The prognostic importance of cathepsin D and E-cadherin in early breast cancer: A single-institution experience

Jacobson-Raber,Galia; Lazarev,Irena; Novack,Victor; Mermershtein,Willmosh; Baumfeld,Yael; Geffen,David  B.; Sion-Vardy,Netta; Ariad,Samuel

doi:10.3892/ol.2011.393

The prognostic importance of cathepsin D and E-cadherin in early breast cancer: A single-institution experience

Authors:
- Galia Jacobson-Raber
- Irena Lazarev
- Victor Novack
- Willmosh Mermershtein
- Yael Baumfeld
- David B. Geffen
- Netta Sion-Vardy
- Samuel Ariad
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Oncology, Soroka Medical Center, Beer-Sheva 84101, Israel, Department of Clinical Research, Soroka Medical Center, Beer-Sheva 84101, Israel, Department of Pathology, Soroka Medical Center, Beer-Sheva 84101, Israel
Published online on: August 24, 2011 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2011.393
Pages: 1183-1190

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Molecular tools have increasingly been used for decision-making in patients with early breast cancer (EBC). Nevertheless, simple tools such as immunohistochemistry may still be required in particular cases to complement traditional and molecular prognosticators. In this study, the prognostic significance of three well-known immunohistochemical biomarkers, cathepsin D, E-cadherin and Ki67, was studied in 270 patients with EBC, followed by a median time of 126 months in a single institution. Histological examination was performed to confirm the histopathological diagnosis and select specimens. The specimens were evaluated using immunohistochemistry and survival curves were plotted. Results revealed the following patient characteristics: node-negative/1-3 lymph nodes in 228 (86%) patients, hormone receptor-positive in 217 (80%); triple-negative in 31 (11%), and Her2-overexpression in 23 (9%) patients. Breast cancer-related events occurred in 37 patients (14%). A total of 217 patients (80%) survived. Receiver operating characteristic analysis for breast cancer-specific survival showed an area under curve for the clinicopathological model of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.64-0.86), 0.79 (95% CI, 0.68-0.90) for the three-biomarker model, and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.92) for the E-cadherin and cathepsin D only model. We propose that a simple prognostic model based on combined scores of E-cadherin and cathepsin D may aid treatment decisions in patients with EBC.

View Figures

View References

1	Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, et al: Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin. 60:277–300. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar
2	Burstein HJ, Harris JR and Morrow M: Malignant tumors of the breast. Cancer: Principles and Practice of Oncology. DeVita VT, Hellman S and Rosenberg SA: 8th edition. Lippincot Williams & Wilkins; Philadelphia: pp. 1606–1654. 2008
3	Van Belle V, van Calster B, Brouckaert O, et al: Qualitative assessment of the progesterone receptor and Her2 improves the Nottingham Prognostic Index up to 5 years after breast cancer diagnosis. J Clin Oncol. 28:4129–4134. 2010.PubMed/NCBI
4	Goldhirsch A, Ingle JN, Gelber RD, et al: Panel members. Thresholds for therapies: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2009. Ann Oncol. 20:1319–1329. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	National Institutes of Health. Consensus Development Conference Statement adjuvant therapy for breast cancer, November 1–3, 2000. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 5–15. 2001.
6	Adjuvant! Onlinehttp://www.adjuvantonline.com/index.jsp.
7	Wang Y, Klijn JG, Zhang Y, et al: Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer. Lancet. 365:671–679. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al: A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 351:2817–2826. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, et al: Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 20:3628–3636. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Elston CW and Ellis IO: Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 19:403–410. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar
11	Pauletti G, Dandekar S, Rong H, et al: Assessment of methods for tissue-based detection of the HER-2/neu alteration in human breast cancer: a direct comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. J Clin Oncol. 18:3651–3664. 2000.PubMed/NCBI
12	Detere S, Saccani G, Jotti L, et al: A ‘quickscore’ method for immunohistochemical semiquantitation: validation for oestrogen receptor in breast carcinomas. J Clin Pathol. 48:876–879. 1995.
13	McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, et al: Reporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK). Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2:416–422. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar
14	Foekens JA, Look MP, Bolt-de Vries J, et al: Cathepsin-D in primary breast cancer: prognostic evaluation involving 2810 patients. Br J Cancer. 79:300–307. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Ohri SS, Vashishta A, Proctor M, et al: The propeptide of cathepsin D increases proliferation, invasion and metastasis of breast cancer cells. Int J Oncol. 32:491–498. 2008.PubMed/NCBI
16	Sagulenko V, Muth D, Sagulenko E, et al: Cathepsin D protects human neuroblastoma cells from doxorubicin-induced cell death. Carcinogenesis. 29:1869–1877. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Prasad CP, Rath G, Mathur S, et al: Expression analysis of E-cadherin, Slug and GSK3beta in invasive ductal carcinoma of breast. BMC Cancer. 9:3252009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Frixen UH, Behrens J, Sachs M, et al: E-cadherin-mediated cell-cell adhesion prevents invasiveness of human carcinoma cells. J Cell Biol. 113:173–185. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Goodwin M and Yap AS: Classical cadherin adhesion molecules: coordinating cell adhesion, signaling and the cytoskeleton. J Mol Histol. 35:839–844. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Nelson WJ and Nusse R: Convergence of Wnt, β-catenin, and cadherin pathways. Science. 303:1483–1487. 2004.
21	Roarty K and Rosen JM: Wnt and mammary stem cells: hormones cannot fly wingless. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 10:643–649. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Van Diest PJ, van der Wall E and Baak JP: Prognostic value of proliferation in invasive breast cancer: a review. J Clin Pathol. 57:675–681. 2004.PubMed/NCBI
23	Albain KS, Paik S and van’t Veer L: Prediction of adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in endocrine responsive, early breast cancer using multigene assays. Breast. 18(Suppl 3): 141–145. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Geffen DB, Abu-Ghanem S, Sion-Vardy N, et al: The impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on decision making about adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer in an oncology practice with a unified treatment policy. Ann Oncol. March;2011.(E-pub ahead of print).
25	Soerjomataram I, Louwman MW, Ribot JG, et al: An overview of prognostic factors for long-term survivors of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 107:309–330. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Payne SJ, Bowen RL, Jones JL, et al: Predictive markers in breast cancer – the present. Histopathology. 52:82–90. 2008.