| Literature DB >> 29304771 |
Asmus Heumann1, Nina Heinemann1, Claudia Hube-Magg1, Dagmar S Lang1, Katharina Grupp2, Martina Kluth1, Sarah Minner1, Christina Möller-Koop1, Markus Graefen3, Hans Heinzer3, Maria Christina Tsourlakis1, Waldemar Wilczak1, Corinna Wittmer1, Frank Jacobsen1, Hartwig Huland3, Ronald Simon4, Thorsten Schlomm3,5, Guido Sauter1, Stefan Steurer1, Patrick Lebok1, Andrea Hinsch1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer anti-estrogen resistance 1 (BCAR1/p130cas) is a hub for diverse oncogenic signaling cascades and promotes tumor development and progression.Entities:
Keywords: BCAR1; Immunohistochemistry; Prognosis; Prostate cancer; Tissue microarray
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29304771 PMCID: PMC5756403 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-017-3956-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Fig. 1Representative image of BCAR1 expression (a) negative, (b) weak, (c) moderate, (d) strong staining at 100×, and 400× (inset) magnification
Fig. 2Association between BCAR1 staining and ERG-status
Association between BCAR1 staining and prostate cancer clinical characteristics
| Parameter | BCAR1 (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N evaluable | Negative | Weak | Moderate | Strong | ||
| All cancers | 9472 | 22.4 | 15.9 | 23.2 | 38.5 | |
| Tumor stage | ||||||
| pT2 | 6170 | 23.7 | 15.9 | 23.1 | 37.4 |
|
| pT3a | 2138 | 20.4 | 16.1 | 24.2 | 39.3 | |
| pT3b-pT4 | 1160 | 19.5 | 15.6 | 21.7 | 43.2 | |
| Gleason score | ||||||
| ≤ 3 + 3 | 2186 | 27.2 | 19.0 | 23.1 | 30.8 |
|
| 3 + 4 | 5133 | 21.9 | 14.9 | 23.5 | 39.8 | |
| 3 + 4 Tertiary 5 | 345 | 22.9 | 14.5 | 23.8 | 38.8 | |
| 4 + 3 | 893 | 18.4 | 17.6 | 21.7 | 42.3 | |
| 4 + 3 Tertiary 5 | 464 | 15.1 | 14.4 | 22.4 | 48.1 | |
| ≥ 4 + 4 | 445 | 20.9 | 11.7 | 23.2 | 44.3 | |
| Lymph node metastasis | ||||||
| N0 | 5262 | 20.9 | 16.1 | 23.2 | 40.0 |
|
| N+ | 494 | 21.3 | 12.8 | 21.5 | 44.5 | |
| Preoperative PSA level (ng/ml) | ||||||
| < 4 | 1480 | 16.9 | 15.0 | 24.0 | 44.1 |
|
| 4–10 | 5475 | 21.6 | 15.9 | 23.5 | 39.0 | |
| 10–20 | 1817 | 26.0 | 15.9 | 22.5 | 35.6 | |
| > 20 | 638 | 32.1 | 17.6 | 19.0 | 31.4 | |
| Surgical margin | ||||||
| Negative | 7566 | 22.1 | 15.8 | 23.3 | 38.8 |
|
| Positive | 1794 | 23.4 | 16.2 | 22.9 | 37.6 | |
Association between BCAR1 expression and Ki67-labeling index in different Gleason scores
| Gleason score | BCAR1 expression | Ki67- | labeling | index | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Mean | ± SD | |||
| All | Negative | 1422 | 1.6 | 0.07 |
|
| Weak | 1063 | 2.5 | 0.08 | ||
| Moderate | 1467 | 2.8 | 0.07 | ||
| Strong | 2390 | 3.5 | 0.05 | ||
| ≤3 + 3 | Negative | 391 | 1.3 | 0.10 |
|
| Weak | 267 | 2.3 | 0.13 | ||
| Moderate | 295 | 2.4 | 0.12 | ||
| Strong | 406 | 2.8 | 0.10 | ||
| 3 + 4 | Negative | 747 | 1.5 | 0.08 |
|
| Weak | 552 | 2.4 | 0.10 | ||
| Moderate | 846 | 2.6 | 0.08 | ||
| Strong | 1387 | 3.3 | 0.06 | ||
| 3 + 4 Tertiary 5 | Negative | 61 | 2.0 | 0.32 |
