Literature DB >> 27798717

Caspase-3 and caspase-8 expression in breast cancer: caspase-3 is associated with survival.

Xuan Pu1, Sarah J Storr1, Yimin Zhang1,2, Emad A Rakha3, Andrew R Green3, Ian O Ellis3, Stewart G Martin4.   

Abstract

Impaired apoptosis is one of the hallmarks of cancer. Caspase-3 and -8 are key regulators of the apoptotic response and have been shown to interact with the calpain family, a group of cysteine proteases, during tumorigenesis. The current study sought to investigate the prognostic potential of caspase-3 and -8 in breast cancer, as well as the prognostic value of combinatorial caspase and calpain expression. A large cohort (n = 1902) of early stage invasive breast cancer patients was used to explore the expression of caspase-3 and -8. Protein expression was examined using standard immunohistochemistry on tissue microarrays. High caspase-3 expression, but not caspase-8, is significantly associated with adverse breast cancer-specific survival (P = 0.008 and P = 0.056, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that caspase-3 remained an independent factor when confounding factors were included (hazard ratio (HR) 1.347, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.086-1.670; P = 0.007). The analyses in individual subgroups demonstrated the significance of caspase-3 expression in clinical outcomes in receptor positive (ER, PR or HER2) subgroups (P = 0.001) and in non-basal like subgroup (P = 0.029). Calpain expression had been previously assessed. Significant association was also found between high caspase-3/high calpain-1 and breast cancer-specific survival in the total patient cohort (P = 0.005) and basal-like subgroup (P = 0.034), as indicated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Caspase-3 expression is associated with adverse breast cancer-specific survival in breast cancer patients, and provides additional prognostic values in distinct phenotypes. Combinatorial caspase and calpain expression can predict worse prognosis, especially in basal-like phenotypes. The findings warrant further validation studies in independent multi-centre patient cohorts.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomarker; Breast cancer; Breast cancer-specific survival; Calpain; Caspase

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27798717      PMCID: PMC5306438          DOI: 10.1007/s10495-016-1323-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Apoptosis        ISSN: 1360-8185            Impact factor:   4.677


Introduction

Dysregulated apoptosis is a hallmark of human cancers. Two major pathways initiate apoptosis: the extrinsic [or death receptor (DR)] pathway is activated in response to ligand binding of DRs superfamily members, resulting in activation of caspase-8 followed by caspase-3; the intrinsic (or mitochondrial) pathway is triggered by mitochondrial release of cytochrome c, leading to formation of Apaf-1 and cytochrome c complex with the assistance of ATP, subsequently activating caspase-9 followed by caspase-3 (reviewed in [1]). Caspases are cysteine aspartyl proteases and 14 family members have been identified [2]. Based on their function, location and structural characteristics, caspases are generally classified as apoptotic caspases or pro-inflammatory caspases. Typical apoptotic caspases can be subdivided into two groups: the initiator caspases (i.e. caspase-2, -8, -9 and -10); and the effector caspases (i.e. caspase-3, -6 and -7). All caspases exist as inactive zymogens (procaspases) and their activation requires proteolytic activity during apoptosis. An effector caspase is activated by an initiator caspase through cleavage at the internal Asp residue, leading to disassembly of the large and small subunit; the inhibitor caspase, however, is activated by dimerization via the signal obtained from death receptors (reviewed in [3]). Aberrant caspase expression and/or activation have been implicated in various types of cancer. High caspase-3 expression has been demonstrated in acute myelogenous leukaemia (AML) compared to the normal counterparts [4]. In comparison, reduced caspase-3 expression has been observed in moderately and poorly differentiated prostate cancer specimens compared with well-differentiated prostate tumours and normal tissues [5]. Loss of caspase-8 mRNA/protein expression has been demonstrated in high grade small cell lung cancers, neuroendocrine lung cancers and paediatric neuroblastoma. Previous studies have suggested that caspase-8 might act as a tumour suppressor in certain types of lung cancer and neuroblastoma [6, 7]. Studies have also shown that CASP8 gene polymorphism may contribute to the increased risk of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma [8, 9]. In breast cancer, in vitro studies have shown that dysregulated caspase activity is involved in chemotherapeutic resistance. One study demonstrated that restoration of caspase-3 expression, in caspase-3 deficient MCF-7 breast cancer cells, can sensitise to doxorubicin- and etoposide-induced apoptosis, suggesting caspase-3 deficiency may be a possible mechanism for chemoresistance [10, 11]. Furthermore, restoration of expression in MCF-7 cells restored cytochrome c- and caspase-8 -mediated activation of pro-caspase-9 [12]. The calpain family, a group of proteolytic intracellular cysteine proteases (EC 3.4.22.17 Clan CA, family C02), are calcium-activated and expressed in a wide range of cells and tissues [13]. Calpastatin is the only known endogenous inhibitor of calpain (reviewed in [14]). The calpain system is involved in the apoptotic machinery through interaction with caspase family members; and a number of caspase family members can be proteolytically processed by calpains. Inhibition of calpain in various tumour cell lines results in p53-dependent apoptosis, cell cycle arrest, and caspase activation (i.e. caspases-2, -3, -6, -8, and -9) [15]. Caspase-7 and -10 can be activated by calpain cleavage [16], calpain-mediated cleavage of caspase-12 is required for endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress-induced apoptosis [17] and degradation of caspase-9 by calpain results in an inactivated form of the enzyme, unable to activate caspase-3 [18]. Previous studies have demonstrated that high caspase-3 expression is significantly associated with improved prognosis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer and hepatocellular carcinomas [19, 20]. The expression of caspase-3 and -6 in breast cancer was not associated with clinical outcome in a small study (n = 210) [21]. Calpain-1, -2 and calpastatin are extensively expressed in breast tumours, ovarian tumours, gastro-oesophageal tumours, pancreas, bile duct and ampulla tumours, and are associated with clinical outcome or treatment response [22-27]. The aim of the current study was to assess caspase-3 and -8 protein expression, their prognostic potential in early invasive breast cancer; as well as the importance of combinatorial caspase/calpain protein expression.

