期刊论文详细信息
Diagnostic Pathology
Immunohistochemistry profiles of breast ductal carcinoma: factor analysis of digital image analysis data
Juozas Lazutka3  Sonata Jarmalaite3  Darius Dasevicius1  Valerijus Ostapenko2  Aida Laurinaviciene2  Arvydas Laurinavicius1 
[1] Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, M.K.Ciurlionio 21, LT-03101 Vilnius, Lithuania;Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, Santariskiu 1, LT-08660 Vilnius, Lithuania;Faculty of Natural Sciences, Vilnius University, M.K.Ciurlionio 21, LT-03101 Vilnius, Lithuania
关键词: Special AT-rich sequence-binding protein 1;    Hypoxia-inducible factor 1α;    Progesteron receptors;    Estrogen receptors;    Androgen receptors;    Breast cancer;    Digital pathology;    Immunohistochemistry;   
Others  :  808136
DOI  :  10.1186/1746-1596-7-27
 received in 2012-01-28, accepted in 2012-03-16,  发布年份 2012
PDF
【 摘 要 】

Background

Molecular studies of breast cancer revealed biological heterogeneity of the disease and opened new perspectives for personalized therapy. While multiple gene expression-based systems have been developed, current clinical practice is largely based upon conventional clinical and pathologic criteria. This gap may be filled by development of combined multi-IHC indices to characterize biological and clinical behaviour of the tumours. Digital image analysis (DA) with multivariate statistics of the data opens new opportunities in this field.

Methods

Tissue microarrays of 109 patients with breast ductal carcinoma were stained for a set of 10 IHC markers (ER, PR, HER2, Ki67, AR, BCL2, HIF-1α, SATB1, p53, and p16). Aperio imaging platform with the Genie, Nuclear and Membrane algorithms were used for the DA. Factor analysis of the DA data was performed in the whole group and hormone receptor (HR) positive subgroup of the patients (n = 85).

Results

Major factor potentially reflecting aggressive disease behaviour (i-Grade) was extracted, characterized by opposite loadings of ER/PR/AR/BCL2 and Ki67/HIF-1α. The i-Grade factor scores revealed bimodal distribution and were strongly associated with higher Nottingham histological grade (G) and more aggressive intrinsic subtypes. In HR-positive tumours, the aggressiveness of the tumour was best defined by positive Ki67 and negative ER loadings. High Ki67/ER factor scores were strongly associated with the higher G and Luminal B types, but also were detected in a set of G1 and Luminal A cases, potentially indicating high risk patients in these categories. Inverse relation between HER2 and PR expression was found in the HR-positive tumours pointing at differential information conveyed by the ER and PR expression. SATB1 along with HIF-1α reflected the second major factor of variation in our patients; in the HR-positive group they were inversely associated with the HR and BCL2 expression and represented the major factor of variation. Finally, we confirmed high expression levels of p16 in Triple-negative tumours.

Conclusion

Factor analysis of multiple IHC biomarkers measured by automated DA is an efficient exploratory tool clarifying complex interdependencies in the breast ductal carcinoma IHC profiles and informative value of single IHC markers. Integrated IHC indices may provide additional risk stratifications for the currently used grading systems and prove to be useful in clinical outcome studies.

Virtual Slides

The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1512077125668949 webcite

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Laurinavicius et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
20140708140714340.pdf 792KB PDF download
Figure 8. 28KB Image download
Figure 7. 23KB Image download
Figure 6. 23KB Image download
Figure 5. 53KB Image download
Figure 4. 25KB Image download
Figure 3. 54KB Image download
Figure 2. 23KB Image download
Figure 1. 186KB Image download
【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

