Alessandra Ciucci1, Gian Franco Zannoni2, Daniele Travaglia1, Marco Petrillo1, Giovanni Scambia1, Daniela Gallo3. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. 2. Department of Histopathology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: d.gallo@rm.unicatt.it.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the present study we have examined the pattern of expression of the full length estrogen receptor β (ERβ1) and two ERβ splice variant isoforms (ERβ2, ERβ5) in well-characterized advanced serous ovarian cancers. METHODS: Immunohistochemistry was performed with ERβ1, ERβ2, and ERβ5 antibodies and results were correlated with pathological and clinical follow-up data. Expression of ERβ isoforms in a panel of ovarian cancer cell lines and human tumor xenografts was also assessed. RESULTS: Immunohistochemical staining revealed cellular compartment-specific distribution for each isoform in malignant ovarian tissues exhibiting both nuclear staining and cytoplasmic staining. Patients with cytoplasmic ERβ2 expression had significantly worse outcome (p = 0.006 at the multivariate analysis), the 5-year survival rate being nearly 28% for patients who did express cytoplasmic ERβ2, and 60% in negative patients. Cytoplasmic ERβ2 expression was also found to be significantly associated with chemoresistance. In concordance with clinical results both nuclear and cytoplasmic expressions were observed for the three isoforms in the cancer cell lines and human tumor xenografts tested. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to uncover an unfavorable prognostic role of ERβ2 in advanced serous ovarian cancer. If anomalies of ERβ2 cytoplasmic expression could be demonstrated to represent an independent unfavorable prognostic marker and/or a marker predicting chemoresistance in advanced serous ovarian cancer, its immunohistochemical assessment at the time of surgery, could help to recognize candidates for clinical trials of new interventions.
OBJECTIVE: In the present study we have examined the pattern of expression of the full length estrogen receptor β (ERβ1) and two ERβ splice variant isoforms (ERβ2, ERβ5) in well-characterized advanced serous ovarian cancers. METHODS: Immunohistochemistry was performed with ERβ1, ERβ2, and ERβ5 antibodies and results were correlated with pathological and clinical follow-up data. Expression of ERβ isoforms in a panel of ovarian cancer cell lines and humantumor xenografts was also assessed. RESULTS: Immunohistochemical staining revealed cellular compartment-specific distribution for each isoform in malignant ovarian tissues exhibiting both nuclear staining and cytoplasmic staining. Patients with cytoplasmic ERβ2 expression had significantly worse outcome (p = 0.006 at the multivariate analysis), the 5-year survival rate being nearly 28% for patients who did express cytoplasmic ERβ2, and 60% in negative patients. Cytoplasmic ERβ2 expression was also found to be significantly associated with chemoresistance. In concordance with clinical results both nuclear and cytoplasmic expressions were observed for the three isoforms in the cancer cell lines and humantumor xenografts tested. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to uncover an unfavorable prognostic role of ERβ2 in advanced serous ovarian cancer. If anomalies of ERβ2 cytoplasmic expression could be demonstrated to represent an independent unfavorable prognostic marker and/or a marker predicting chemoresistance in advanced serous ovarian cancer, its immunohistochemical assessment at the time of surgery, could help to recognize candidates for clinical trials of new interventions.
Authors: Jenna Z Marcus; Merieme Klobocista; Rouzan G Karabakhtsian; Eric Prossnitz; Gary L Goldberg; Gloria S Huang Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Jinyou Liu; Gangadhara R Sareddy; Mei Zhou; Suryavathi Viswanadhapalli; Xiaonan Li; Zhao Lai; Rajeshwar R Tekmal; Andrew Brenner; Ratna K Vadlamudi Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2018-04-16 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Jennifer Taylor Veneris; Kathleen M Darcy; Paulette Mhawech-Fauceglia; Chunqiao Tian; Ernst Lengyel; Ricardo R Lastra; Tanja Pejovic; Suzanne D Conzen; Gini F Fleming Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2017-04-26 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Elizabeth M Poole; Eva Schernhammer; Leigha Mills; Susan E Hankinson; Shelley S Tworoger Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Laura Smith; Euan W Baxter; Philip A Chambers; Caroline A Green; Andrew M Hanby; Thomas A Hughes; Claire E Nash; Rebecca A Millican-Slater; Lucy F Stead; Eldo T Verghese; Valerie Speirs Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-10-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Amy L Shafrir; Ana Babic; Margaret Gates Kuliszewski; Megan S Rice; Mary K Townsend; Jonathan L Hecht; Shelley S Tworoger Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-08-20 Impact factor: 4.254