Literature DB >> 21592298

Histopathological variables and biomarkers enhancer of zeste homologue 2, Ki-67 and minichromosome maintenance protein 7 as prognosticators in primarily endocrine-treated prostate cancer.

Teemu T Tolonen1, Teuvo L J Tammela, Paula M Kujala, Vilppu J Tuominen, Jorma J Isola, Tapio Visakorpi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: • To evaluate the prognostic value of histopathological variables and immunostainings of biomarkers enhancer of zeste homologue 2 (EZH2), Ki-67 and minichromosome maintenance protein 7 (MCM7) from core biopsies of hormonally treated patients with prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • Biopsies of 247 primarily endocrine-treated patients were analysed for histopathological characteristics and Gleason scores (GS) according to the revised guidelines of International Society of Urologic Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference 2005. • Immunohistochemical stainings were analysed with the aid of digital image analysis. • The prognostic value of the histopathological variables and the biomarkers was analysed with univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis, with biochemical recurrence as an endpoint.
RESULTS: • Biomarkers EZH2 (relative risk [RR] 2.0, 95% confidence interval 1.2-3.3), Ki-67 (3.4, 2.1-5.5) and MCM7 (2.4, 1.5-3.9) were significantly associated with progression-free survival in a univariate analysis. • Ki-67 immunostaining index detected high-risk patients with GS of 7 (9.1, 8.0-10.3). • In a multivariate analysis with non-conventional GS groups 5-7 (3 + 4), 7(4 + 3)-8, and 9-10, the independent prognostic markers were pretreatment GS (2.2, 1.5-3.2), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (2.1, 1.1-4.2), perineural invasion (PNI) (1.6, 1.2-2.2), and clinical T-stage (cT) (1.9, 1.0-3.7). • Combination of the independent markers (PSA level > 20 ng/mL or GS >3 + 4 or PNI >3 or cT >2) yielded best risk stratification (RR 11.6, 10.4-12.7).
CONCLUSIONS:GS remains one of the most important prognostic factors in prostate cancer. However, the refined guidelines by ISUP 2005 might have shifted the threshold between low-grade and high-grade cancers from GS 6 vs 7 to GS 3 + 4 vs 4 + 3. • PNI is an independent prognostic marker superior to cT. • Ki-67 is the most useful biomarker in detecting patients with GS = 7 at high risk for progression.
© 2011 THE AUTHORS. BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21592298     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10253.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  9 in total

1.  Perineural invasion is an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after local treatment: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yang Meng; Yan-Biao Liao; Peng Xu; Wu-Ran Wei; Jia Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15

2.  Immunohistochemical expression of minichromosome maintenance complex protein 2 predicts biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer: a tissue microarray and digital imaging analysis-based study of 428 cases.

Authors:  Antoun Toubaji; Siobhan Sutcliffe; Alcides Chaux; Kristen Lecksell; Jessica Hicks; Angelo M De Marzo; Elizabeth A Platz; George J Netto
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 3.466

3.  Overall and worst gleason scores are equally good predictors of prostate cancer progression.

Authors:  Teemu T Tolonen; Paula M Kujala; Teuvo L J Tammela; Vilppu J Tuominen; Jorma J Isola; Tapio Visakorpi
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2011-10-06       Impact factor: 2.264

4.  Supervised regularized canonical correlation analysis: integrating histologic and proteomic measurements for predicting biochemical recurrence following prostate surgery.

Authors:  Abhishek Golugula; George Lee; Stephen R Master; Michael D Feldman; John E Tomaszewski; David W Speicher; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-12-19       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Evaluation of the proliferation marker Ki-67 in a large prostatectomy cohort.

Authors:  Elin Richardsen; Sigve Andersen; Samer Al-Saad; Mehrdad Rakaee; Yngve Nordby; Mona Irene Pedersen; Nora Ness; Thea Grindstad; Ingeborg Movik; Tom Dønnem; Roy Bremnes; Lill-Tove Busund
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Association between EZH2 expression, silencing of tumor suppressors and disease outcome in solid tumors.

Authors:  M Wassef; A Michaud; R Margueron
Journal:  Cell Cycle       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 4.534

Review 7.  Prognostic histopathological and molecular markers on prostate cancer needle-biopsies: a review.

Authors:  A Marije Hoogland; Charlotte F Kweldam; Geert J L H van Leenders
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Expression of Minichromosome Maintenance Proteins (MCM) and Cancer Prognosis: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kaihua Gou; Jingwei Liu; Xue Feng; Hao Li; Yuan Yuan; Chengzhong Xing
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 4.207

9.  Combined Longitudinal Clinical and Autopsy Phenomic Assessment in Lethal Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Recommendations for Advancing Precision Medicine.

Authors:  Juho Jasu; Teemu Tolonen; Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Himisha Beltran; Susan Halabi; Mario A Eisenberger; Michael A Carducci; Yohann Loriot; Kim Van der Eecken; Martijn Lolkema; Charles J Ryan; Sinja Taavitsainen; Silke Gillessen; Gunilla Högnäs; Timo Talvitie; Robert J Taylor; Antti Koskenalho; Piet Ost; Teemu J Murtola; Irina Rinta-Kiikka; Teuvo Tammela; Anssi Auvinen; Paula Kujala; Thomas J Smith; Pirkko-Liisa Kellokumpu-Lehtinen; William B Isaacs; Matti Nykter; Juha Kesseli; G Steven Bova
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2021-07-02
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.