Materials and methods

Clinical samples

This immunohistochemical based study was performed using a cohort of 1902 early stage breast cancer patients treated at Nottingham University Hospitals between 1986 and 1998 with long term follow-up. Information on clinical history and outcome was maintained on a prospective basis, and patientsclinical history and tumour characteristics were assessed in a standardised manner, including age at diagnosis, tumour size, histologic stage and grade, Nottingham prognostic index (NPI), lymphovascular invasion (LVI), oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status. The median age of the patients was 55 years (ranging from 18 to 72) and the median follow-up time was 177 months (ranging from 1 to 308 months). 63.2% (1203 of 1902) of patients had stage I disease. Patients were managed under a uniform protocol, where all underwent mastectomy (n = 1067, 56.1%) or wide local excision (n = 819, 43.1%) and approximately half of the patients received radiotherapy (n = 1025, 53.9%). Systemic adjuvant treatment was given dependent upon NPI values, ER and menopausal status. Patients with an NPI value <3.4 did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy, whereas patients with an NPI value of 3.4 or above were chosen for CMF chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil, n = 320, 16.8%) if they were ER negative or premenopausal; patients with ER positive disease were candidates for hormone therapy (n = 674, 35.4%). Breast cancer-specific survival was defined as the time interval (in months) from the start of primary surgery to death resultant from breast cancer. ER, PR and HER2 status were available for this cohort and have been described previously [28]. HER2 expression was determined by immunohistochemistry with fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) used as the arbiter in cases with an immunohistochemistry score of 2. Basal like phenotype was defined as the detection of cytokeratin (CK)-5/6 and/or CK-14 expression in 10% or more of invasive breast tumour cells, irrespective of ER, PR or HER2 status [29]. This study is reported in accordance with REMARK criteria [30]. Nottingham Research Ethics Committee 2 approved the project under “Development of a molecular genetic classification of breast cancer R&D (No. 03HI01 REC Ref.C202313)”. The clinicopathologic variables of the cohort are shown in Table 1.
Table 1

Clinicopathologic variables of patient cohort

VariablesNo. (%)VariablesNo. (%)
Age (mean ± SD, years)54.25 (±9.77)ER status
 ≤40165 (8.7%) Positive1370 (72.0%)
 >401736 (91.3%) Negative476 (25.0%)
 ND1 (0.1%) ND57 (3.0%)
Tumour size (mm)2.06 ± 1.14PR status
 ≤201185 (62.3%) Positive1035 (54.4%)
 >20708 (37.2%) Negative739 (38.9%)
 ND9 (0.5%) ND128 (6.7%)
Tumour stageHER2 status
 I1203 (63.2%) Positive243 (12.8%)
 II531 (27.9%) Negative1602 (84.2%)
 III160 (8.4%) ND57 (3.0%)
 ND8 (0.4%)Basal status
Tumour grade Positive368 (19.3%)
 I346 (18.2%) Negative1390 (73.1%)
 II632 (33.2%) ND144 (7.6%)
 III915 (48.1%)Triple negative status
 ND9 (0.5%) Positive315 (16.6%)
NPI4.16 ± 1.18 Negative1516 (79.7%)
 ≤3.4619 (32.5%) ND71 (3.7%)
 3.41–5.4948 (49.8%)Breast cancer-specific survival
 >5.4324 (17.0%) Alive1064 (55.9%)
 ND11 (0.6%) Dead505 (26.6%)
Lymphovascular invasion ND333 (17.5%)
 Positive492 (25.9%)Recurrence
 Negative1070 (56.3%) Present752 (39.5%)
 ND340 (17.9%) Not present1103 (58.0%)
Operation type ND47 (2.5%)
 Mastectomy1067 (56.1%)Distant metastasis
 WLE lumpectomy819 (43.1%) Present579 (30.4%)
 ND16 (0.8%) Not present1310 (68.9%)

Continuous data are shown as mean ± standard deviation (SD). NPI Nottingham prognostic value, WLE wide local excision, ER oestrogen receptor, PR progesterone receptor, HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, ND not determined

Clinicopathologic variables of patient cohort Continuous data are shown as mean ± standard deviation (SD). NPI Nottingham prognostic value, WLE wide local excision, ER oestrogen receptor, PR progesterone receptor, HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, ND not determined

