| Literature DB >> 35658894 |
Vesna Ivanović1, Nasta Dedović-Tanić2,3, Zorka Milovanović4, Bratislav Stojiljković5, Miroslav Demajo2, Vesna Mandušić2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Metastatic Axillary Lymph Node (mALN) status is currently the most important prognostic factor in the management of primary breast cancer (BC). Thus, development of specimens which enable identification of new mALN markers, involved in the progression of the disease, are of considerable interest. The specific aim of this work was to describe the method of establishment of Metastatic Axillary Nodal Cell Suspension and its fractionation, termed Fractionated Nodal Cell Suspension (FNCS), into nuclear and cytosolic extracts to enable determination of protein expression levels of nuclear cFOS and cytosolic Transforming Growth Factor β1 (TGFβ1) in BC patients.Entities:
Keywords: Axillary lymph nodes; FNCS, Fractionated Nodal Cell Suspension; TGFβ1; cFOS
Year: 2022 PMID: 35658894 PMCID: PMC9166494 DOI: 10.1186/s12575-022-00167-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biol Proced Online ISSN: 1480-9222 Impact factor: 7.717
Fig. 1Workflow of the experimental design for the present study, to establish and fractionate Metastatic Nodal Cell Suspension specimen termed FNCS, which enables determination of protein expression level of nuclear cFOS and cytosolic TGFβ1
Fig. 2HeLa cell fractionation model illustrated by time curves after serum treatment for: A nuclear cFOS protein, presented by black circles (●), and B cytosolic TGF β1 protein, presented by black triangles (▲). The extracts were obtained by fractionation of growing HeLa cells as described in Methods. All the time points were simultaneously processed and assayed in a single cFOS or TGF-β1 ELISA microplate. Each point was run in duplicate and represents the mean value of two wells. The intra-assay (n = 6) and inter-assay (n = 4) reproducibility was 7 and 15%, respectively
Fig. 3Test of internal control: to verify that the detected cFOS and TGFβ1 markers were derived from HeLa cell nucleus and cytoplasm, respectively. Histograms represent the two time points (t = 2 & t = 4 hrs) selected from time curves presented in Fig. 2 and the two markers measured in nuclear extracts (designated as N2& N4) and cytosolic extracts (designated as C2&C4): A cFOS oncoprotein levels in nuclear versus cytosolic HeLa cell extracts and B TGF-β1 levels in nuclear versus cytosolic HeLa cell extracts
Clinical and pathohistological characteristics of BC patients from whom metastatic ALNs were dissected
| Characteristics | Patients’ number | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 74 | 39 | 70 | 52 | 48 | 66 | |
| Post | Pre | Post | Post | Pre | Post | |
| 0 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 8 | |
| 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 8 | |
| 0 | 0 | 1a | 0 | 1+ | 1+ | |
| TNBC | TNBC | nonTNBC | nonTNBC | nonTNBC | nonTNBC | |
| III | II | II | II | II | II | |
| ILC/ IAC | IDC | ILC | ILC | ILC | ILC | |
| IIIB | IIIA | IIIA | IIIA | II | II | |
| 3d/8 | 4/18, pni+,f | 7/13, pni+,f | 7/14 | 1/8, pni+,f | 1/15 | |
| pT4de, N2, M0 | pT1a, N2a, M0 | pT2, N2a, M0 | pT: pTU1g: 2, N2a, M0 pTU2g: 1c | pT1c, N1a, M0 | pT1c, N1a, M0 | |
aGrading scale used to evaluate ER and PR ranged from 0 to 8. The cut-off value was 3, above which the markers were considered positive as proposed previously20
bAssessment of histological grade of primary breast tumor was based on Scarff-Bloom-Richardson system (I-III)
cPatients were staged according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 6th edition staging manual [23]
dMetastasis observed in 3 out of 8 ALNs
elarge primary tumor, “d”, with malignant infiltration of surrounding skin
fpni+, malignant infiltration of perinodal adipose tissue
gTU1 and TU2 signify two primary tumor lesions diagnozed simultaneously on the same breast of the indicated BC patient
Fig. 4Comparative images of H&E stained morphology for axillary lymph nodes of patient #1 in Table 1: A Normal ALN tissue (nALN) as control, without metastatic deposits and B Autologous metastatic ALN (mALN) with near total replacement of lymph nodal tissue by nodules of metastasis (black dots)
Fig. 5Comparative scatter diagrams of ALN biomarkers of BC patients described in Tables 1 & 2. A diameter of tumor deposits of metastatic ALN; horizontal bar represent median value; Median 13.5; Mean 23.86 ± S.E.M. 12.74; number of samples = 5. B Levels of nuclear cFOS detected in FNCS-derived extracts of nonmalignant ALN tissue as a control versus that of the autologous metastatic ALN tissue; horizontal bars represent median values for nALN versus mALN: Control: Median 2.81; Mean 4.89 ± SEM 1.88; number of samples = 6; Metastatic: Median 13.2; Mean 12.47 ± SEM 1.63; number of samples = 3; Median significance p > 0.05. Here no significant difference between C and M. C. Levels of cytosolic TGFβ1 in FNCS-derived extracts of nomal ALN tissue as a control versus that of the autologous metastatic ALN tissue: horizontal bars represent median values; p, level of significance for nALN versus mALN: Control: Median 0.48; Mean 0.55 ± SEM 0.08; number of samples = 6; Metastatic: Median 1.05; Mean 1.41 ± SEM 0.40; number of samples = 6. Median significantly different, p < 0.05
Individual parameter values measured in the selected single metastatic ALN (mALN) for each of the BC patient presented in Table 1 and described in Methods and Fig. 4
| Parameter | Patients’ number | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 80.0b | 9.5 | 14.5 | 13.5 | 1.8 | n.a.d | |
| 80% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 30% | n.a. | |
| none | none | none | none | positive | n.a. | |
| 790 | 720 | 190 | 660 | 630 | 530 | |
| 18.6 | 3.6 | 5.2 | 9.0 | 3.8 | 3.9 | |
| 3.2 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 1.7 | 1.1 | 0.8 | |
| 6.5 | 1.2 | 1.7 | 2.5 | 0.9 | 1.2 | |
| 15.50 | 8.75 | 13.20 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 3.60 | 1.20 | 0.90 | 1.02 | 0.67 | 1.08 | |
aThe size of tumor deposits was assessed from the H&E slices of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded ALN tissue
b“mALN1” essentially exhibited the conglomerate size: 80 × 50 × 40 mm, with malignant infiltration of surrounding ALN tissue
cobserved morphologically
dnot available due to much too small ALN size and the entire “mALN 6” was used for cFOS and TGFβ1 analysis
Fig. 6Image of the sieving device (100 μm cell strainer) for pulverization and filtration of ALN tissue to obtain cell suspension free from fat and connective tissue (for details see Methods)