| Literature DB >> 23048060 |
Vida Khatamianfar1, Fatma Valiyeva, Paul S Rennie, Wei-Yang Lu, Burton B Yang, Glenn S Bauman, Madeleine Moussa, Jim W Xuan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES ANDEntities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23048060 PMCID: PMC3488719 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001410
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Patient list selected in this study
| Organ | Patient number | Tumour type | Tumour grade |
|---|---|---|---|
| 35 Tumour-TMA | 42 | Description in | |
| Prostate TMA | 105 | Adenocarcinoma | BPH 16 |
| PIN 4 | |||
| Gleason score 4 5 | |||
| Gleason score 6 31 | |||
| Gleason 7 15 | |||
| Gleason score 8 16 | |||
| Gleason score 9–10 9 | |||
| Stroma 3 | |||
| Absent cores 6 | |||
| Kidney | 75 | Clear cell carcinoma 43 | Grade 1 4 |
| Papillary RCC 11 | Grade 2 38 | ||
| Chromophobe RCC 13 | Grade 3 28 | ||
| Cystic RCC 6 | Grade 4 5 | ||
| Sarcomatoid RCC 2 | |||
| Bladder | 44 | Urothelial carcinoma | Low grade 38 |
| High grade 6 | |||
| Lung | 4 | Bronchoalveolar carcinoma 1 | Grade 1 1 |
| Adenocarcinoma 1 | Grade 2 1 | ||
| Large cell carcinoma 1 | Grade 3 1 | ||
| Squamous cell carcinoma 1 | Grade 4 1 | ||
| Breast | 3 | Invasive lobular carcinoma 1 | Grade 1 1 |
| Invasive mammary carcinoma 2 | Grade 3 2 | ||
| Female genital tract | 5 | Endometrial carcinoma 4 | Grade 1 4 |
| Ovary, endometrioid carcinoma 1 | Grade 2 1 | ||
| Gatrointestinal tract | 2 | Colon carcinoma 1 | Low grade 1 |
| Pancreas neuroendocrine carcinoma 1 | High grade 1 | ||
| Parotid | 3 | Mucoepidermoid carcinoma 1 | Low grade 1 |
| Metastatic SCC 1 | High grade 2 | ||
| Metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma 1 | |||
| Mouth, tongue and larynx | 4 | Squamous cell carcinoma 4 | Moderately differentiated 3 |
| Moderately to poorly differentiated 1 | |||
| Total | 291 |
RCC, renal cell carcinoma; SCC, squamous cell carcinoma; TMA, tissue microarray.
Figure 1Correlation of TRIM59 immunhistochemistry (IHC) staining in prostate cancer cases in tissue microarray (TMA) assessed by the Gleason grading system. All panels in (A) were shown haematoxylin staining, ×20. Non-tumour: weak or negative, prostate intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN): TRIM59 is located in the cytoplasm of the luminal cells (intensity = 2). Gleason score 3 + 3, TRIM59 is located in the cytoplasm of tumour cells (intensity = 2). Gleason score 3 + 4, TRIM59 is located in the cytoplasm of the tumour cells (intensity = 2). Gleason score 4 + 4, TRIM59 is located in the cytoplasm of the tumour cells (intensity = 2). Gleason score 4 + 5, TRIM59 is located in the cytoplasm of the tumour cells (intensity<1). Graph B: correlation of TRIM59 protein levels by intensity with Gleason score in prostate cancer TMA analysis. Error bars show mean (±SE).
