ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The TF (Thomsen-Friedenreich, CD176, Galß1-3GalNAc) carbohydrate moiety is known as a specific oncofetal carbohydrate epitope present in fetal and neoplastic tissue as well as in stem cells. TF was demonstrated to mediate tumor-promoting features and to be highly immunogenic. The current study aimed to evaluate whether presence of the TF antigen is associated with clinico-pathological parameters and prognosis of early breast cancer (BC). METHODS: Primary BC tissue (n = 226) was stained for TF using two monoclonal anti-TF antibodies (Nemod-TF1, Nemod-TF2). Staining results were correlated to clinical data including survival. RESULTS: Nemod-TF1 staining was positively correlated to lymph node metastasis (p = 0.03) and the presence of tumor-associated MUC1 (TA-MUC1; p = 0.003). Further, the presence of the Nemod-TF1 epitope predicted worse prognosis in TA-MUC1 positive (overall survival: p = 0.026) as well as in triple negative (overall survival: p = 0.002; distant metastasis-free survival: p = 0.012) BC. CONCLUSIONS: The data presented here further support a role of TF in BC tumor biology. Whether anti-TF directed treatment approaches may gain clinical relevance in those cases determined as triple negative or TA-MUC1 positive remains to be determined.
Subject(s)
Antibodies/immunology , Antigens, Tumor-Associated, Carbohydrate/immunology , Mucin-1/metabolism , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/metabolism , Antigens, Neoplasm/immunology , Biomarkers, Tumor/immunology , Female , Humans , Immunohistochemistry , Lymphatic Metastasis/diagnosis , Lymphatic Metastasis/pathology , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
Follicle stimulating hormone receptor (FSHR) and luteinizing hormone receptor (LHCGR) were demonstrated to impact upon survival of patients suffering from epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Though structure wise the G-protein coupled estrogen receptor (GPER/GPR30) is related to FSHR/LHCGR, its prognostic impact in EOC remains controversial. We recently found that FSHR negative patients represent a specific EOC subgroup that may behave differently in respect to both treatment response and prognosis. Hence, the current study aimed to analyze how GPER may interact with the FSHR/LHCGR system in EOC and whether the prognostic significance of GPER in EOC cases (n=151) may be dependent on the FSHR/LHCGR immunophenotype of the tumor. Ovarian cancer cell lines were used to study how FSH and LH regulate GPER and whether GPER activation differentially affects in vitro cell proliferation in presence/absence of activated FSHR/LHCGR. In EOC tissue, GPER correlated with FSHR/LHCGR and was related to prolonged overall survival only in FSHR/LHCGR negative patients. Although GPER was found to be specifically induced by LH/FSH, GPER agonists (4-Hydroxy-Tamoxifen, G1) reduced EOC cell proliferation only in case of LH/FSH unstimulated pathways. To the same direction, only patients characterized as LHCGR/FSHR negative seem to gain from GPER in terms of survival. Our combined tissue and in vitro results support thus the hypothesis that GPER activation could be of therapeutic benefit in LHCGR/FSHR negative EOC patients. Further studies are needed to evaluate the impact of GPER activation on a clinical scheme.