TMA construction and Immunohistochemistry

Caspase-3 and -8 protein expression was investigated using tissue microarrays (TMAs) by immunohistochemistry. All calpain and calpastatin protein expression was assessed previously [23, 31]. A single 0.6 mm tissue core was used for each patient with the core being taken from a representative tumour area as assessed by a specialist breast cancer histopathologist, as described previously [32]. Freshly cut 4 μm sections of the TMAs were used for immunohistochemistry. Primary antibody specificity was confirmed using Western blotting, on a range of breast cancer cell lines, prior to immunohistochemistry. Validation of anti-caspase-3 and -8 antibody specificity was conducted by Western blotting and data is shown in Fig. 1. Equal protein loading was used however without a loading control no firm conclusions can be drawn regarding the relative expression of the proteins across the different cell lines. Validation of anti-calpain-1, -2, -9 and calpastatin antibody specificities were established in previously published studies [22, 23, 31]. It should be noted that the anti-caspase-3 and -8 antibodies used in the current study can detect both full-length and cleaved forms of the respective proteins. Briefly, following dewaxing in xylene and rehydration in ethanol, antigen retrieval was performed in 0.01 mol/L sodium citrate buffer (pH 6.0) in a microwave, 750 W for 10 min followed by 450 W for 10 min. Caspase-3 and -8 staining were achieved using a Vectastain Universal Elite ABC Kit (Vector Laboratories, USA) and a Novolink Polymer Detection System (Leica, Denmark) following the manufacturers’ protocols, respectively. Caspase-3 (1:100, Cell Signalling Technology, USA, 9662) was applied to the tissue for 1 h at room temperature, and caspase-8 (1:25, Thermo Scientific, USA, PA1-29159) was applied to the tissue for overnight at 4 °C. Immunohistochemical reactions were visualised with 3,3′-diaminobenzidine and counterstained with haematoxylin, dehydrated and fixed in xylene followed by mounting with DPX. Positive controls constituted early stage breast tumour composite sections of varying grade and negative control omitted primary antibody.
Fig. 1

Antibody validation for anti-caspase-3 (panel A) and anti-caspase-8 (panel B). A single specific band, of 35 kDa, was obtained for caspase-3, and a single specific band, of 62 kDa, obtained for caspase-8. Expression, as shown, was assessed across a range of breast cancer cell lines, representing different phenotypes (MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-435, T-47D, MCF-7 and SKBR3), human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC), fibroblasts (MRC-5), cervical cancer (HeLa) and/or colorectal cancer cells (SW480’s). Expression of caspase-3 was absent, as expected, from MCF-7’s

Antibody validation for anti-caspase-3 (panel A) and anti-caspase-8 (panel B). A single specific band, of 35 kDa, was obtained for caspase-3, and a single specific band, of 62 kDa, obtained for caspase-8. Expression, as shown, was assessed across a range of breast cancer cell lines, representing different phenotypes (MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-435, T-47D, MCF-7 and SKBR3), human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC), fibroblasts (MRC-5), cervical cancer (HeLa) and/or colorectal cancer cells (SW480’s). Expression of caspase-3 was absent, as expected, from MCF-7’s Staining was assessed at 200× magnification following high-resolution scanning (Nanozoomer Digital Pathology Scanner, Hamamatsu Photonics). Protein expression was assessed using a semi-quantitative immunohistochemistry H-score as previously described [33]. The staining intensity was assessed as: none (0), weak (1), medium (2) and strong (3), and H-scores were calculated by multiplying the percentage of positive areas by the staining intensity, giving rise to a score ranging between 0 and 300. 30% of scores were examined by a second independent assessor, blind to clinicopathological and survival endpoints. Good concordance was demonstrated between both scorers (single measure intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.898 for caspase-3 and 0.732 for caspase-8). The cut point used to dichotomise immunohistochemical scores was determined in a non-biased fashion using X-tile software [34].

Statistical analysis

The relationship between categorised protein expression and clinicopathologic factors were examined using Pearson’s Chi square test of association (χ2) or Fisher’s exact test if a cell count was <5 in a 2 × 2 table. Spearman’s rank test was performed to assess for correlations between the different protein expression levels. Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan–Meier method and significance determined using the Log-rank test. Multivariate survival analysis used the Cox proportional hazards regression model. All differences were considered statistically significant at the level of P < 0.05. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 22.0 software.

Results

Immunohistochemical staining

Representative staining patterns are shown in Fig. 2. Caspase-3 and -8 expression was mainly granular/diffuse cytoplasmic staining with some heterogeneity between adjacent tumour cells, varying from weak to intense staining. Nuclear staining was observed in a small number of cases and some inflammatory cells were observed to express caspase-3 and -8. A few TMA cores were not assessed due to insufficient tumour or the core being missing, a total number of 1421 cases for caspase-3, and 1402 cases for caspase-8 were assessed. Caspase-3 had a median H-score of 80 ± 74 and ranged from 0 to 260; caspase-8 had a median H-score of 185 ± 43 and ranged from 0 to 275. The X-tile cut point for caspase-3 was 128, with 556 (39.8%) cases having high expression and 855 (60.2%) cases having low expression. The X-tile cut point for caspase-8 was 183, with 736 (52.5%) cases having high expression and 666 (47.5%) cases having low expression.
Fig. 2

Representative photomicrographs at 10× magnification with 20× magnification inset panel and scale bar representing 100 μm. a Caspase-3 high expression; b caspase-3 low expression; c caspase-8 high expression; d caspase-8 low expression

