Literature DB >> 24523142

Clinical significance of different types of p53 gene alteration in surgically treated prostate cancer.

Martina Kluth1, Silvia Harasimowicz, Lia Burkhardt, Katharina Grupp, Antje Krohn, Kristina Prien, Jovisa Gjoni, Thomas Haß, Rami Galal, Markus Graefen, Alexander Haese, Ronald Simon, Julia Hühne-Simon, Christina Koop, Jan Korbel, Joachim Weischenfeld, Hartwig Huland, Guido Sauter, Alexander Quaas, Waldemar Wilczak, Maria-Christina Tsourlakis, Sarah Minner, Thorsten Schlomm.   

Abstract

Despite a multitude of p53 immunohistochemistry (IHC) studies, data on the combined effect of nuclear p53 protein accumulation and TP53 genomic inactivation are lacking for prostate cancer. A tissue microarray including 11,152 prostate cancer samples was analyzed by p53 IHC and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Nuclear p53 accumulation was found in 10.1% of patients including 1.4% with high-level and 8.7% with low-level immunostaining. TP53 sequencing revealed that 17 of 22 (77%) cases with high-level p53 immunostaining, but only 3% (1 of 31) low-level p53 cases carried putative dominant-negative mutations. TP53 deletions occurred in 14.8% of cancers. Both deletions and protein accumulation were linked to unfavorable tumor phenotype and prostate specific antigen (PSA) recurrence (p<0.0001 each). The combination of both methods revealed subgroups with remarkable differences in their clinical course. Tumors with either TP53 deletion (14%) or low-level p53 positivity (8.7%) had identical risks of PSA recurrence, which were markedly higher than in cancers without p53 alterations (p<0.0001). Tumors with both p53 deletion and low-level p53 positivity (1.5%) had a worse prognosis than patients with only one of these alterations (p<0.0001). Tumors with strong p53 immunostaining or homozygous inactivation through deletion of one allele and disrupting translocation involving the second allele had the worst outcome, independent from clinical and pathological parameters. These data demonstrate a differential clinical impact of various TP53 alterations in prostate cancer. Strong p53 immunostaining-most likely accompanying dominant negative or oncogenic p53 mutation-has independent prognostic relevance and may thus represent a clinical useful molecular feature of prostate cancer.
© 2014 UICC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  mutation; p53; progression; prostate cancer; protein

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24523142     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.28784

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  47 in total

1.  Evidence of a Prion-Like Transmission of p53 Amyloid in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Shinjinee Sengupta; Samir K Maji; Santanu K Ghosh
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2017-08-28       Impact factor: 4.272

2.  Analysis of differentially expressed genes, clinical value and biological pathways in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Zhaohui He; Fucai Tang; Zechao Lu; Yucong Huang; Hanqi Lei; Zhibiao Li; Guohua Zeng
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2018-05-15       Impact factor: 4.060

3.  Analytic, Preanalytic, and Clinical Validation of p53 IHC for Detection of TP53 Missense Mutation in Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Liana B Guedes; Fawaz Almutairi; Michael C Haffner; Gaurav Rajoria; Zach Liu; Szczepan Klimek; Roberto Zoino; Kasra Yousefi; Rajni Sharma; Angelo M De Marzo; George J Netto; William B Isaacs; Ashley E Ross; Edward M Schaeffer; Tamara L Lotan
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 12.531

4.  Expression of ERG protein in prostate cancer: variability and biological correlates.

Authors:  Gustavo Ayala; Anna Frolov; Deyali Chatterjee; Dandan He; Susan Hilsenbeck; Michael Ittmann
Journal:  Endocr Relat Cancer       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 5.678

5.  Androgen induces G3BP2 and SUMO-mediated p53 nuclear export in prostate cancer.

Authors:  D Ashikari; K Takayama; T Tanaka; Y Suzuki; D Obinata; T Fujimura; T Urano; S Takahashi; S Inoue
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 9.867

6.  8p deletion is strongly linked to poor prognosis in breast cancer.

Authors:  P Lebok; A Mittenzwei; M Kluth; C Özden; B Taskin; K Hussein; K Möller; A Hartmann; A Lebeau; I Witzel; S Mahner; L Wölber; F Jänicke; S Geist; P Paluchowski; C Wilke; U Heilenkötter; R Simon; G Sauter; L Terracciano; R Krech; A von der Assen; V Müller; E Burandt
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2015-05-11       Impact factor: 4.742

Review 7.  Aggregation and Prion-Like Properties of Misfolded Tumor Suppressors: Is Cancer a Prion Disease?

Authors:  Danielly C F Costa; Guilherme A P de Oliveira; Elio A Cino; Iaci N Soares; Luciana P Rangel; Jerson L Silva
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 10.005

8.  Endoplasmic reticulum stress, autophagic and apoptotic cell death, and immune activation by a natural triterpenoid in human prostate cancer cells.

Authors:  Benjamin M Johnson; Faisal F Y Radwan; Azim Hossain; Bently P Doonan; Jessica D Hathaway-Schrader; Jason M God; Christina V Voelkel-Johnson; Narendra L Banik; Sakamuri V Reddy; Azizul Haque
Journal:  J Cell Biochem       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 4.429

Review 9.  [Prognostic and predictive molecular markers for urologic cancers].

Authors:  A Hartmann; T Schlomm; S Bertz; J Heinzelmann; S Hölters; R Simon; R Stoehr; K Junker
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 0.639

10.  Combined Loss of EAF2 and p53 Induces Prostate Carcinogenesis in Male Mice.

Authors:  Yao Wang; Laura E Pascal; Mingming Zhong; Junkui Ai; Dan Wang; Yifeng Jing; Jan Pilch; Qiong Song; Lora H Rigatti; Lara E Graham; Joel B Nelson; Anil V Parwani; Zhou Wang
Journal:  Endocrinology       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 4.736

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.