PURPOSE: This study aimed to measure expression of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and CD34 in pretreatment tumor biopsies from patients on the RTOG C0128 phase II study, and to correlate expression of these biomarkers, using quantitative immunohistochemistry, with clinical outcome parameters. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Pretreatment biopsies were placed into tissue microarrays. COX-2 and CD34 expression were measured using automated quantitative immunohistochemistry (AQUA®). Cox regression models and Fisher's exact test were used to explore associations between expression of the biomarkers and clinical end points. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were accrued between 2001 and 2004; 78 were eligible and analyzable. Pathology specimen submission was optional; COX-2 expression was determined for 37 (47%) of patients, and CD34 scoring was determined for 34 (44%) of patients. Median follow-up was 44.5 months. In tumors where COX-2 data were available, 6 (16%) of 37 patients had local-regional failure; 4 of these patients had tumors with COX-2 scores below the AQUA® score median (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-2.16; P = 0.28). Of the 8 patients with disease-free survival failures, 5 had tumors with COX-2 levels below the median (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-2.04; P = 0.32). The 4 patients who died all had COX-2 levels below the median value. COX-2 levels below the median were associated with worse 2-year survival (Fisher's P = 0.046). There was no statistically significant association between CD34 status and clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Low COX-2 expression measured by AQUA® was associated with worse overall survival in this subset of patients available for analysis from RTOG C0128. Application of AQUA® technology, in a larger study, will be required to definitively evaluate the association COX-2 with clinical outcome in cervical cancer.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to measure expression of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and CD34 in pretreatment tumor biopsies from patients on the RTOG C0128 phase II study, and to correlate expression of these biomarkers, using quantitative immunohistochemistry, with clinical outcome parameters. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Pretreatment biopsies were placed into tissue microarrays. COX-2 and CD34 expression were measured using automated quantitative immunohistochemistry (AQUA®). Cox regression models and Fisher's exact test were used to explore associations between expression of the biomarkers and clinical end points. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were accrued between 2001 and 2004; 78 were eligible and analyzable. Pathology specimen submission was optional; COX-2 expression was determined for 37 (47%) of patients, and CD34 scoring was determined for 34 (44%) of patients. Median follow-up was 44.5 months. In tumors where COX-2 data were available, 6 (16%) of 37 patients had local-regional failure; 4 of these patients had tumors with COX-2 scores below the AQUA® score median (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-2.16; P = 0.28). Of the 8 patients with disease-free survival failures, 5 had tumors with COX-2 levels below the median (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-2.04; P = 0.32). The 4 patients who died all had COX-2 levels below the median value. COX-2 levels below the median were associated with worse 2-year survival (Fisher's P = 0.046). There was no statistically significant association between CD34 status and clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Low COX-2 expression measured by AQUA® was associated with worse overall survival in this subset of patients available for analysis from RTOG C0128. Application of AQUA® technology, in a larger study, will be required to definitively evaluate the association COX-2 with clinical outcome in cervical cancer.
Authors: R Masunaga; H Kohno; D K Dhar; S Ohno; M Shibakita; S Kinugasa; H Yoshimura; M Tachibana; H Kubota; N Nagasue Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2000-10 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Nasser K Altorki; Paul Christos; Jeff L Port; Paul C Lee; Farooq Mirza; Cathy Spinelli; Roger Keresztes; Debra Beneck; Subroto Paul; Brendon M Stiles; Yuwei Zhang; David S Schrump Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: K Kishi; S Petersen; C Petersen; N Hunter; K Mason; J L Masferrer; P J Tofilon; L Milas Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2000-03-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: J L Masferrer; K M Leahy; A T Koki; B S Zweifel; S L Settle; B M Woerner; D A Edwards; A G Flickinger; R J Moore; K Seibert Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2000-03-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Corinne M Doll; Michael Prystajecky; Misha Eliasziw; Alexander C Klimowicz; Stephanie K Petrillo; Peter S Craighead; Desiree Hao; Roman Diaz; Susan P Lees-Miller; Anthony M Magliocco Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2010-10-09 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Harry J M Groen; Hannie Sietsma; Andrew Vincent; Monique M H Hochstenbag; John W G van Putten; Anke van den Berg; Otilia Dalesio; Bonne Biesma; Hans J M Smit; Ariën Termeer; T Jeroen N Hiltermann; Ben E E M van den Borne; Franz M N H Schramel Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-10-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David K Gaffney; Anuja Jhingran; Lorraine Portelance; Akila Viswanathan; Tracey Schefter; Joanne Weidhaas; William Small Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 3.437