Representative photomicrographs at 10× magnification with 20× magnification inset panel and scale bar representing 100 μm. a Caspase-3 high expression; b caspase-3 low expression; c caspase-8 high expression; d caspase-8 low expression Spearman’s rank correlation was used to assess the correlation between caspase-3/-8, calpains, and calpastatin protein expression (Table 2). As immunohistochemical expression data for calpain-1, -2, -9 and calpastatin, were available, and as there are links in the literature between both systems it was decided to explore for potential correlations between calpain system protein expression and caspase-3/-8 protein expression. It would be interesting to further investigate the correlations between caspase-3/-8 and other calpain family members once such data becomes available. Correlations were found between the expression of caspase-3 and calpain-1 (r = 0.062, P = 0.047) and between caspase-8 and calpastatin (r = 0.086, P = 0.008); although statistically significant, these correlations are of marginal biological relevance, as reflected by the low r values. In breast cancer subgroup specific settings, significant correlations were found between caspase-3 and calpain-2 expression in the basal-like subgroup (r = 0.143, P = 0.045); caspase-3 and calpain-2 expression in the triple-negative subgroup (r = 0.194, P = 0.01); caspase-8 and calpain-9 (r = 0.25, P = 0.019), caspase-8 and calpastatin (r = 0.22, P = 0.009) in the HER2+ subgroup (Table 2) but, as before, are of marginal biological relevance due to the low r values.
Table 2

Correlation between protein expressions in total and different subgroups

TotalHER2+Basal-likeTriple-negative
R-valueSig.R-valueSig.R-valueSig.R-valueSig.
Caspase-3
 Calpain-10.062 0.047 0.1260.1220.0470.5060.0760.308
 Calpain-20.0620.051−0.0570.490.143 0.045 0.194 0.01
 Calpain-90.0310.4430.0880.408−0.0670.467−0.0560.557
 Calpastatin−0.0530.099−0.0280.7450.0580.4180.0090.908
Caspase-8
 Calpain-1−0.0530.092−0.0670.4020.050.485−0.0030.966
 Calpain-20.0170.6060.0620.4610.0880.2280.0130.868
 Calpain-90.0470.2510.25 0.019 −0.0050.957−0.0890.358
 Calpastatin0.086 0.008 0.22 0.009 0.0470.515−0.0090.904

Significant P-values are indicated by bold font

Correlation between protein expressions in total and different subgroups Significant P-values are indicated by bold font

Relationship with clinicopathologic criteria

The expression of both caspase-3 and -8 was assessed for associations with clinicopathologic variables. High caspase-3 expression was significantly associated with HER2 positivity (χ2=6.624; df=1; P = 0.01). No significant association was found between caspase-8 expression and clinicopathologic variables (Table 3). High caspase-3 expression was significantly associated with the occurrence of death due to breast cancer (χ2=6.711; df=1; P = 0.01), recurrence (χ2=8.111; df=1; P = 0.004) and distant metastasis (χ2 = 5.724; df=1; P = 0.017) (Table 3).
Table 3

Correlations between caspase-3/-8 protein expressions and clinicopathologic variables

VariablesCaspase-3 (N = 1421)Caspase-8 (N = 1402)
LowHigh P-valueLowHigh P-value
Age (years)
 ≤4091 (6.4%)45 (3.2%)0.0966 (4.7%)65 (4.6%)0.494
 >40763 (53.7%)521 (36.7%)600 (42.8%)670 (47.8%)
Tumour size (mm)
 ≤20512 (36.2%)341 (24.1%)0.943410 (29.4%)432 (30.9%)0.241
 >20339 (23.9%)224 (15.8%)252 (18.1%)302 (21.6%)
Tumour stage
 I517 (36.5%)353 (24.9%)0.227419 (30.0%)453 (32.4%)0.578
 II267 (18.9%)156 (11.0%)191 (13.7%)212 (15.2%)
 III68 (4.8%)55 (3.9%)52 (3.7%)69 (4.9%)
Tumour grade
 I148 (10.5%)97 (6.9%)0.979122 (8.7%)114 (8.2%)0.219
 II274 (19.4%)180 (12.7%)219 (15.7%)234 (16.8%)
 III429 (30.3%)288 (20.3%)321 (23.0%)386 (27.7%)
NPI
 ≤3.4251 (17.7%)175 (12.4%)0.416203 (14.6%)215 (15.4%)0.516
 3.41–5.4452 (31.9%)280 (19.8%)348 (24.9%)378 (27.1%)
 >5.4148 (10.5%)109 (7.7%)111 (8.0%)140 (10.0%)
LVI
 Positive238 (20.1%)162 (13.7%)0.456117 (15.3%)207 (17.9%)0.747
 Negative484 (40.9%)300 (25.3%)349 (30.1%)425 (36.7%)
Operation type
 Mastectomy493 (35.0%)325 (23.1%)0.99378 (27.2%)429 (30.9%)0.511
 WLE356 (25.3%)235 (16.7%)283 (20.4%)299 (21.5%)
ER status
 Positive614 (44.5%)394 (28.6%)0.526463 (34.1%)532 (39.1%)0.439
 Negative219 (15.9%)152 (11.0%)178 (13.1%)186 (13.7%)
PR status
 Positive467 (35.1%)293 (22.0%)0.35349 (26.4%)400 (30.3%)0.469
 Negative337 (25.3%)235 (17.6%)278 (21.0%)294 (22.3%)
HER2 status
 Positive100 (7.2%)94 (6.8%) 0.01 84 (6.2%)110 (8.1%)0.201
 Negative729 (52.7%)460 (33.3%)565 (41.4%)606 (44.4%)
Basal status
 Positive164 (12.4%)110 (8.3%)0.938140 (10.7%)128 (9.8%)0.098
 Negative630 (47.7%)418 (31.6%)482 (37.0%)553 (42.4%)
Triple-negative status
 Positive154 (11.2%)96 (7.0%)0.604124 (9.2%)122 (9.0%)0.27
 Negative673 (48.9%)452 (32.9%)516 (38.1%)593 (43.8%)
Breast cancer-specific survival
 Alive577 (41.7%)342 (24.7%) 0.01 444 (32.6%)464 (34.0%)0.157
 Dead259 (18.7%)207 (14.9%)204 (15.0%)251 (18.4%)
Recurrence
 Present318 (23.0%)255 (18.5%) 0.004 263 (19.3%)305 (22.4%)0.496
 Not present510 (36.9%)298 (21.6%)382 (28.1%)411 (30.2%)
Distant metastasis
 Present250 (17.7%)201 (14.2%) 0.017 204 (14.7%)240 (17.2%)0.431
 Not present597 (42.3%)364 (25.8%)457 (32.8%)491 (35.3%)

