Fabian B T Kraus1, Nicole E Topalov2, E Deuster2, I Hysenaj2, D Mayr3, A Chelariu-Raicu2, S Beyer2, T Kolben2, A Burges2, S Mahner2, F Trillsch2, U Jeschke2,4, B Czogalla2. 1. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. Fabian.Kraus@med.uni-muenchen.de. 2. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. 3. Institute of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Despite recent advances in the treatment of ovarian cancer (OC), long-term remissions remain scarce. For a targeted approach, prognostic markers are indispensable for predicting survival and treatment response. Given their association with multiple hallmarks of cancer, histamine receptors (HR) are emerging as promising candidates. Here, we investigate their expression pattern and prognostic value in OC. METHODS: Specimens of 156 epithelial OC patients were collected during cytoreductive surgery at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, LMU, between 1990 and 2002 and combined in a tissue microarray. Immunohistochemical staining of the HR H1, H2, H3 and H4 was quantified by an immunoreactive score and linked with clinico-pathological data by Spearman's correlation. Via ROC curve analysis, optimal cut-off values for potential prognostic markers were defined. Overall survival (OS) was visualized in Kaplan-Maier curves and significances determined by log-rank testing. A Cox regression model was applied for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: HR H3 and H4 expression was restricted to the cytosol of OC cells, while H1 was also present in the nucleus. A significant association between HR H1, H3 and H4 expression with several clinico-pathological parameters was revealed. In addition, HR H1 and H3 expression correlated positively, HR H4 expression negatively with OS. In addition, HR H3 was identified as independent prognostic marker for OS. HR H2 expression had no prognostic value. CONCLUSIONS: HR H1, H3 and H4 could serve as potential predictors for OS of OC patients. Further research is warranted to elucidate their pathophysiologic role and their predictive and therapeutic potential in OC.
PURPOSE: Despite recent advances in the treatment of ovarian cancer (OC), long-term remissions remain scarce. For a targeted approach, prognostic markers are indispensable for predicting survival and treatment response. Given their association with multiple hallmarks of cancer, histamine receptors (HR) are emerging as promising candidates. Here, we investigate their expression pattern and prognostic value in OC. METHODS: Specimens of 156 epithelial OC patients were collected during cytoreductive surgery at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, LMU, between 1990 and 2002 and combined in a tissue microarray. Immunohistochemical staining of the HR H1, H2, H3 and H4 was quantified by an immunoreactive score and linked with clinico-pathological data by Spearman's correlation. Via ROC curve analysis, optimal cut-off values for potential prognostic markers were defined. Overall survival (OS) was visualized in Kaplan-Maier curves and significances determined by log-rank testing. A Cox regression model was applied for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: HR H3 and H4 expression was restricted to the cytosol of OC cells, while H1 was also present in the nucleus. A significant association between HR H1, H3 and H4 expression with several clinico-pathological parameters was revealed. In addition, HR H1 and H3 expression correlated positively, HR H4 expression negatively with OS. In addition, HR H3 was identified as independent prognostic marker for OS. HR H2 expression had no prognostic value. CONCLUSIONS: HR H1, H3 and H4 could serve as potential predictors for OS of OC patients. Further research is warranted to elucidate their pathophysiologic role and their predictive and therapeutic potential in OC.
Authors: Sanjiv S Agarwala; John Glaspy; Steven J O'Day; Malcolm Mitchell; John Gutheil; Eric Whitman; Rene Gonzalez; Evan Hersh; Lynn Feun; Robert Belt; Frank Meyskens; Kristoffer Hellstrand; Diana Wood; John M Kirkwood; Kurt R Gehlsen; Peter Naredi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bruno Blaya; Francesca Nicolau-Galmés; Shawkat M Jangi; Idoia Ortega-Martínez; Erika Alonso-Tejerina; Juan Burgos-Bretones; Gorka Pérez-Yarza; Aintzane Asumendi; María D Boyano Journal: Inflamm Allergy Drug Targets Date: 2010-07
Authors: Andreas du Bois; Alexander Reuss; Eric Pujade-Lauraine; Philipp Harter; Isabelle Ray-Coquard; Jacobus Pfisterer Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-03-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Bastian Czogalla; Maja Kahaly; Doris Mayr; Elisa Schmoeckel; Beate Niesler; Anna Hester; Christine Zeder-Göß; Thomas Kolben; Alexander Burges; Sven Mahner; Udo Jeschke; Fabian Trillsch Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2019-08-14 Impact factor: 3.989