| Literature DB >> 21824412 |
João Paulo Oliveira-Costa1, Juliana S Zanetti, Giórgia G Silveira, Danilo F Soave, Lucinei R Oliveira, Verônica A Zorgetto, Fernando A Soares, Sérgio Zucoloto, Alfredo Ribeiro-Silva.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cancer stem cell (CSC) hypothesis postulates that tumors are maintained by a self-renewing CSC population that is also capable of differentiating into non-self-renewing cell populations that constitute the bulk of tumor. Stem cells renewal and differentiation can be directly influenced by the oxygen levels of determined tissues, probably by the reduction of oxidative DNA damage in hypoxic regions, thus leading to a friendlier microenvironment, regarding to clonal expansion and for resistance to chemotherapeutic regimens. Furthermore, there have been strong data indicating a pivotal role of hypoxic niche in cancer stem cells development. There are evidence that hypoxia could drive the maintenance of CSC, via HIF-1α expression, but it still to be determined whether hypoxia markers are expressed in breast tumors presenting CD44+CD24-/low immunophenotype.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21824412 PMCID: PMC3170242 DOI: 10.1186/1746-1596-6-73
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagn Pathol ISSN: 1746-1596 Impact factor: 2.644
Figure 1Double immunostaining showing CD44 (brown) and CD24 (red). A) Immunofenotype CD44-CD24+. B) Immunofenotype CD44+CD24+ (for means of comparison).
Relationship between clinical and pathological features and breast carcinomas expressing the immunophenotype CD44+CD24-/low and carcinomas that do not express this immunophenotype
| Feature | CD44+CD24-/low positive | CD44+CD24-/low negative | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 0.789 | ||
| < 50 | 38 | 66 | |
| > 50 | 51 | 98 | |
| Menopausal status | 0.131 | ||
| Pre | 38 | 53 | |
| Post | 51 | 111 | |
| Tumor size (cm) | 0.837 | ||
| < 2 | 24 | 49 | |
| 2-5 | 39 | 66 | |
| > 5 | 26 | 49 | |
| Bloom & Richardson | 0.319 | ||
| I | 28 | 66 | |
| II | 48 | 73 | |
| III | 13 | 25 | |
| Clinical Staging | 0.219 | ||
| I | 12 | 21 | |
| IIa | 21 | 40 | |
| IIb | 19 | 34 | |
| IIIa | 6 | 20 | |
| IIIb | 22 | 44 | |
| IV | 9 | 5 | |
| Recurrence | 1.000 | ||
| Yes | 11 | 21 | |
| No | 78 | 143 | |
| Lymph node status | 0.895 | ||
| Pos | 47 | 89 | |
| Neg | 42 | 75 | |
| Distant metastasis | 0.479 | ||
| Yes | 30 | 48 | |
| No | 59 | 116 | |
| Death | 0.035* | ||
| Yes | 37 | 46 | |
| No | 52 | 118 | |
*Statistically significant.
Relationship between immunohistochemical features and breast carcinomas expressing CD44+CD24-/low immunophenotype and carcinomas that do not express this immunophenotype
| Feature | CD44+CD24-/low positive | CD44+CD24-/low negative | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| RE | 0.340 | ||
| Pos | 53 | 108 | |
| Neg | 36 | 56 | |
| RP | 0.141 | ||
| Pos | 47 | 103 | |
| Neg | 42 | 61 | |
| p53 | 0.786 | ||
| Pos | 56 | 106 | |
| Neg | 33 | 58 | |
| HER-2 | 0.013* | ||
| Pos | 10 | 40 | |
| Neg | 79 | 124 | |
| Ki67 | 0.410 | ||
| Pos | 34 | 54 | |
| Neg | 55 | 110 | |
| HIF-1a | 0.039* | ||
| Pos | 26 | 29 | |
| Neg | 63 | 135 | |
| CAIX | 0.551 | ||
| Pos | 26 | 41 | |
| Neg | 63 | 123 | |
*Statistically significant.
Figure 2Univariate analysis of the prognostic impact of CD44. Using Kaplan Mayer table followed by log-rank test.
Figure 3Univariate analysis of the prognostic impact of CD44. Using Kaplan Mayer table followed by log-rank test.