NPI Nottingham Prognostic Index, LVI lymphovascular invasion (determined using IHC), WLE wide local excision, ER oestrogen receptor, PR progesterone receptor, HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. Correlations between caspase-3/-8 protein expression and clinicopathologic variables was assessed using Pearson’s Chi square test of association (χ²) or Fisher’s exact test if in a 2 × 2 tables and cell count was <5. Significant P-values are indicated by bold font

Correlations between caspase-3/-8 protein expressions and clinicopathologic variables NPI Nottingham Prognostic Index, LVI lymphovascular invasion (determined using IHC), WLE wide local excision, ER oestrogen receptor, PR progesterone receptor, HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. Correlations between caspase-3/-8 protein expression and clinicopathologic variables was assessed using Pearson’s Chi square test of association (χ²) or Fisher’s exact test if in a 2 × 2 tables and cell count was <5. Significant P-values are indicated by bold font

Relationship with clinical outcome

High caspase-3, but not caspase-8, expression was significantly associated with adverse disease-specific survival (P = 0.008 and 0.056 respectively) (Fig. 3a, b). In multivariate analysis, including potentially confounding factors of age, tumour size, stage, grade, NPI, lymphovascular invasion, ER, PR and HER2 status (with individual Kaplan–Meier statistics of P < 0.05 for all variables), caspase-3 expression remained significant for breast cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio (HR) 1.347, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.086–1.670; P = 0.007) (Table 4). The caspase-3 and -8 expression was combined to assess their relationship with survival. The combination of high caspase-3 and -8 expression was significantly associated with adverse breast cancer-specific survival in the total patient cohort (P = 0.021) (Fig. 3c); significance was not, however, retained in multivariate analysis using the previous confounding variables (HR 1.069, 95% CI 0.967–1.182; P = 0.194).
Fig. 3

Kaplan–Meier survival curve analysis showing caspase-3 (panel A), caspase-8 (panel B) and combinatorial caspase-3 and -8 expression (panel C), related breast cancer-specific survival; significance was determined using the log rank test. Numbers below the graph show patients at risk at the specified months. Panel A low caspase-3 (a) and high caspase-3 (b) expression. Panel B low caspase-8 (a) and high caspase-8 (b) expression. Panel C low caspase-3/-8 (a), high caspase-3/low caspase-8 (b), low caspase-3/high caspase-8 (c), high caspase-3/high caspase-8 (d)

Table 4

Cox proportional hazards analysis for breast cancer-specific survival

Sig.Exp(B)95% CI for Exp(B)
LowerUpper
Age0.9391.0130.7241.418
Tumour size 0.003 1.5391.1632.037
Tumour stage<0.001 1.7791.3752.302
Tumour grade 0.001 1.5951.1972.125
Nottingham prognosis index0.7820.9440.6291.418
Lymphovascular invasion<0.001 1.5951.2761.993
ER status 0.009 1.5281.1092.104
PR status 0.001 0.6240.4690.831
HER2 status 0.035 1.3621.0221.816
Caspase-3 0.007 1.3471.0861.670

Exp (B) hazard ratio, 95% CI 95% confidence interval, ER oestrogen receptor, PR progesterone receptor, HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. Significant P-values are indicated by bold font

