Christopher Kobierzycki1, Jedrzej Grzegrzolka2, Natalia Glatzel-Plucinska2, Aleksandra Piotrowska2, Andrzej Wojnar3, Beata Smolarz4, Hanna Romanowicz4, Piotr Dziegiel2,5. 1. Division of Histology and Embryology, Department of Human Morphology and Embryology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland christopher.kobierzycki@umed.wroc.pl. 2. Division of Histology and Embryology, Department of Human Morphology and Embryology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland. 3. Department of Pathomorphology, Lower Silesian Oncology Centre, Wroclaw, Poland. 4. Department of Pathology, Polish Mother's Memorial Hospital Research Institute, Lodz, Poland. 5. Department of Physiotherapy, University School of Physical Education, Wroclaw, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: An impaired cell-cycle control and genetic material organization are crucial elements of carcinogenesis. p16 is a tumor suppressor protein which decelerates promotion of the cells from G1 to S phase, whereas special AT-rich sequence-binding protein 1 (SATB1) is a nuclear matrix protein that binds to specific regions of the DNA and ensures its proper organization and function. Increased levels of both markers are observed in various types of cancers. The aim of this study was to investigate the expression of p16 and SATB1 proteins in regard to expression of the Ki-67 antigen and available clinicopathological data (i.a. receptor status, staging and grading). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed on 130 samples of archived invasive ductal breast cancers. Immunohistochemical reactions were performed on freshly prepared tissue microarrays and subsequently scanned by a histologic scanner. Reactions were evaluated separately in the cytoplasm (p16c, SATB1c) and nucleus (p16n, SATB1n, Ki-67) with use of a quantification software under researcher supervision. RESULTS: Expression was observed for Ki-67 in 100%, p16c in 90%, p16n in 89.2%, SATB1c in 98.5% and SATB1n in 87.7% of cancer cases. Statistical analysis showed strong positive correlations: p16c vs. p16n and SATB1c vs. SATB1n (p<0.001 for both) and weak positive correlations: p16c vs. SATB1c and p16c vs. SATB1n (p=0.008, p=0.027; respectively). Expression of p16n was stronger in G1 vs. G2 (p=0.034) while Ki-67 expression was stronger in cases with negative progesterone receptor status (p=0.011). All other analyzed associations were statistically insignificant. CONCLUSION: A weak association between immunohistochemical expression of p16 and SATB1 indicated limited possibility of their independent usage. Further studies concerning determination of a wider panel of proteins controlling cell cycle should be considered. Copyright
BACKGROUND/AIM: An impaired cell-cycle control and genetic material organization are crucial elements of carcinogenesis. p16 is a tumor suppressor protein which decelerates promotion of the cells from G1 to S phase, whereas special AT-rich sequence-binding protein 1 (SATB1) is a nuclear matrix protein that binds to specific regions of the DNA and ensures its proper organization and function. Increased levels of both markers are observed in various types of cancers. The aim of this study was to investigate the expression of p16 and SATB1 proteins in regard to expression of the Ki-67 antigen and available clinicopathological data (i.a. receptor status, staging and grading). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed on 130 samples of archived invasive ductal breast cancers. Immunohistochemical reactions were performed on freshly prepared tissue microarrays and subsequently scanned by a histologic scanner. Reactions were evaluated separately in the cytoplasm (p16c, SATB1c) and nucleus (p16n, SATB1n, Ki-67) with use of a quantification software under researcher supervision. RESULTS: Expression was observed for Ki-67 in 100%, p16c in 90%, p16n in 89.2%, SATB1c in 98.5% and SATB1n in 87.7% of cancer cases. Statistical analysis showed strong positive correlations: p16c vs. p16n and SATB1c vs. SATB1n (p<0.001 for both) and weak positive correlations: p16c vs. SATB1c and p16c vs. SATB1n (p=0.008, p=0.027; respectively). Expression of p16n was stronger in G1 vs. G2 (p=0.034) while Ki-67 expression was stronger in cases with negative progesterone receptor status (p=0.011). All other analyzed associations were statistically insignificant. CONCLUSION: A weak association between immunohistochemical expression of p16 and SATB1 indicated limited possibility of their independent usage. Further studies concerning determination of a wider panel of proteins controlling cell cycle should be considered. Copyright
Authors: Arvydas Laurinavicius; Andrew R Green; Aida Laurinaviciene; Giedre Smailyte; Valerijus Ostapenko; Raimundas Meskauskas; Ian O Ellis Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2015-12-01
Authors: Emmi Peurala; Peppi Koivunen; Kirsi-Maria Haapasaari; Risto Bloigu; Arja Jukkola-Vuorinen Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2013-01-21 Impact factor: 6.466