.  Targeting the hepatocyte growth factor-cMET axis in cancer therapy.

Authors:  George R Blumenschein; Gordon B Mills; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-08-06       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Prognostic role of c-met expression in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Iwona Gisterek; Ewelina Lata; Agnieszka Halon; Rafal Matkowski; Jolanta Szelachowska; Przemyslaw Biecek; Jan Kornafel
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2011-06-08

7.  Immunophenotyping invasive breast cancer: paving the road for molecular imaging.

Authors:  Jeroen F Vermeulen; Aram S A van Brussel; Petra van der Groep; Folkert H M Morsink; Peter Bult; Elsken van der Wall; Paul J van Diest
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  MET in gastric carcinomas: comparison between protein expression and gene copy number and impact on clinical outcome.

Authors:  H E Lee; M A Kim; H S Lee; E-J Jung; H-K Yang; B L Lee; Y-J Bang; W H Kim
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 9.  The clinical and functional significance of c-Met in breast cancer: a review.

Authors:  Colan M Ho-Yen; J Louise Jones; Stephanie Kermorgant
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 6.466

10.  Met and its ligand HGF are associated with clinical outcome in breast cancer.

Authors:  Cynthia Veenstra; Gizeh Pérez-Tenorio; Anna Stelling; Elin Karlsson; Sanam Mirwani Mirwani; Bo Nordensköljd; Tommy Fornander; Olle Stål
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-06-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.