【 参考文献 】
  • [1]Prat A, Ellis MJ, Perou CM: Practical implications of gene-expression-based assays for breast oncologists. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011, 9(1):48-57.
  • [2]Rakha EA, Ellis IO: Modern classification of breast cancer: should we stick with morphology or convert to molecular profile characteristics. Adv Anat Pathol 2011, 18(4):255-267.
  • [3]Rakha EA, Reis-Filho JS, Baehner F, Dabbs DJ, Decker T, Eusebi V, Fox SB, Ichihara S, Jacquemier J, Lakhani SR, et al.: Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. Breast Cancer Res 2010, 12(4):207.
  • [4]Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Thurlimann B, Senn HJ: Strategies for subtypes-dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 2011, 22(8):1736-1747.
  • [5]Kaufmann M, Pusztai L: Use of standard markers and incorporation of molecular markers into breast cancer therapy: Consensus recommendations from an International Expert Panel. Cancer 2011, 117(8):1575-1582.
  • [6]Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, Allred DC, Hagerty KL, Badve S, Fitzgibbons PL, Francis G, Goldstein NS, Hayes M, et al.: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2010, 134(6):907-922.
  • [7]Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ, Dowsett M, Fitzgibbons PL, Hanna WM, Langer A, et al.: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007, 131(1):18-43.
  • [8]Tadrous PJ: On the concept of objectivity in digital image analysis in pathology. Pathology 2010, 42(3):207-211.
  • [9]Laurinavicius A, Laurinaviciene A, Dasevicius D, Elie N, Plancoulaine B, Bor C, Herlin P: Digital image analysis in pathology: benefits and obligation. Anal Cell Pathol (Amst) 2012, 35(2):75-78.
  • [10]Rakha EA, Reis-Filho JS, Ellis IO: Combinatorial biomarker expression in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010, 120(2):293-308.
  • [11]Blows FM, Driver KE, Schmidt MK, Broeks A, van Leeuwen FE, Wesseling J, Cheang MC, Gelmon K, Nielsen TO, Blomqvist C, et al.: Subtyping of breast cancer by immunohistochemistry to investigate a relationship between subtype and short and long term survival: a collaborative analysis of data for 10,159 cases from 12 studies. PLoS Med 2010, 7(5):e1000279.
  • [12]Cuzick J, Dowsett M, Pineda S, Wale C, Salter J, Quinn E, Zabaglo L, Mallon E, Green AR, Ellis IO, et al.: Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the genomic health recurrence score in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29(32):4273-4278.
  • [13]Madabhushi A, Agner S, Basavanhally A, Doyle S, Lee G: Computer-aided prognosis: predicting patient and disease outcome via quantitative fusion of multi-scale, multi-modal data. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2011, 35(7-8):506-514.
  • [14]Ali HR, Dawson SJ, Blows FM, Provenzano E, Leung S, Nielsen T, Pharoah PD, Caldas C: A Ki67/BCL2 index based on immunohistochemistry is highly prognostic in ER-positive breast cancer. J Pathol 2012, 226(1):97-107.
  • [15]Soria D, Garibaldi JM, Ambrogi F, Green AR, Powe D, Rakha E, Macmillan RD, Blamey RW, Ball G, Lisboa PJ, et al.: A methodology to identify consensus classes from clustering algorithms applied to immunohistochemical data from breast cancer patients. Comput Biol Med 2010, 40(3):318-330.
  • [16]Ismail K: Unravelling factor analysis. Evid Based Ment Health 2008, 11(4):99-102.
  • [17]Laurinaviciene A, Dasevicius D, Ostapenko V, Jarmalaite S, Lazutka J, Laurinavicius A: Membrane connectivity estimated by digital image analysis of HER2 immunohistochemistry is concordant with visual scoring and fluorescence in situ hybridization results: algorithm evaluation on breast cancer tissue microarrays. Diagn Pathol 2011, 6(1):87. BioMed Central Full Text
  • [18]Elston CW, 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 1991, 19(5):403-410.
  • [19]Dawson SJ, Makretsov N, Blows FM, Driver KE, Provenzano E, Le Quesne J, Baglietto L, Severi G, Giles GG, McLean CA, et al.: BCL2 in breast cancer: a favourable prognostic marker across molecular subtypes and independent of adjuvant therapy received. Br J Cancer 2010, 103(5):668-675.
  • [20]Abdel-Fatah TM, Powe DG, Ball G, Lopez-Garcia MA, Habashy HO, Green AR, Reis-Filho JS, Ellis IO: Proposal for a modified grading system based on mitotic index and Bcl2 provides objective determination of clinical outcome for patients with breast cancer. J Pathol 2010, 222(4):388-399.
  • [21]Callagy GM, Webber MJ, Pharoah PD, Caldas C: Meta-analysis confirms BCL2 is an independent prognostic marker in breast cancer. BMC Cancer 2008, 8:153. BioMed Central Full Text
  • [22]Kallel-Bayoudh I, Hassen HB, Khabir A, Boujelbene N, Daoud J, Frikha M, Sallemi-Boudawara T, Aifa S, Rebai A: Bcl-2 expression and triple negative profile in breast carcinoma. Med Oncol 2011, 28(Suppl 1):S55-61.
  • [23]Aleskandarany MA, Rakha EA, Macmillan RD, Powe DG, Ellis IO, Green AR: MIB1/Ki-67 labelling index can classify grade 2 breast cancer into two clinically distinct subgroups. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011, 127(3):591-599.
  • [24]Fasanella S, Leonardi E, Cantaloni C, Eccher C, Bazzanella I, Aldovini D, Bragantini E, Morelli L, Cuorvo LV, Ferro A, et al.: Proliferative activity in human breast cancer: Ki-67 automated evaluation and the influence of different Ki-67 equivalent antibodies. Diagn Pathol 2011, 6(Suppl 1):S7. BioMed Central Full Text