Kaplan–Meier survival curve analysis showing caspase-3 (panel A), caspase-8 (panel B) and combinatorial caspase-3 and -8 expression (panel C), related breast cancer-specific survival; significance was determined using the log rank test. Numbers below the graph show patients at risk at the specified months. Panel A low caspase-3 (a) and high caspase-3 (b) expression. Panel B low caspase-8 (a) and high caspase-8 (b) expression. Panel C low caspase-3/-8 (a), high caspase-3/low caspase-8 (b), low caspase-3/high caspase-8 (c), high caspase-3/high caspase-8 (d) Cox proportional hazards analysis for breast cancer-specific survival Exp (B) hazard ratio, 95% CI 95% confidence interval, ER oestrogen receptor, PR progesterone receptor, HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. Significant P-values are indicated by bold font Caspase-3 and -8 expressions were examined for associations with breast cancer-specific survival in different breast cancer subgroups. When analysed in the total patient cohort, caspase-3 expression showed interest in HER2 positive, triple-negative and basal-like diseases (P < 0.001, P = 0.004 or P = 0.009, respectively, Fig. 4a–c); whilst caspase-8 expression showed interest in HER2+ and basal-like disease (P < 0.001 or P = 0.039, respectively, Fig. 4d, f). This was further investigated in the individual subgroups (HER2 positive, triple-negative and basal-like). Neither caspase-3 nor caspase-8 protein expression was significantly associated with breast cancer-specific survival in any of the groups (data not shown). In comparison, caspase-3 expression was associated with survival in receptor positive (ER, PR or HER2) and non-basal like subgroups (P = 0.001 and 0.029, Fig. 5a, b). In the receptor positive subgroup, significance was retained in multivariate analysis (HR 1.465, 95% CI 1.150–1.867; P = 0.002), including confounding factors of age, tumour size, stage, grade, NPI, lymphovascular invasion, ER, PR and HER2 status (with individual Kaplan–Meier statistics of P < 0.05 for all variables). The significance was also retained in non-basal like patients for multivariate analysis (HR 1.385, 95% CI 1.079–1.777; P = 0.01), including the same confounding factors as in receptor positive subgroup (with individual Kaplan–Meier statistics of P < 0.05 for all variables).
Fig. 4

Kaplan–Meier survival curves for breast cancer specific-survival based upon caspase-3/caspase-8 expression, showing as different subgroups. Panel A caspase-3 expression with HER2 negative and HER2 positive diseases. Panel B caspase-3 expression with non-triple negative and triple-negative diseases. Panel C caspase-3 expression with non-basal like diseases and basal-like diseases. Panel D caspase-8 expression with HER2 negative and HER2 positive diseases. Panel E caspase-8 expression with non-triple negative and triple-negative diseases. Panel F caspase-8 expression with non-basal like diseases and basal-like diseases

Fig. 5

Kaplan–Meier survival curves for breast cancer-specific survival based upon caspase-3 expression in receptor positive subgroup (panel A) and non-basal like subgroup (panel B). Significance was determined using the log rank test. Numbers below the graph show patients at risk at the specified months. Panel A, B high caspase-3 expression (a) and low caspase-3 expression (b)

Kaplan–Meier survival curves for breast cancer specific-survival based upon caspase-3/caspase-8 expression, showing as different subgroups. Panel A caspase-3 expression with HER2 negative and HER2 positive diseases. Panel B caspase-3 expression with non-triple negative and triple-negative diseases. Panel C caspase-3 expression with non-basal like diseases and basal-like diseases. Panel D caspase-8 expression with HER2 negative and HER2 positive diseases. Panel E caspase-8 expression with non-triple negative and triple-negative diseases. Panel F caspase-8 expression with non-basal like diseases and basal-like diseases Kaplan–Meier survival curves for breast cancer-specific survival based upon caspase-3 expression in receptor positive subgroup (panel A) and non-basal like subgroup (panel B). Significance was determined using the log rank test. Numbers below the graph show patients at risk at the specified months. Panel A, B high caspase-3 expression (a) and low caspase-3 expression (b)

Combinational biomarker analysis

The relationship between caspase and calpain expression with breast cancer-specific survival was explored. The expression of proteins was grouped (e.g. high caspase/high calpain, low caspase/low calpain, high caspase/low calpain, and low caspase/high calpain). Patients with high caspase-3/high calpain-1 expression, high caspase-3/high calpain-2 expression, high caspase-3/low calpastatin expression, or high caspase-8/low calpain-1 expression had significantly worse breast cancer-specific survival (P = 0.005, 0.049, 0.02, and 0.02 respectively) (Table 5). The significance of caspase-3/calpastatin for breast cancer-specific survival was retained in multivariate analysis (HR 1.241, 95% CI 1.053–1.462; P = 0.01), when considering previous confounding factors. No other significant association was found between any combinational protein expressions and breast cancer-specific survival in the total patient cohort (data not shown). In subgroup analyses, a significant association was found between caspase-3/calpain-1 and breast cancer-specific survival in the basal-like subgroup (P = 0.034), the same pattern shown in the total group (high caspase-3/high calpain-1) that was associated with poor prognosis. However, significance was not retained from multivariate analysis, using previous confounding factors.
Table 5

Kaplan Meier survival analyses for breast cancer-specific survival based upon combinatorial protein expression

Calpain-1Calpain-2Calpain-9Calpastatin
P-valuePatients (N) P-valuePatients (N) P-valuePatients (N) P-valuePatients (N)
Total
 Caspase-3 0.005 994 0.049 9980.139589 0.02 951
 Caspase-8 0.02 9710.0569430.0725700.085930
HER2+
 Caspase-30.5751450.8551410.248890.244135
 Caspase-80.3821420.7061380.779860.49133
Basal-like
 Caspase-3 0.034 1970.0591930.2531180.228194
 Caspase-80.251900.0541850.3081140.322187
TNeg
 Caspase-30.1091750.2921720.2051080.654175
 Caspase-80.5791660.2351630.0711030.291166

