| 1. |
- Botling, Johan, et al.
(författare)
-
Biomarker Discovery in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer : Integrating Gene Expression Profiling, Meta-analysis, and Tissue Microarray Validation
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cancer Research. - 1078-0432 .- 1557-3265. ; 19:1, s. 194-204
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: Global gene expression profiling has been widely used in lung cancer research to identify clinically relevant molecular subtypes as well as to predict prognosis and therapy response. So far, the value of these multigene signatures in clinical practice is unclear, and the biologic importance of individual genes is difficult to assess, as the published signatures virtually do not overlap.Experimental Design: Here, we describe a novel single institute cohort, including 196 non-small lung cancers (NSCLC) with clinical information and long-term follow-up. Gene expression array data were used as a training set to screen for single genes with prognostic impact. The top 450 probe sets identified using a univariate Cox regression model (significance level P < 0.01) were tested in a meta-analysis including five publicly available independent lung cancer cohorts (n = 860).Results: The meta-analysis revealed 14 genes that were significantly associated with survival (P < 0.001) with a false discovery rate < 1%. The prognostic impact of one of these genes, the cell adhesion molecule 1 (CADM1), was confirmed by use of immunohistochemistry on tissue microarrays from 2 independent NSCLC cohorts, altogether including 617 NSCLC samples. Low CADM1 protein expression was significantly associated with shorter survival, with particular influence in the adenocarcinoma patient subgroup.Conclusions: Using a novel NSCLC cohort together with a meta-analysis validation approach, we have identified a set of single genes with independent prognostic impact. One of these genes, CADM1, was further established as an immunohistochemical marker with a potential application in clinical diagnostics. Clin Cancer Res; 19(1); 194-204. (c) 2012 AACR.
|
|
| 2. |
- Braegelmann, Johannes, et al.
(författare)
-
Pan-Cancer Analysis of the Mediator Complex Transcriptome Identifies CDK19 and CDK8 as Therapeutic Targets in Advanced Prostate Cancer
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cancer Research. - : American Association for Cancer Research Inc.. - 1078-0432 .- 1557-3265. ; 23:7, s. 1829-1840
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: The Mediator complex is a multiprotein assembly, which serves as a hub for diverse signaling pathways to regulate gene expression. Because gene expression is frequently altered in cancer, a systematic understanding of the Mediator complex in malignancies could foster the development of novel targeted therapeutic approaches.Experimental Design: We performed a systematic deconvolution of the Mediator subunit expression profiles across 23 cancer entities (n = 8,568) using data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Prostate cancer-specific findings were validated in two publicly available gene expression cohorts and a large cohort of primary and advanced prostate cancer (n = 622) stained by immunohistochemistry. The role of CDK19 and CDK8 was evaluated by siRNA-mediated gene knockdown and inhibitor treatment in prostate cancer cell lines with functional assays and gene expression analysis by RNAseq.Results: Cluster analysis of TCGA expression data segregated tumor entities, indicating tumor-type-specific Mediator complex compositions. Only prostate cancerwasmarked by high expression of CDK19. In primary prostate cancer, CDK19 was associated with increased aggressiveness and shorter disease-free survival. During cancer progression, highest levels of CDK19 and of its paralog CDK8were present inmetastases. In vitro, inhibition ofCDK19 and CDK8 by knockdown or treatment with a selective CDK8/ CDK19 inhibitor significantly decreased migration and invasion.Conclusions: Our analysis revealed distinct transcriptional expression profiles of the Mediator complex across cancer entities indicating differential modes of transcriptional regulation. Moreover, it identified CDK19 and CDK8 to be specifically overexpressed during prostate cancer progression, highlighting their potential as novel therapeutic targets in advanced prostate cancer.
|
|
| 3. |
- Etzioni, Ruth, et al.
