| Literature DB >> 26908452 |
Yayun Chi1, Ling Yao1, Xin Hu1, Sheng Huang1, Naisi Huang1, Shan Li1, Zhiming Shao1, Jiong Wu2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Breast cancer (BC) is prevalent worldwide malignant cancer. Improvements in timely and effective diagnosis and prediction are needed. As reported, secreted DAND5 is contributed to BC metastasis. We aim to assess whether DAND5 in peripheral blood serum could determine BC-specific mortality.Entities:
Keywords: DAND5; biomarker; breast cancer; prognosis; secreted factor
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26908452 PMCID: PMC4924764 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.7498
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1DAND5 expression profile in breast cancer tissue microarrays
A. DAND5 immunostaining was determined in breast cancer and scored as (1) (2) low expression, (3) (4) high expression. All immunohistochemical photomicrographs are magnified 400×. B. Relationship between DAND5 expression and disease free survival (DFS)/overall survival (OS). P values were calculated using the unadjusted log-rank test.
Relationship between DAND5 expression and clinicopathological features in 250 breast cancer patients for IHC detection
| Characteristics | DAND5 | Number of patients (%) | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low n (%) | High n (%) | |||
| Age (mean 51.9, SD 9.524, median 51, range 29-85) | ||||
| <50 | 34(13.6) | 86(34.4) | 120(48) | |
| ≥50 | 23(9.2) | 107(42.8) | 130(52) | |
| Menopausal status | 0.052 | |||
| Pre | 31(12.4) | 77(30.8) | 108(43.2) | |
| Post | 26(10.4) | 116(46.4) | 142(56.8) | |
| Tumor size (cm) | 0.769 | |||
| 2cm | 25(10) | 90(36) | 115(46) | |
| >2,5cm | 28(11.2) | 92(36.8) | 120(48) | |
| >5cm | 4(1.6) | 8(3.2) | 12(4.8) | |
| Node status | 0.308 | |||
| Negative | 38(15.2) | 113(45.2) | 151(60.4) | |
| Positive | 19(7.6) | 78(31.2) | 97(38.8) | |
| ER status | ||||
| Negative | 40(16) | 110(44) | 150(60) | |
| Positive | 17(6.8) | 83(33.2) | 100(40) | |
| HER-2 status | 0.074 | |||
| Negative | 34(13.6) | 114(45.6) | 148(59.2) | |
| Positive | 23(9.2) | 78(31.2) | 100(40) | |
| Differentiation | 0.923 | |||
| I | 1(0.4) | 1(0.4) | 2(0.8) | |
| II | 41(16.4) | 143(57.2) | 184(73.6) | |
| III | 15(6) | 46(18.4) | 61(24.4) | |
| TNM stage | 0.535 | |||
| I | 17(6.8) | 57(22.8) | 74(29.6) | |
| II | 33(13.2) | 99(39.6) | 132(52.8) | |
| III | 7(2.8) | 35(14) | 42(16.8) | |
Abbreviations: ER, estrogen receptor; HER-2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2
Based onPearson χ2 test except for surgery type and radiation therapy, for which P is based on Fisher's exact test.
Univariate regression model of prognostic covariates in 250 BC patients
| Variable | HR | 95.0% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | |||
| Age(<50/>=50) | 0.815 | 0.553 | 1.595 | 0.939 |
| Menopausal status(negative/positive) | 0.1 | 0.914 | 2.78 | 1.594 |
| ER(negative/positive) | 0.388 | 0.456 | 1.356 | 0.787 |
| PR(negative/positive) | 0.027 | 0.185 | 0.903 | 0.409 |
| TNM(I, II, III) | 0.003 | 1.24 | 2.767 | 1.852 |
| Pathological stage(I, II, III) | 0.035 | 1.041 | 2.98 | 1.761 |
| Her2 status(negative/positive) | 0.809 | 0.548 | 1.6 | 0.936 |
| Node status(negative/positive) | 0.003 | 1.304 | 3.819 | 2.232 |
| Tumor size (2 cm, >2,5cm, >5 cm) | 2.708 | 1.086 | 1.715 | |
| DAND5 (negative/positive) | 5.494 | 1.008 | 2.353 | |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; ER status, estrogen receptor status; PR status, prostrogen receptor status;HER-2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; HR, hazard ratio.
Multivariate regression model of prognostic covariates in 250 BC patients
| Variable | HR | 95.0% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | |||
| Age(<50/>=50) | 0.573 | 0.284 | 1.155 | 0.12 |
| Menopausal status(negative/positive) | 2.022 | 0.971 | 4.211 | 0.06 |
| ER(negative/positive) | 1.179 | 0.561 | 2.479 | 0.664 |
| PR(negative/positive) | 0.367 | 0.137 | 0.98 | |
| TNM(I, II, III) | 1.029 | 0.552 | 1.916 | 0.929 |
| Pathological stage(I, II, III) | 1.594 | 0.887 | 2.865 | 0.119 |
| Her2 status(negative/positive) | 0.874 | 0.481 | 1.586 | 0.657 |
| Node status(negative/positive) | 1.918 | 0.924 | 3.98 | 0.081 |
| Tumor size (2cm,>2,5cm,>5cm) | 1.806 | 1.085 | 3.005 | |
| DAND5 (negative/positive) | 2.537 | 1.056 | 6.096 | |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; ER status, estrogen receptor status; PR status, prostrogen receptor status;HER-2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; HR, hazard ratio.
