Oana Taban1, Anca Maria Cimpean2, Marius Raica1, Sorin Olariu3. 1. Department of Microscopic Morphology/Histology, Angiogenesis Research Center, Timis, Romania. 2. Department of Microscopic Morphology/Histology, Angiogenesis Research Center, Timis, Romania ancacimpean1972@yahoo.com. 3. Department of Surgery I, County Hospital Timisoara "Victor Babeş" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Timişoara, Timis, Romania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: PROX1 is involved in cancer development and progression as both a tumor suppressor and oncogene. Immunohistochemical (IHC) PROX1 nuclear expression is a widely accepted pattern. Scattered data reported PROX1 IHC cytoplasmic expression in different tumors, including gastric cancer but it is not clear if this holds true. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Evaluation of the cytoplasmic expression of PROX1 in normal gastric mucosa and gastric cancer was performed by IHC followed by RNAscope, an in situ hybridization-based method for detecting PROX1 mRNA amplification on paraffin-embedded samples and to evaluate its clinical impact. RESULTS: Twenty five out of 48 cases of gastric cancer showed PROX1 nuclear and cytoplasmic immunohistochemical expression. Twelve out of these 20 cases positive for PROX1 on IHC (54.5%) had PROX1 mRNA gene amplification. The overlapping of PROX1 cytoplasmic expression assessed by immunohistochemistry and cytoplasmic RNAscope amplification was statistically significant (p=0.031). PROX1 mRNA gene amplification correlated with tumor grade (p=0.05) and regional lymph node metastasis as well (p=0.033). No significant correlation was obtained between PROX1 and histopathology, tumor size or distal metastasis. CONCLUSION: A significant correlation was found between IHC and RNAscope PROX1 expression in the cytoplasm of normal and gastric cancer cells. This strongly supports its validation as a true expression on immunohistochemistry. A strong correlation between PROX1 mRNA amplification and regional lymph node metastasis supports its implications in cancer spreading and metastasis and sustains its utility, not only as a lymphatic marker, but also as a potential tumor marker in various tumor types, including gastric cancer. Copyright
BACKGROUND:PROX1 is involved in cancer development and progression as both a tumor suppressor and oncogene. Immunohistochemical (IHC) PROX1 nuclear expression is a widely accepted pattern. Scattered data reported PROX1 IHC cytoplasmic expression in different tumors, including gastric cancer but it is not clear if this holds true. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Evaluation of the cytoplasmic expression of PROX1 in normal gastric mucosa and gastric cancer was performed by IHC followed by RNAscope, an in situ hybridization-based method for detecting PROX1 mRNA amplification on paraffin-embedded samples and to evaluate its clinical impact. RESULTS: Twenty five out of 48 cases of gastric cancer showed PROX1 nuclear and cytoplasmic immunohistochemical expression. Twelve out of these 20 cases positive for PROX1 on IHC (54.5%) had PROX1 mRNA gene amplification. The overlapping of PROX1 cytoplasmic expression assessed by immunohistochemistry and cytoplasmic RNAscope amplification was statistically significant (p=0.031). PROX1 mRNA gene amplification correlated with tumor grade (p=0.05) and regional lymph node metastasis as well (p=0.033). No significant correlation was obtained between PROX1 and histopathology, tumor size or distal metastasis. CONCLUSION: A significant correlation was found between IHC and RNAscope PROX1 expression in the cytoplasm of normal and gastric cancer cells. This strongly supports its validation as a true expression on immunohistochemistry. A strong correlation between PROX1 mRNA amplification and regional lymph node metastasis supports its implications in cancer spreading and metastasis and sustains its utility, not only as a lymphatic marker, but also as a potential tumor marker in various tumor types, including gastric cancer. Copyright
Authors: Dongwon Choi; Swapnika Ramu; Eunkyung Park; Eunson Jung; Sara Yang; Wonhyeuk Jung; Inho Choi; Sunju Lee; Kyu Eui Kim; Young Jin Seong; Mingu Hong; George Daghlian; Daniel Kim; Eugene Shin; Jung In Seo; Vicken Khatchadourian; Mengchen Zou; Wei Li; Roger De Filippo; Paul Kokorowski; Andy Chang; Steve Kim; Ana Bertoni; Tania Weber Furlanetto; Sung Shin; Meng Li; Yibu Chen; Alex Wong; Chester Koh; Jan Geliebter; Young-Kwon Hong Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2015-11-25 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Anca Maria Cimpean; Dusan Lalošević; Vesna Lalošević; Pavle Banović; Marius Raica; Ovidiu Alexandru Mederle Journal: In Vivo Date: 2018 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Magdalena Rudzińska; Małgorzata Grzanka; Anna Stachurska; Michał Mikula; Katarzyna Paczkowska; Tomasz Stępień; Agnieszka Paziewska; Jerzy Ostrowski; Barbara Czarnocka Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2019-05-05 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Abeer M Hafez; Ola A Harb; Ahmed Z Alattar; Nabila Hefzi; Rham Z Ahmed; Shady E Shaker; Amr Ibrahim; Ahmed K El-Taher Journal: Contemp Oncol (Pozn) Date: 2021-01-04