| 1. |
- Kang, E. Y., et al.
(författare)
-
CCNE1 and survival of patients with tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma: An Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0008-543X .- 1097-0142. ; 129:5, s. 697-713
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Cyclin E1 (CCNE1) is a potential predictive marker and therapeutic target in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). Smaller studies have revealed unfavorable associations for CCNE1 amplification and CCNE1 overexpression with survival, but to date no large-scale, histotype-specific validation has been performed. The hypothesis was that high-level amplification of CCNE1 and CCNE1 overexpression, as well as a combination of the two, are linked to shorter overall survival in HGSC. Methods: Within the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium, amplification status and protein level in 3029 HGSC cases and mRNA expression in 2419 samples were investigated. Results: High-level amplification (>8 copies by chromogenic in situ hybridization) was found in 8.6% of HGSC and overexpression (>60% with at least 5% demonstrating strong intensity by immunohistochemistry) was found in 22.4%. CCNE1 high-level amplification and overexpression both were linked to shorter overall survival in multivariate survival analysis adjusted for age and stage, with hazard stratification by study (hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.08-1.47, p = .034, and HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32, p = .015, respectively). This was also true for cases with combined high-level amplification/overexpression (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.09-1.47, p = .033). CCNE1 mRNA expression was not associated with overall survival (HR, 1.00 per 1-SD increase; 95% CI, 0.94-1.06; p = .58). CCNE1 high-level amplification is mutually exclusive with the presence of germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants and shows an inverse association to RB1 loss. Conclusion: This study provides large-scale validation that CCNE1 high-level amplification is associated with shorter survival, supporting its utility as a prognostic biomarker in HGSC.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Kang, E. Y., et al.
(författare)
-
MCM3 is a novel proliferation marker associated with longer survival for patients with tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Virchows Archiv. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0945-6317 .- 1432-2307. ; 480
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSC) are highly proliferative neoplasms that generally respond well to platinum/taxane chemotherapy. We recently identified minichromosome maintenance complex component 3 (MCM3), which is involved in the initiation of DNA replication and proliferation, as a favorable prognostic marker in HGSC. Our objective was to further validate whether MCM3 mRNA expression and possibly MCM3 protein levels are associated with survival in patients with HGSC. MCM3 mRNA expression was measured using NanoString expression profiling on formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tissue (N = 2355 HGSC) and MCM3 protein expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry (N = 522 HGSC) and compared with Ki-67. Kaplan-Meier curves and the Cox proportional hazards model were used to estimate associations with survival. Among chemotherapy-naive HGSC, higher MCM3 mRNA expression (one standard deviation increase in the score) was associated with longer overall survival (HR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.92, p < 0.0001, N = 1840) in multivariable analysis. MCM3 mRNA expression was highest in the HGSC C5.PRO molecular subtype, although no interaction was observed between MCM3, survival and molecular subtypes. MCM3 and Ki-67 protein levels were significantly lower after exposure to neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy-naive tumors: 37.0% versus 46.4% and 22.9% versus 34.2%, respectively. Among chemotherapy-naive HGSC, high MCM3 protein levels were also associated with significantly longer disease-specific survival (HR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.36-0.74, p = 0.0003, N = 392) compared to cases with low MCM3 protein levels in multivariable analysis. MCM3 immunohistochemistry is a promising surrogate marker of proliferation in HGSC.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Hollestelle, Antoinette, et al.
(författare)
-
No clinical utility of KRAS variant rs61764370 for ovarian or breast cancer
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Gynecologic Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0090-8258 .- 1095-6859. ; 141:2, s. 386-401
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective Clinical genetic testing is commercially available for rs61764370, an inherited variant residing in a KRAS 3′ UTR microRNA binding site, based on suggested associations with increased ovarian and breast cancer risk as well as with survival time. However, prior studies, emphasizing particular subgroups, were relatively small. Therefore, we comprehensively evaluated ovarian and breast cancer risks as well as clinical outcome associated with rs61764370. Methods Centralized genotyping and analysis were performed for 140,012 women enrolled in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (15,357 ovarian cancer patients; 30,816 controls), the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (33,530 breast cancer patients; 37,640 controls), and the Consortium of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 (14,765 BRCA1 and 7904 BRCA2 mutation carriers). Results We found no association with risk of ovarian cancer (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.04, p = 0.74) or breast cancer (OR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.94-1.01, p = 0.19) and results were consistent among mutation carriers (BRCA1, ovarian cancer HR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.97-1.23, p = 0.14, breast cancer HR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.97-1.12, p = 0.27; BRCA2, ovarian cancer HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.71-1.13, p = 0.34, breast cancer HR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.94-1.19, p = 0.35). Null results were also obtained for associations with overall survival following ovarian cancer (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.83-1.07, p = 0.38), breast cancer (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.87-1.06, p = 0.38), and all other previously-reported associations. Conclusions rs61764370 is not associated with risk of ovarian or breast cancer nor with clinical outcome for patients with these cancers. Therefore, genotyping this variant has no clinical utility related to the prediction or management of these cancers.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