Kaplan–Meier survival analyses for breast cancer-specific survival based upon combined protein expression in the total patient cohort and different breast tumour phenotypes. Significance was determined using the log-rank test. Significant P values are indicated by bold font. HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, TNeg triple-negative

Kaplan Meier survival analyses for breast cancer-specific survival based upon combinatorial protein expression Kaplan–Meier survival analyses for breast cancer-specific survival based upon combined protein expression in the total patient cohort and different breast tumour phenotypes. Significance was determined using the log-rank test. Significant P values are indicated by bold font. HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, TNeg triple-negative

Discussion

High caspase-3 expression is significantly associated with adverse disease-specific survival (P = 0.008); and remains significant in multivariate analysis when considering potential confounding factors (P = 0.007). Caspase-8 was not associated with breast cancer-specific survival. Several studies have suggested that caspase-3 overexpression and enhanced apoptotic activity, is observed in breast carcinomas compared with controls; however, none have shown significant associations between protein expression and patient prognosis [21, 35]. One study demonstrated that 75% (35 out of 46) of breast tumours lacked caspase-3 transcript and protein expression, and the remaining samples had substantially decreased expression [11]. This finding was in contrast with previous reports by Nakopoulou et al., in which high caspase-3 protein expression was present in 75.2% (103 out of 137) of invasive breast tumour samples, in comparison with non-neoplastic breast tissues [36]. Results from the current study suggest that high caspase-3 expression is associated with adverse breast cancer-specific survival in breast cancer patients. No associations were observed between caspase-8 and clinicopathological criteria. High caspase-3 expression was significantly associated with HER2 positive tumours (P = 0.01). Associations between HER2 positive tumours and caspase-3 expression have not been reported previously; however, activation of HER2 can trigger downstream signalling via the phosphatidylinositol kinase 3 (PI3K/AKT) pathways, and AKT signalling has been shown to reduce the activity of caspase-9, the downstream effector of caspase-3 [37, 38]. Expression of phosphorylated AKT and phosphorylated caspase-9 are significantly correlated in gastric and colorectal cancer [39]. As discussed before, caspase-3 is the downstream effector of caspase-9; it may be possible that caspase-3 interacts with other substrates and potentially regulates apoptosis through the HER2 signalling pathway. The prognostic significance of caspase-3 expression in different breast cancer phenotypes was also examined. The Kaplan–Meier subgroup analyses demonstrated a significant association in receptor positive (ER, PR or HER2) and non-basal like subgroups, and remained significant in multivariate analysis. In the case of caspase-8, no significant association was observed in any individual subgroup. The results further emphasised the prognostic importance of caspase-3 in receptor positive and non-basal like patients. Calpain plays an important role in tumorigenesis, and there is a close link between calpain and caspase protein families. We have previously shown that high calpain-2 expression is associated with worse prognosis in patients with basal-like or triple-negative diseases [23] and that calpain-1 expression is associated with trastuzumab response in HER2+ breast cancer patients [27, 33]. Calpain and caspase protein expression was combined to assess associations with breast cancer-specific survival. High caspase-3/high calpain-1, high caspase-3/high calpain-2 and high caspase-3/low calpastatin expression significantly associated with adverse breast cancer-specific survival in the total patient cohort; and combinational caspase-3/calpain-1 has important prognostic value in basal-like patients. Only caspase-3/calpastatin expression was identified as an independent factor for breast cancer-specific survival from multivariate analysis. It is important to note that this study focuses on the expression levels of functionally significant proteases, without assessing their activity. It would be interesting to investigate the relationship between patient prognosis and active caspases and calpains as part of any future work. Antibodies are available for caspase-3 and -8 and different methodologies are used to detect their activities; however no published studies have investigated their expression in breast cancer [40, 41]. Antibodies have been described that are able to determine calpain activity through the detection of specific calpain-cleaved products; however these antibodies have not been optimised for use in human tumour tissue [42, 43]. The current study demonstrates that high caspase-3 expression is significantly associated with adverse breast cancer-specific survival, and remains so in multivariate analysis including potential confounding factors. Caspase-8 expression is not associated with breast cancer-specific survival. Further subgroup analyses demonstrate that caspase-3 and -8 expression are important in distinct breast cancer phenotypes. Caspase-3 and -8 expression was combined with calpain expression to provide important information on evaluating patient outcome in basal-like phenotype disease. Further validation is warranted to confirm if determining caspase-3 with/without calpain expression would be of clinical benefit.
  43 in total

Review 1.  Interaction of calpastatin with calpain: a review.

Authors:  Amanda Wendt; Valery F Thompson; Darrel E Goll
Journal:  Biol Chem       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.915

2.  High-throughput protein expression analysis using tissue microarray technology of a large well-characterised series identifies biologically distinct classes of breast cancer confirming recent cDNA expression analyses.

Authors:  Dalia M Abd El-Rehim; Graham Ball; Sarah E Pinder; Emad Rakha; Claire Paish; John F R Robertson; Douglas Macmillan; Roger W Blamey; Ian O Ellis
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Human mature red blood cells express caspase-3 and caspase-8, but are devoid of mitochondrial regulators of apoptosis.