Figure 2Immunohistochemistry analysis of TRIM59 expression in kidney cancer (RCC, renal cell carcinoma) cases: correlation with tumour grade by intensity detecting early tumorigenesis. Five types of RCC with different grades were shown clear cell carcinoma (A–D), papillary RCC (E and F), chromophobe RCC (G–I), sarcomatoid RCC (J) and cystic RCC (K and L). (A) Clear cell carcinoma, grade1, weak cytoplasmic staining in tumour cells, ≥50% nuclear staining, cytoplasmic staining in tumour cells (×40). (B) Clear cell carcinoma, grade 2, moderate cytoplasmic staining in tumour cells, no nuclear staining (×40). (C) Clear cell carcinoma, grade 3, strong cytoplasmic staining in tumour cells, no nuclear staining (×40). (D) Clear cell carcinoma, grade 4, moderate cytoplasmic staining and nuclear (%) staining (×40). (E) Papillary RCC, grade 2, strong cytoplasmic staining in tumour cells, no nuclear staining (×40). (F) Papillary RCC, grade 3, strong cytoplasmic staining in tumour cells, no nuclear staining, normal cortex tissue is visible adjacent to tumour area (×40). (G) Chromophobe RCC, grade 2, strong cytoplasmic staining in tumour cells, no nuclear staining. (×40). (H) Chromophobe RCC, grade 3, strong cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining, (×40). (I) Chromophobe RCC, grade 4, moderate cytoplasm staining and nuclear staining (×40). (J) Sarcomatoid RCC, grade 4, weak cytoplasmic staining and nuclear staining (×40). (K) Cystic RCC, grade 2, moderate cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (×40). (L)Cystic RCC, grade 3, strong cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (×40). Last two panels: normal kidney tissues (×20, ×40). (M) Graph: correlation of TRIM59 protein levels by relative scores (both intensity and extent) with grade in RCC according to the Fuhrman nuclear grading system. Error bars show mean (±SE).
Immunohistochemistry (IHC) analysis of TRIM59 as multiple marker in 35 tumour tissue microarray
| Tumour type | Patient number | Core number | Pathological grade | Cell type | IHC staining | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cytoplasm staining (intensity) | Nuclear staining (extent) | |||||
| Renal clear cell carcinoma, | 2 | 6 | 2 | Epithelial | moderate | – |
| 3 | moderate | – | ||||
| Adrenal gland cortical carcinoma | 1 | 3 | N/A | Epithelial | Moderate–strong | – |
| Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), skin | 2 | 6 | WD | Epithelial | Strong | – |
| MD | Moderate | – | ||||
| Basal cell carcinoma, skin | 2 | 6 | N/A | Epithelial | Moderate | – |
| Moderate–strong | ||||||
| Melanoma | 1 | 3 | N/A | Epithelial | Weak | 50%+ |
| Endometroid adenocarcinoma | 2 | 6 | 2 | Epithelial | Moderate–strong | – |
| 1 | Moderate–strong | – | ||||
| Leiomyosarcoma | 1 | 3 | N/A | Mesenchymal | Weak | – |
| Omentum serous adenocarcinoma, | 1 | 3 | WD | Epithelial | Weak–moderate | – |
| Ovary serous adenocarcinoma | 1 | 3 | N/A | Epithelial | Weak–moderate | – |
| Ovary clear cell carcinoma | 1 | 3 | PD | Epithelial | Moderate–strong | 30%+ |
| Cervix adenocarcinoma | 1 | 3 | WD-MD | Epithelial | Moderate–strong | – |
| Colon adenocarcinoma | 1 | 3 | Low grade | Epithelial | Weak | – |
| Breast ductal adenocarcinoma | 1 | 3 | 2/3 | Epithelial | Moderate–strong | 50%+ |
| Bladder urothelial carcinoma | 2 | 6 | Low grade | Epithelial | Weak | – |
| 2 (low grade) | Epithelial | Moderate | – | |||
| Stomach GIST | 1 | 3 | Epithelial | Weak–moderate | – | |
| Esophagus adenocarcinoma | 1 | 3 | MD | Epithelial | 0–Weak | – |
| Thyroid, papillary carcinoma | 1 | 3 | N/A | Epithelial | Weak | – |
| Thyroid, medullary carcinoma | 1 | 3 | N/A | Epithelial | Moderate | – |