Figure 2DAND5 promoted tumor proliferation and angiogenesis in vitro and in vivo
A. Representative pictures of pseudocapillary formation in matrigel from HUVECs in 0.1% FBS exposed to breast cancer cell culture at 12 h after cell seeding. B. Quantification of pseudocapillaries obtained by counting numbers of complete circles/wells. Numbers represent the mean of 6 samples ± SEM of three experiments run in triplicate. C. MDA-MB231 DAND5 and knock down stable cell lysates and T47D DAND5 stable cell lysates were immunoblotted using DAND5 antibody. D. MDA-MB231 wild type, DAND5 and knock down stable cells were seeded in 96 well plate and cultured for the times as indicated, the cell growth was analyzed with CCK-8 assay. *P <0.05. **P<0.001. E. Inhibition of DAND5 by shRNA inhibited the vascularization of tumors in mice. The images were reconstructed using the filtered back projection (FBP) algorithm. Tumorigenesis was obtained after injection of MDA-MB231 cells or MDA-MB231 shDAND5 cells. F. Image of representative tumors from MDA-MB231 or MDA-MB231 shDAND5 xenografts harvested at end point. G. Images to visualize positive staining of DAND5 in xenograft tumor harvested at end point. Bars: 20 um, magnification × 400.
Relationship between DAND5 expression in peripheral blood serums and clinicopathological features in 1730 breast cancer patients for ELISA detection
| Characteristics | DAND5 | Number of patients (%) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low n (%) | High n (%) | |||
| Age | 0.583 | |||
| <50 | 1011(58.4) | 517(29.9) | 158 (88.3) | |
| ≥50 | 93(5.4) | 47(2.7) | 140(8.1) | |
| Menopausal status | 0.191 | |||
| Pre | 542(31.3) | 283(16.4) | 825(47.6) | |
| Post | 562(32.5) | 335(19.4) | 897(1.9) | |
| Tumor size (cm) | 0.305 | |||
| 2cm | 559(32.3) | 283(16.4) | 842(48.7) | |
| >2,5cm | 369(21.3) | 235(14.6) | 604(35.9) | |
| >5cm | 32(1.8) | 20(1.2) | 52(3) | |
| Node status | 0.196 | |||
| Negative | 698(40.3) | 362(20.9) | 1060(61.2) | |
| Positive | 407(23.5) | 256(14.8) | 663(38.3) | |
| ER status | 0.463 | |||
| Negative | 320(18.5) | 168(9.7) | 488(28.2) | |
| Positive | 718(41.5) | 412(23.8) | 1130(65.3) | |
| HER-2 status | 0.164 | |||
| Negative | 834(48.2) | 487(28.2) | 1321(76.4) | |
| Positive | 71(4.1) | 30(1.7) | 101(5.8) | |
| Differentiation | 0.130 | |||
| I | 20(1.2) | 8(0.5) | 28(1.7) | |
| II | 500(28.9) | 305(17.6) | 805(46.5) | |
| III | 280(16.2) | 135(7.8) | 415(24) | |
| TNM stage | 0.091 | |||
| I | 390(22.5) | 184(10.6) | 574(33.1) | |
| II | 407(23.5) | 239(13.8) | 646(47.3) | |
| III | 174(10.1) | 117(6.8) | 291(16.9) | |
Abbreviations: ER, estrogen receptor; HER-2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 a. Based onPearson χ2 test except for surgery type and radiation therapy, for which P is based on Fisher's exact test.
Univariate and multivariate analysis for disease free survival in 1730 cases
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | p value | HR (95% CI) | p value | |
| Age | 0.661 (0.206-2.117) | 0.485 | 1.106 (0.593-2.062) | 0.751 |
| Menopausal status | 0.996 (0.592-1.676) | 0.989 | 0.800 (0.568-1.128) | 0.203 |
| Tumor grade | 4.286 (2.313-7.942) | 4.462 (2.097-10.278) | ||
| Tumor size | 3.317 (2.242-4.907) | 1.613 (1.159-2.245) | ||
| Lymph node status | 2.847 (2.276-3.563) | 2.135 (1.552-2.938) | ||
| ER status | 0.399 (0.236-0.674) | 0.861 (0.596-1.242) | ||
| HER-2/neu status | 2.304 (0.905-5.867) | 0.08 | 1.122 (0.584-2.153) | 0.73 |
| DAND5 | 1.58 (1.206-2.070) | 1.4 (1.003-1.954) | ||
Abbreviations: HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; ER, estrogen receptor; HER-2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; a.p is based on the Cox regression test.
Figure 3Serum DAND5 in breast cancer patients linked to opposing outcomes by ELISA detection
Relationship between DAND5 expression and disease free survival (DFS)/overall survival (OS). P values were calculated using the unadjusted log-rank test.