(författare)
-
Increasing use of radical prostatectomy for nonlethal prostate cancer in Sweden
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cancer Research. - : American Association for Cancer Research. - 1078-0432 .- 1557-3265. ; 18:24, s. 6742-6747
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: The number of patients in Sweden treated with radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer has increased exponentially. The extent to which this increase reflects treatment of nonlethal disease detected through prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening is unknown.EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We undertook a nationwide study of all 18,837 patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy in Sweden from 1988 to 2008 with complete follow-up through 2009. We compared cumulative incidence curves, fit Cox regression and cure models, and conducted a simulation study to determine changes in treatment of nonlethal cancer, in cancer-specific survival over time, and effect of lead-time due to PSA screening.RESULTS: The annual number of radical prostatectomies increased 25-fold during the study period. The 5-year cancer-specific mortality rate decreased from 3.9% [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.5-5.3] among patients diagnosed between 1988 and 1992 to 0.7% (95% CI, 0.4-1.1) among those diagnosed between 1998 and 2002 (P(trend) < 0.001). According to the cure model, the risk of not being cured declined by 13% (95% CI, 12%-14%) with each calendar year. The simulation study indicated that only about half of the improvement in disease-specific survival could be accounted for by lead-time.CONCLUSION: Patients overdiagnosed with nonlethal prostate cancer appear to account for a substantial and growing part of the dramatic increase in radical prostatectomies in Sweden, but increasing survival rates are likely also due to true reductions in the risk of disease-specific death over time. Because the magnitude of harm and costs due to overtreatment can be considerable, identification of men who likely benefit from radical prostatectomy is urgently needed.
|
|
| 4. |
- Flavin, Richard, et al.
(författare)
-
SPINK1 protein expression and prostate cancer progression
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cancer Research. - Philadelphia, USA : American Association for Cancer Research. - 1078-0432 .- 1557-3265. ; 20:18, s. 4904-11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: SPINK1 overexpression has been described in prostate cancer and is linked with poor prognosis in many cancers. The objective of this study was to characterize the association between SPINK1 overexpression and prostate cancer-specific survival.Experimental design: The study included 879 participants in the U.S. Physicians' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study, diagnosed with prostate cancer (1983-2004) and treated by radical prostatectomy. Protein tumor expression of SPINK1 was evaluated by immunohistochemistry on tumor tissue microarrays.Results: Seventy-four of 879 (8%) prostate cancer tumors were SPINK1 positive. Immunohistochemical data were available for PTEN, p-Akt, pS6, stathmin, androgen receptor (AR), and ERG (as a measure of the TMPRSS2:ERG translocation). Compared with SPINK1-negative tumors, SPINK1-positive tumors showed higher PTEN and stathmin expression, and lower expression of AR (P < 0.01). SPINK1 overexpression was seen in 47 of 427 (11%) ERG-negative samples and in 19 of 427 (4%) ERG-positive cases (P = 0.0003). We found no significant associations between SPINK1 status and Gleason grade or tumor stage. There was no association between SPINK1 expression and biochemical recurrence (P = 0.56). Moreover, there was no association between SPINK1 expression and prostate cancer mortality (there were 75 lethal cases of prostate cancer during a mean of 13.5 years follow-up; HR = 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-1.76).Conclusions: Our results suggest that SPINK1 protein expression may not be a predictor of recurrence or lethal prostate cancer amongst men treated by radical prostatectomy. SPINK1 and ERG protein expression do not seem to be entirely mutually exclusive, as some previous studies have suggested.
|
|
| 5. |
- Lu, Donghao, et al.
(författare)
-
Stress-Related Signaling Pathways in Lethal and Nonlethal Prostate Cancer
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. - Philadelphia, USA : American Association for Cancer Research. - 1078-0432 .- 1557-3265. ; 22:3, s. 765-772
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: Recent data suggest that neuroendocrine signaling may influence progression in some cancers. We aimed to determine whether genes within the five major stress-related signaling pathways are differentially expressed in tumor tissue when comparing prostate cancer patients with lethal and nonlethal disease.Experimental design: We measured mRNA expression of 51 selected genes involved in predetermined stress-related signaling pathways (adrenergic, glucocorticoid, dopaminergic, serotoninergic, and muscarinic systems) in tumor tissue and normal prostate tissue collected from prostate cancer patients in the Physicians' Health Study (n = 150; n = 82 with normal) and the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (n = 254; n = 120 with normal). We assessed differences in pathway expression in relation to prostate cancer lethality as the primary outcome and to biomarkers as secondary outcomes.Results: Differential mRNA expression of genes within the adrenergic (P = 0.001), glucocorticoid (P < 0.0001), serotoninergic (P = 0.0019), and muscarinic (P = 0.0045) pathways in tumor tissue was associated with the risk of lethality. The adrenergic pathway was also statistically significant (P = 0.001) when comparing against differential expression of genes not involved in the pathways. In adjacent normal prostate tissue, none of the pathways was clearly differentially expressed between lethal and nonlethal prostate cancer. The glucocorticoid and adrenergic pathways were associated with cell proliferation, while the glucocorticoid pathway was additionally associated with angiogenesis and perineural invasion.Conclusions: Our study suggests that stress-related signaling pathways, particularly the adrenergic and glucocorticoid, may be dysregulated in the tumors of men whose prostate cancer proves to be lethal, and motivates further investigation of these pathways in functional studies.