| Pancreas adenocarcinoma | 2 | 6 | 2 | Epithelial | Weak–moderate | – |
| 2 | Moderate–strong | – | ||||
| Pancreas endocrine tumour | 1 | 3 | N/A | Epithelial | Strong | – |
| Lung SCC | 1 | 3 | PD | Epithelial | Strong | – |
| Lung mesothelioma | 1 | 3 | MD-PD | Strong | 20%+ | |
| Lung adenocarcinoma | 1 | 3 | MD | Moderate | 50%+ | |
| Lung bronchoalveolar carcinoma | 1 | 3 | WD | Moderate–strong | 50%+ | |
| Lung mesothelioma, biphasic | 1 | 3 | MD-PD | Strong | 20%+ | |
| Liver hepatocellular carcinoma (HCCa) | 1 | 3 | 2/4 | Epithelial | Strong | – |
| Liver metastatic carcinoid | 1 | 3 | N/A | Epithelial | Strong | – |
| Small bowel marginal zone lymphoma | 1 | 3 | N/A | Lymphocyte | 0–Weak | – |
| Lymph node, follicular lymphoma | 1 | 3 | 1/3 | Lymphocyte | 0–Weak | – |
| Lymph node, metastatic carcinoid | 1 | 3 | Low grade | Epithelial | Strong | – |
| Spleen, Hodgkin's lymphoma | 1 | 3 | N/A | Lymphocyte | Weak | – |
| Stomach, malt lymphoma | 1 | 3 | Low grade | Lymphocyte | 0–Weak | – |
| Thymus invasive thymoma | 1 | 3 | N/A | Epithelial | 0–Wweak | – |
| Appendix, goblet cell carcinoid | 1 | 3 | N/A | Epithelial | 0 | – |
GIST, gastrointestinal stromal tumour.
Figure 3Comparison of TRIM59 expression as a multiple-cancer marker in eight types of tumours in breast, lung, parotid, gastrointestinal, female genital tract, bladder, head and neck mucosal tumour and prostate cancer. Negative TRIM59 staining in normal tissues was shown for each tumour, respectively (×20). (A) Lung bronchoalveolar carcinoma, grade 1, strong cytoplasmic and nuclear staining of tumour cells, (×40). (B) Lung adenocarcinoma, grade 2, moderate cytoplasmic staining of tumour cells, no nuclear staining (×40). (C) Lung large cell carcinoma, grade 4, moderate cytoplasmic and nuclear staining of tumour cells (×40). (D) Breast cancer, invasive lobular, low-grade, moderate to strong cytoplasmic and nuclear staining of tumour cells (×40). (E) Breast cancer, invasive mammary (no specific type), high-grade, moderate cytoplasmic staining of tumour cells, no nuclear staining (×40). (F) Pancreas neuroendocrine carcinoma, poorly differentiated, strong cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining of tumour cells (×40). (G) Colon carcinoma, low-grade, weak-to-moderate cytoplasmic staining of tumour cells, no nuclear staining (×40). (H) Endometrial carcinoma, grade1, weak-to-moderate cytoplasmic staining of tumour cells, no nuclear staining (×40). (I) Endometrial carcinoma, grade 2, moderate-to-strong cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (×40). (J) Ovary, endometrioid carcinoma, grade 1, weak cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (×40). (K) Bladder urothelial carcinoma, low-grade, moderate cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (×40). (L) Prostate adenocarcinoma, Gleason score 8, moderate cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (40×). (M) Floor of mouth, SCC moderately differentiated, strong cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (40×). (N) Tongue cancer, SCC moderately to poorly differentiated, strong cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (40×). (O) Larynx, SCC moderately differentiated, strong cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (40×). (P) Parotid, mucoepidermoid carcinoma, low-grade, strong cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (×40). (Q) Parotid, metastatic SCC, poorly differentiated, moderate-to-strong cytoplasmic staining, no nuclear staining (×40). (R) Graphic comparison of relative scores (both intensity and extent) of TRIM59 IHC signals in eight different tumour types. fGT, female genital tract. Error bars show means (±SE) of the relative scores in all grades analysed and compared.