ABSTRACT
Genome-wide analysis using microarrays has revolutionized breast cancer (BC) research. A substantial body of evidence supports the clinical utility of the 21-gene assay (Oncotype DX) and 70-gene assay (MammaPrint) to predict BC recurrence and the magnitude of benefit from chemotherapy. However, there is currently no genetic tool able to predict chemosensitivity and chemoresistance to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) during BC treatment. In this study, we explored the predictive value of DNA repair gene expression in the neoadjuvant setting. We selected 98 patients with BC treated with NACT. We assessed DNA repair expression in 98 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded core biopsy fragments used at diagnosis and in 32 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded post-NACT residual tumors using quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. The following genes were selected: BRCA1, PALB2, RAD51C, BRCA2, ATM, FANCA, MSH2, XPA, ERCC1, PARP1, and SNM1. Of 98 patients, 33 (33.7%) achieved pathologic complete response (pCR). The DNA expression of 2 genes assessed in pre-NACT biopsies (PALB2 and ERCC1) was lower in pCR than in non-pCR patients (P=0.005 and P=0.009, respectively). There was no correlation between molecular subtype and expression of DNA repair genes. The genes BRCA2 (P=0.009), ATM (P=0.004), FANCA (P=0.001), and PARP1 (P=0.011) showed a lower expression in post-NACT residual tumor samples (n=32) than in pre-NACT biopsy samples (n=98). The expression of 2 genes (PALB2 and ERCC1) was lower in pCR patients. These alterations in DNA repair could be considered suitable targets for cancer therapy.
ABSTRACT
The purpose of the present study was to identify the expression of p16INK4 in cervical cancer precursor lesions by immunohistochemistry and to correlate it with lesion grade and presence of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Cervical specimens from 144 women seen consecutively at the gynecology outpatient clinic of our institution from December 2003 to May 2005 were analyzed by cytopathology, histopathology, polymerase chain reaction for HPV-DNA, and p16INK4 immunostaining. Histologically normal biopsies, HPV-DNA negative by polymerase chain reaction, were used as control. HPV-DNA prevalence, including the control group, was 68.1 percent and the prevalence of p16INK4 expression was 55.0 percent. The percentage of cells stained by p16INK4 ranged from 10 to 100 percent, both in the group consisting of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)1/HPV specimens and in the group of CIN2/CIN3 specimens with P value of 0.0001. p16INK4 expression was 48.3 percent in the CIN1/HPV group, as opposed to 94.3 percent in the CIN2/CIN3 group (P = 0.001), showing a statistically significant difference between the two groups. The quantitative method used here is simple and less subjective than the different semiquantitative methods described in the literature. In view of the different definitions of a p16INK4-positive case, it is almost impossible to compare the findings reported by different investigators. This study confirms the association between p16INK4 and CIN2 and CIN3 lesions. Moreover, it shows that some low grade lesions expressed high levels of this protein. This may indicate that such low grade lesions may be predisposed to progress to high grade lesions. This means that p16INK4 may be a strong marker for "neoplastic lesions" induced by HPV and not just an infection marker.