|
|
| 6. |
- Matikas, Alexios, et al.
(författare)
-
Prognostic implications of PD-L1 expression in breast cancer : systematic review and meta-analysis of immunohistochemistry and pooled analysis of transcriptomic data
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cancer Research. - : American Association for Cancer Research. - 1078-0432 .- 1557-3265. ; 25:18, s. 5717-5726
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: Conflicting data have been reported on the prognostic value of PD-L1 protein and gene expression in breast cancer.EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science Core Collection were searched and data were extracted independently by two researchers. Outcomes included pooled PD-L1 protein positivity in tumor cells, immune cells or both, per subtype and per antibody used; and its prognostic value for disease-free and overall survival. A pooled gene expression analysis of 39 publicly available transcriptomic datasets was also performed.RESULTS: Of the initial 4184 entries, 38 retrospective studies fulfilled the predefined inclusion criteria. The overall pooled PD-L1 protein positivity rate was 24% (95% CI 15 - 33%) in tumor cells and 33% (95% CI 14 - 56%) in immune cells. PD-L1 protein expression in tumor cells was prognostic for shorter overall survival (HR = 1.63; 95% CI 1.07 - 2.46, p=0.02); there was significant heterogeneity (I2 = 80%, pheterogeneity<0.001). In addition, higher PD-L1 gene expression predicted better survival in multivariate analysis in the entire population (HR=0.82, 95% CI 0.74 - 0.90, p<0.001 for OS) and in basal-like tumors (HR=0.64, 95% CI 0.52 - 0.80, p<0.001 for OS), pinteraction 0.005.CONCLUSION: The largest to our knowledge meta-analysis on the subject informs on PD-L1 protein positivity rates and its prognostic value in breast cancer. Standardization is needed prior to routine implementation. PD-L1 gene expression is a promising prognostic factor, especially in basal-like BC. Discrepant prognostic information might be related to PD-L1 gene expression in the stroma.
|
|
| 7. |
- Zheng, S. Lilly, et al.
(författare)
-
Genetic variants and family history predict prostate cancer similar to prostate-specific antigen
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cancer Research. - 1078-0432 .- 1557-3265. ; 15:3, s. 1105-1111
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: Although prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is the best biomarker for predicting prostate cancer, its predictive performance needs to be improved. Results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial revealed the overall performance measured by the areas under curve of the receiver operating characteristic at 0.68. The goal of the present study is to assess the ability of genetic variants as a PSA-independent method to predict prostate cancer risk. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We systematically evaluated all prostate cancer risk variants that were identified from genome-wide association studies during the past year in a large population-based prostate cancer case-control study population in Sweden, including 2,893 prostate cancer patients and 1,781 men without prostate cancer. RESULTS: Twelve single nucleotide polymorphisms were independently associated with prostate cancer risk in this Swedish study population. Using a cutoff of any 11 risk alleles or family history, the sensitivity and specificity for predicting prostate cancer were 0.25 and 0.86, respectively. The overall predictive performance of prostate cancer using genetic variants, family history, and age, measured by areas under curve was 0.65 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.66), significantly improved over that of family history and age (0.61%; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-0.62; P = 2.3 x 10(-10)). CONCLUSION: The predictive performance for prostate cancer using genetic variants and family history is similar to that of PSA. The utility of genetic testing, alone and in combination with PSA levels, should be evaluated in large studies such as the European Randomized Study for Prostate Cancer trial and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.
|
|