Authors:  C P Berg; I H Engels; A Rothbart; K Lauber; A Renz; S F Schlosser; K Schulze-Osthoff; S Wesselborg
Journal:  Cell Death Differ       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 15.828

4.  Down-regulation of caspase 3 in breast cancer: a possible mechanism for chemoresistance.

Authors:  Eswaran Devarajan; Aysegul A Sahin; Jack S Chen; Raghu R Krishnamurthy; Neeraj Aggarwal; Anne-Marie Brun; Anna Sapino; Fan Zhang; Dhawal Sharma; Xiao-He Yang; Ann D Tora; Kapil Mehta
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2002-12-12       Impact factor: 9.867

Review 5.  Mechanisms of caspase activation and inhibition during apoptosis.

Authors:  Yigong Shi
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 17.970

6.  Immunohistochemical expression of caspase-3 as an adverse indicator of the clinical outcome in human breast cancer.

Authors:  L Nakopoulou; P Alexandrou; K Stefanaki; E Panayotopoulou; A C Lazaris; P S Davaris
Journal:  Pathobiology       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Phosphorylation status of Akt and caspase-9 in gastric and colorectal carcinomas.

Authors:  Akiko Sangawa; Michiko Shintani; Naoki Yamao; Shingo Kamoshida
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2014-05-15

8.  The biological, clinical and prognostic implications of p53 transcriptional pathways in breast cancers.

Authors:  Tarek M Abdel-Fatah; Desmond G Powe; Johnson Agboola; Martyna Adamowicz-Brice; Roger W Blamey; Maria A Lopez-Garcia; Andrew R Green; Jorge S Reis-Filho; Ian O Ellis
Journal:  J Pathol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 7.996

9.  Low calpain-9 is associated with adverse disease-specific survival following endocrine therapy in breast cancer.

Authors:  Jillian Davis; Stewart G Martin; Poulam M Patel; Andrew R Green; Emad A Rakha; Ian O Ellis; Sarah J Storr
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2014-12-23       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK).

Authors:  L M McShane; D G Altman; W Sauerbrei; S E Taube; M Gion; G M Clark
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2005-08-22       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  31 in total

1.  Effect of Aβ protein on inhibiting proliferation and promoting apoptosis of retinal pigment epithelial cells.

Authors:  Zi Ye; Shou-Zhi He; Zhao-Hui Li
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 1.779

2.  Investigating the Impact of Optimized Trans-Cinnamic Acid-Loaded PLGA Nanoparticles on Epithelial to Mesenchymal Transition in Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Noha M Badawi; Yasmeen M Attia; Dina M El-Kersh; Olfat A Hammam; Maha K A Khalifa
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2022-02-18

3.  Emerging perspectives on mitochondrial dysfunctioning and inflammation in epileptogenesis.

Authors:  Shareen Singh; Thakur Gurjeet Singh
Journal:  Inflamm Res       Date:  2021-10-15       Impact factor: 4.575

Review 4.  Targeting apoptotic caspases in cancer.

Authors:  Ashley Boice; Lisa Bouchier-Hayes
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Res       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 4.739

5.  Anti-tumor activity of nanomicelles encapsulating CXCR4 peptide antagonist E5.

Authors:  Xiaocui Fang; Hanyi Xie; Hongyang Duan; Ping Li; Maryam Yousaf; Haiyan Xu; Yanlian Yang; Chen Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Caspase polymorphisms and prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Song Zhang; Qianyi Xiao; Zhuqing Shi; Guopeng Yu; Xiao-Pin Ma; Haitao Chen; Pengyin Zhang; Suqin Shen; He-Xi Ge Sai-Yin; Tao-Yang Chen; Pei-Xin Lu; Neng-Jin Wang; Weihua Ren; Peng Huang; Jun Xie; Carly Conran; S Lilly Zheng; Long Yu; Jianfeng Xu; De-Ke Jiang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-04-28       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Metformin Triggers Autophagy to Attenuate Drug-Induced Apoptosis in NSCLC Cells, with Minor Effects on Tumors of Diabetic Patients.

Authors:  Zhiguang Xiao; Silvia Gaertner; Alicia Morresi-Hauf; Rebecca Genzel; Thomas Duell; Axel Ullrich; Pjotr G Knyazev
Journal:  Neoplasia       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 5.715

8.  Caspase-3 expression in tumorigenesis and prognosis of buccal mucosa squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Jer-Shyung Huang; Cheng-Mei Yang; Jyh-Seng Wang; Huei-Han Liou; I-Chien Hsieh; Guan-Cheng Li; Sin-Jhih Huang; Chih-Wen Shu; Ting-Ying Fu; Yun-Chung Lin; Luo-Ping Ger; Pei-Feng Liu
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-08-24

9.  Antitumor, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities of kaempferol and its corresponding glycosides and the enzymatic preparation of kaempferol.

Authors:  Jingqiu Wang; Xianying Fang; Lin Ge; Fuliang Cao; Linguo Zhao; Zhenzhong Wang; Wei Xiao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Cell Survival Is Regulated via SOX9/BCL2L1 Axis in HCT-116 Colorectal Cancer Cell Line.

Authors:  Erik Lizárraga-Verdugo; Erika Ruiz-García; César López-Camarillo; Mercedes Bermúdez; Mariana Avendaño-Félix; Rosalío Ramos-Payán; Geovanni Romero-Quintana; Alfredo Ayala-Ham; Carlos Villegas-Mercado; Carlos Pérez-Plasencia; Maribel Aguilar-Medina
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2020-04-29       Impact factor: 4.375

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.