Wakahara Makoto, Hosoya Keiko, Ishii Hiroshi, Umekita Yoshihisa
Division of General Thoracic Surgery and Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago 683-8503, Japan.
Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago 683-8503, Japan.
Yonago Acta Med. 2023 Jan 16;66(1):19-23. doi: 10.33160/yam.2023.02.003. eCollection 2023 Feb.
Maspin is known to be a tumor suppressor protein: however, its prognostic value in patients with breast cancer remains controversial. The key influential factors contributing to this complexity may be the differences in antibodies used, as well as the positive criteria and sample size. To date, no study has investigated the prognostic significance of maspin expression by using two different antibodies in the same cohort. We aimed to clarify whether differences in antibodies could influence on the prognostic value of maspin in breast cancer patients.
Immunohistochemical analyses using an anti-maspin antibody (clone G167-70) were performed on 164 resected specimens of invasive carcinoma of no special type (NOS). The correlation with clinicopathological factors was compared to previous results using clone EAW24, with longer follow-up duration.
The subcellular localization of maspin expression was as follows: cytoplasmic-only staining, 3 cases (1.8%), pancellular staining, 43 cases (26.2%); and no staining, 118 cases (72.0%). No nuclear-only staining was observed. There was no significant correlation between clinicopathological characteristics and the pancellualr expression of maspin. The pancellular expression group showed a significantly longer disease-free survival (DFS) than the other groups ( = 0.046). When clone EAW24 was used, the cytoplasmic-only staining group showed significantly shorter DFS than the pancellular staining group ( = 0.003).
Clone EAW24 may be superior to clone G167-70 in selecting breast carcinoma with an aggressive phenotype, while clone G167-70 may be superior to clone EAW24 in selecting non-aggressive breast carcinoma.
已知乳珠蛋白是一种肿瘤抑制蛋白;然而,其在乳腺癌患者中的预后价值仍存在争议。造成这种复杂性的关键影响因素可能是所用抗体的差异,以及阳性标准和样本量。迄今为止,尚无研究在同一队列中使用两种不同抗体研究乳珠蛋白表达的预后意义。我们旨在阐明抗体差异是否会影响乳珠蛋白在乳腺癌患者中的预后价值。
对164例无特殊类型(NOS)浸润性癌的切除标本进行了使用抗乳珠蛋白抗体(克隆G167-70)的免疫组织化学分析。将其与使用克隆EAW24且随访时间更长的先前结果进行比较,以分析与临床病理因素的相关性。
乳珠蛋白表达的亚细胞定位如下:仅细胞质染色3例(1.8%),全细胞染色43例(26.2%);无染色118例(72.0%)。未观察到仅细胞核染色。临床病理特征与乳珠蛋白的全细胞表达之间无显著相关性。全细胞表达组的无病生存期(DFS)明显长于其他组(P = 0.046)。当使用克隆EAW24时,仅细胞质染色组显示DFS明显短于全细胞染色组(P = 0.003)。
在选择具有侵袭性表型的乳腺癌方面,克隆EAW24可能优于克隆G167-70,而在选择非侵袭性乳腺癌方面,克隆G167-70可能优于克隆EAW24。