  • [25]Elzagheid A, Kuopio T, Pyrhonen S, Collan Y: Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future? Diagn Pathol 2006, 1:41. BioMed Central Full Text
  • [26]Han HJ, Russo J, Kohwi Y, Kohwi-Shigematsu T: SATB1 reprogrammes gene expression to promote breast tumour growth and metastasis. Nature 2008, 452(7184):187-193.
  • [27]Patani N, Jiang W, Mansel R, Newbold R, Mokbel K: The mRNA expression of SATB1 and SATB2 in human breast cancer. Cancer Cell Int 2009, 9:18. BioMed Central Full Text
  • [28]Kohwi-Shigematsu T, Han HJ, Russo J, Kohwi Y: Re: The role of SATB1 in breast cancer pathogenesis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010, 102(24):1879-1880. author reply 1880-1871
  • [29]Iorns E, Hnatyszyn HJ, Seo P, Clarke J, Ward T, Lippman M: The role of SATB1 in breast cancer pathogenesis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010, 102(16):1284-1296.
  • [30]Yamayoshi A, Yasuhara M, Galande S, Kobori A, Murakami A: Decoy-DNA against special AT-rich sequence binding protein 1 inhibits the growth and invasive ability of human breast cancer. Oligonucleotides 2011, 21(2):115-121.
  • [31]Hanker LC, Karn T, Mavrova-Risteska L, Ruckhaberle E, Gaetje R, Holtrich U, Kaufmann M, Rody A, Wiegratz I: SATB1 gene expression and breast cancer prognosis. Breast 2011, 20(4):309-313.
  • [32]Keith B, Johnson RS, Simon MC: HIF1alpha and HIF2alpha: sibling rivalry in hypoxic tumour growth and progression. Nat Rev Cancer 2011, 12(1):9-22.
  • [33]Yamamoto Y, Ibusuki M, Okumura Y, Kawasoe T, Kai K, Iyama K, Iwase H: Hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha is closely linked to an aggressive phenotype in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008, 110(3):465-475.
  • [34]Bos R, van der Groep P, Greijer AE, Shvarts A, Meijer S, Pinedo HM, Semenza GL, van Diest PJ, van der Wall E: Levels of hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha independently predict prognosis in patients with lymph node negative breast carcinoma. Cancer 2003, 97(6):1573-1581.
  • [35]Oliveira-Costa JP, Zanetti JS, Silveira GG, Soave DF, Oliveira LR, Zorgetto VA, Soares FA, Zucoloto S, Ribeiro-Silva A: Differential expression of HIF-1alpha in CD44 + CD24-/low breast ductal carcinomas. Diagn Pathol 2011, 6:73. BioMed Central Full Text
  • [36]Schindl M, Schoppmann SF, Samonigg H, Hausmaninger H, Kwasny W, Gnant M, Jakesz R, Kubista E, Birner P, Oberhuber G: Overexpression of hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha is associated with an unfavorable prognosis in lymph node-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2002, 8(6):1831-1837.
  • [37]Dales JP, Beaufils N, Silvy M, Picard C, Pauly V, Pradel V, Formisano-Treziny C, Bonnier P, Giusiano S, Charpin C, et al.: Hypoxia inducible factor 1alpha gene (HIF-1alpha) splice variants: potential prognostic biomarkers in breast cancer. BMC Med 2010, 8:44. BioMed Central Full Text
  • [38]Subhawong AP, Subhawong T, Nassar H, Kouprina N, Begum S, Vang R, Westra WH, Argani P: Most basal-like breast carcinomas demonstrate the same Rb-/p16+ immunophenotype as the HPV-related poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinomas which they resemble morphologically. Am J Surg Pathol 2009, 33(2):163-175.
  • [39]Stefansson OA, Jonasson JG, Olafsdottir K, Hilmarsdottir H, Olafsdottir G, Esteller M, Johannsson OT, Eyfjord JE: CpG island hypermethylation of BRCA1 and loss of pRb as co-occurring events in basal/triple-negative breast cancer. Epigenetics: Official J DNA Methyl Soc 2011, 6(5):638-649.
  • [40]Stefansson OA, Jonasson JG, Olafsdottir K, Bjarnason H, Th Johannsson O, Bodvarsdottir SK, Valgeirsdottir S, Eyfjord JE: Genomic and phenotypic analysis of BRCA2 mutated breast cancers reveals co-occurring changes linked to progression. Breast Cancer Res 2011, 13(5):R95. BioMed Central Full Text
  • [41]Karray-Chouayekh S, Baccouche S, Khabir A, Sellami-Boudawara T, Daoud J, Frikha M, Jlidi R, Gargouri A, Mokdad-Gargouri R: Prognostic significance of p16INK4a/p53 in Tunisian patients with breast carcinoma. Acta Histochem 2011, 113(5):508-513.
  • [42]Arima Y, Hayashi N, Hayashi H, Sasaki M, Kai K, Sugihara E, Abe E, Yoshida A, Mikami S, Nakamura S, et al.: Loss of p16 expression is associated with the stem cell characteristics of surface markers and therapeutic resistance in estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer. Int J Cancer 2011, in press.
  • [43]Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Green AR, Lee AH, Robertson JF, Ellis IO: Prognostic markers in triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer 2007, 109(1):25-32.
  • [44]Tang D, Xu S, Zhang Q, Zhao W: The expression and clinical significance of the androgen receptor and E-cadherin in triple-negative breast cancer. Med Oncol 2011, in press.
  • [45]He J, Peng R, Yuan Z, Wang S, Peng J, Lin G, Jiang X, Qin T: Prognostic value of androgen receptor expression in operable triple-negative breast cancer: a retrospective analysis based on a tissue microarray. Med Oncol 2011, in press.
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:107次 浏览次数:23次