|
| Weak | 45 | 2.6 | 0.37 | ||
| Moderate | 59 | 3.4 | 0.32 | ||
| Strong | 96 | 3.9 | 0.25 | ||
| 4 + 3 | Negative | 115 | 1.8 | 0.29 |
|
| Weak | 115 | 2.8 | 0.29 | ||
| Moderate | 126 | 3.0 | 0.27 | ||
| Strong | 233 | 4.2 | 0.20 | ||
| 4 + 3 Tertiary 5 | Negative | 50 | 2.0 | 0.53 |
|
| Weak | 47 | 3.4 | 0.54 | ||
| Moderate | 72 | 3.8 | 0.44 | ||
| Strong | 147 | 4.8 | 0.31 | ||
| ≥4 + 4 | Negative | 58 | 3.5 | 0.63 |
|
| Weak | 36 | 4.0 | 0.80 | ||
| Moderate | 68 | 4.6 | 0.58 | ||
| Strong | 118 | 5.5 | 0.44 |
Fig. 3Association between BCAR1 staining and 10q23 (PTEN), 6q21 (MAP3K7), 5q21 (CHD1), 3p13 (FOXP1) deletion in (a) all cancers, (b) the ERG-negative and (c) -positive subset
Fig. 4Kaplan-Meier plots of prostate specific antigen (PSA) recurrence after radical prostatectomy and BCAR1 staining in (a) all cancers, (b) the ERG-negative and (c) -positive subset. Low level combines cases with weak and moderate BCAR1 expression, which had similar prognosis
Hazard ratio of PSA recurrence-free survival of established prognostic parameters and BCAR1 expression
| Scenario | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyzable (N) | 8522 | 8662 | 8778 | 5362 | |
| Preoperative | Gleason score biopsy | ||||
| 3 + 4 vs. ≤3 + 3 | 1.98 *** | ||||
| 4 + 3 vs. 3 + 4 | 1.62 *** | ||||
| ≥ 4 + 4 vs. 4 + 3 | 1.30 *** | ||||
| Clinical tumor (cT) stage | |||||
| T2a vs. T1c | 1.33 *** | 1.33 *** | |||
| T2b vs. T2a | 1.47 *** | 1.40 *** | |||
| T3a vs. T2c | 0.62 * | 0.65 * | |||
| Preoperative PSA level | |||||
| 4–10 vs. <4 | 1.45 *** | 1.38 ** | 1.21 * | 1.17 | |
| 10–20 vs. 4–10 | 1.52 *** | 1.43 *** | 1.28 *** | 1.19 * | |
| > 20 vs. 10–20 | 1.69 *** | 1.53 *** | 1.20 * | 1.19 * | |
| BCAR1 expression | |||||
| Weak vs. negative | 1.17 * | 1.14 | 1.16 * | 1.29 * | |
| Moderate vs. weak | 0.91 | 0.92 | 0.88 | 0.78 * | |
| Strong vs. moderate | 1.14 * | 1.08 | 1.12 | 1.13 | |
| Postoperative | Gleason score prostatectomy | ||||
| 3 + 4 vs. ≤3 + 3 | 3.05 *** | 2.48 *** | 2.24 *** | ||
| 4 + 3 vs. 3 + 4 | 2.56 *** | 2.13 *** | 2.01 *** | ||
| ≥ 4 + 4 vs. 4 + 3 | 1.70 *** | 1.20 * | 1.11 | ||
| Pathological tumor (pT) stage | |||||
| T3a vs. T2 | 2.00 *** | 2.03 *** | |||
| T3b vs. T3a | 1.72 *** | 1.55 *** | |||
| T4 vs. T3b | 1.38 * | 1.35 | |||
| Surgical margin (R) status | |||||
| R1 vs. R0 | 1.44 *** | 1.31 *** | |||
| Lymph node (N) status | |||||
| N+ vs. N0 | 1.44 *** | ||||
Scenario 1 combines preoperatively available parameter (preoperative Gleason score obtained on the original biopsy, clinical tumor (cT) stage, and preoperative PSA) with the postoperative BCAR1 expression. In scenario 2 the biopsy Gleason is replaced by the Gleason score obtained on radical prostatectomy (RPE). In scenario 3 cT-stage is superseded by pathological tumor (pT) stage and surgical margin (R) status. In scenario 4 the lymph node (pN) stage is added. Asterisk indicate significance level: * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.001, and *** p ≤ 0.0001