BACKGROUND: In view of the marked molecular heterogeneity of prostate cancer (PCa), clinical and pathologic parameters alone may be unreliable for predicting disease outcomes after surgical intervention. The development of biomarkers may be helpful to estimate tumor heterogeneity and stratify patients in terms of their risk of progression. Levels of v-ets avian erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog (ERG), trefoil factor 3 (TFF3), and serine peptidase inhibitor, Kazal type 1 (SPINK1) are commonly elevated in PCa, but it is unclear whether the evaluation of these 3 markers can help to discriminate patients who will have different clinical outcomes. The authors investigated whether assessment of ERG, TFF3, and SPINK1 expression could help to define clinically relevant, distinct subsets of patients with PCa. METHODS: The cohort consisted of 279 men with PCa who underwent radical prostatectomy at Henri Mondor Hospital. Expression levels of ERG, TFF3, and SPINK1 were evaluated immunohistochemically in the prostatectomy specimens. Potential associations of ERG, TFF3, and SPINK1 with age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), tumor stage, Gleason score, and biochemical recurrence, defined by PSA failure, were investigated. RESULTS: Although prognostic significance was not observed for ERG or TFF3, an exclusive pattern of expression was demonstrated for TFF3 and ERG. SPINK1 expression was observed exclusively in a subgroup of cancers that expressed TFF3 (41 of 175 tumors). Moreover, SPINK1 positivity was identified as predictive of biochemical recurrence in univariate (P = .0009) and multivariate (P = .0003) analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The current results suggest that ERG and TFF3 characterize 2 distinct subsets of PCa, with a more aggressive subgroup of TFF3-expressing tumors that express SPINK1. Together, these findings support a rationale of screening for these biomarkers for prognostic purposes and molecular subtyping of the disease.
BACKGROUND: In view of the marked molecular heterogeneity of prostate cancer (PCa), clinical and pathologic parameters alone may be unreliable for predicting disease outcomes after surgical intervention. The development of biomarkers may be helpful to estimate tumor heterogeneity and stratify patients in terms of their risk of progression. Levels of v-ets avian erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog (ERG), trefoil factor 3 (TFF3), and serine peptidase inhibitor, Kazal type 1 (SPINK1) are commonly elevated in PCa, but it is unclear whether the evaluation of these 3 markers can help to discriminate patients who will have different clinical outcomes. The authors investigated whether assessment of ERG, TFF3, and SPINK1 expression could help to define clinically relevant, distinct subsets of patients with PCa. METHODS: The cohort consisted of 279 men with PCa who underwent radical prostatectomy at Henri Mondor Hospital. Expression levels of ERG, TFF3, and SPINK1 were evaluated immunohistochemically in the prostatectomy specimens. Potential associations of ERG, TFF3, and SPINK1 with age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), tumor stage, Gleason score, and biochemical recurrence, defined by PSA failure, were investigated. RESULTS: Although prognostic significance was not observed for ERG or TFF3, an exclusive pattern of expression was demonstrated for TFF3 and ERG. SPINK1 expression was observed exclusively in a subgroup of cancers that expressed TFF3 (41 of 175 tumors). Moreover, SPINK1 positivity was identified as predictive of biochemical recurrence in univariate (P = .0009) and multivariate (P = .0003) analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The current results suggest that ERG and TFF3 characterize 2 distinct subsets of PCa, with a more aggressive subgroup of TFF3-expressing tumors that express SPINK1. Together, these findings support a rationale of screening for these biomarkers for prognostic purposes and molecular subtyping of the disease.
Authors: Cindy Ke Zhou; Denise Young; Edward D Yeboah; Sally B Coburn; Yao Tettey; Richard B Biritwum; Andrew A Adjei; Evelyn Tay; Shelley Niwa; Ann Truelove; Judith Welsh; James E Mensah; Robert N Hoover; Isabell A Sesterhenn; Ann W Hsing; Shiv Srivastava; Michael B Cook Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: D Lee; J Fontugne; N Gumpeni; K Park; T Y MacDonald; B D Robinson; A Sboner; M A Rubin; J M Mosquera; C E Barbieri Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Hai Xia Zhang; Ou Sheng Liu; Chao Deng; Yan He; Ye Qian Feng; Jin An Ma; Chun Hong Hu; Zhan Gui Tang Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Andrea Bakker; Jonathan C Slack; Nalla Palanisamy; Shannon Carskadon; Sunita Ghosh; Ibrahim Khalifeh; Tarek A Bismar Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2022-08-18 Impact factor: 4.322
Authors: James D Brooks; Wei Wei; Sarah Hawley; Heidi Auman; Lisa Newcomb; Hilary Boyer; Ladan Fazli; Jeff Simko; Antonio Hurtado-Coll; Dean A Troyer; Peter R Carroll; Martin Gleave; Raymond Lance; Daniel W Lin; Peter S Nelson; Ian M Thompson; Lawrence D True; Ziding Feng; Jesse K McKenney Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 3.240