Article

An analysis of Cyclin D1, Cytokeratin 5/6 and Cytokeratin 8/18 expression in breast papillomas and papillary carcinomas

Diagnostic Pathology (Impact Factor: 2.41). 01/2013; 8(1):8. DOI: 10.1186/1746-1596-8-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: To evaluate the expression levels of Cyclin D1 in breast papillomas and papillary carcinomas, and to analyze the types of cells that co-express Cyclin D1 with Cytokeratin 5/6 (CK 5/6) or with Cytokeratin 8/18(CK 8/18). METHODS: Fifty-nine cases of papillary lesions including 36 papillomas and 23 intracystic papillary carcinomas were examined. Cyclin D1, CK 5/6 and CK 8/18 expression levels were evaluated by double immunostaining. RESULTS: Cyclin D1 is highly expressed in papillary carcinomas (27.54% +/- 15.43%) compared with papillomas (8.81% +/- 8.41%, p < 0.01). Cyclin D1 is predominantly expressed in Cytokeratin 8/18- expressing cells, rather than in Cytokeratin 5/6-expressing cells, regardless of the type of lesion. In Papillomas, Cyclin D1 exhibited a mean 11.42% (11.42% +/- 10.17%) coexpression rate with Cytokeratin 8/18 compared with a mean 2.50% (2.50% +/- 3.24%) coexpression rate with Cytokeratin 5/6 (p < 0.01). In papillary carcinomas, Cyclin D1 exhibited a mean 34.74% (34.74% +/- 16.32%) co-expression rate with Cytokeratin 8/18 compared with a co-expression rate of 0.70% (0.70% +/- 0.93%) with Cytokeratin 5/6 (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The increase in Cyclin D1 suggests an association of Cyclin D1 staining with papillary carcinomas. Although Cyclin D1 is an effective marker for the differential diagnosis of other papillary lesions, it cannot be used to distinguish between papilloma and papillary carcinoma lesions because its expression occurs in both lesions. Our results show that Cyclin D1 and CK 5/6 staining could be used in concert to distinguish between the diagnosis of papilloma (Cyclin D1 < 4.20%, CK 5/6 positive) or papillary carcinoma (Cyclin D1 > 37.00%, CK 5/6 negative). In addition, our data suggest that Cyclin D1 is expressed only in the cancer stem or progenitor cells that co-immunostained with CK 8/18 in papillary carcinomas, and predominantly with CK 8/18 in the papillomas. Virtual slides The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/7299340558756848.

0 Followers
 · 
71 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A formalism is obtained for classical systems which is the counterpart of the S-operator formalism of quantum theory. It is an extension of the formalism of N-particle kinetic equations (generalized master equations) in statistical mechanics, and depends on the application of orthogonal projection operators to the Liouville equation in interaction picture. It is applied to systems of particles with finite-range, central-force interactions in the absence of external forces. A pair of coupled integral equations for the projected parts of the density operator is obtained, which can be iterated to produce series expansions in which propagation alternates between complementary parts of a dyadic Hilbert space. In first order the N-particle kinetic equation is recovered. A Møller wave operator and an S-operator are defined, in which the Liouville operator replaces the hamiltonian of quantum scattering theory. Lippmann-Schwinger equations and Born iterative series are also obtained for the eigenfunctions and propagators of the Liouville operator. The alternation of propagation in these series is analogous to that of the Faddeev equations. The approach to equilibrium is described in Schrödinger picture. The density operator is written as the sum of a time-independent equilibrium component of unit norm, and a time-dependent component whose norm is zero at all times; conservation of probability is maintained by the equilibrium component. Correspondingly, the expectation of an observable is the sum of its equilibrium expectation value and a time-dependent term which approaches zero as time becomes infinite. The initial ensemble can be regarded as regressing, after infinite time, to the same equilibrium state as the one, at an infinitely earlier time, from which it evolved. The formalism is extended to the von Neumann equation for quantum systems in the dyadic (super-operator) space.
    Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 01/1975; 81(2):163-189. DOI:10.1016/0378-4371(75)90062-X · 1.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Small breast epithelial mucin (SBEM) has been implicated in tumor genesis and micrometastasis in breast cancer. Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) was characterized by high incidence in young women,early relapse and a very poor prognosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of SBEM expression in tissues of TNBC with diseasefree survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). METHODS: SBEM protein expression was detected in 87 available formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue specimens from TNBC patients by means of immunohistochemistry (IHC). We analyzed the correlation between the SBEM protein expression and DFS and OS during a 5 year follow-up period, respectively. And a SBEM cut-off value of prognosis was established associated with DFS and OS. SBEM was analyzed against other risk factors in multivariate analysis. RESULTS: SBEM 3+ score was cut-off value of prognosis and significantly correlated with DFS (p = 0.000) and OS (p = 0.001) in TNBC patients. There was a marked associations (p <0.05) between SBEM 3+ score and tumor size, grade, node status, TNM stage and Ki67. Multivariate analysis showed that patients with SBEM 3+ represented a higher risk of recurrence and mortality than those with a lower SBEM expression (HR = 3.370 with p = 0.008 for DFS and HR = 4.185 with p = 0.004 for OS). CONCLUSIONS: SBEM is an independent risk predictor and may offer utility as a prognostic marker in TNBC patients. Virtual Slides http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1624613061936917.
    Diagnostic Pathology 05/2013; 8(1):71. DOI:10.1186/1746-1596-8-71 · 2.41 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: Alteration of CyclinD1 was suggested to relate with development of endometrial carcinogenesis before, however CyclinD1 expression is not well defined in endometrial hyperplasia lesions. We checked the relationship between its expression and clinic-pathological variables of endometrial lesions to explore the possibility for CyclinD1 as a potential diagnostic and prognostic marker. Cyclin D1 immunohistochemical analysis (IHC) was used to evaluate 201 fixed, paraffin-embedded endometrial samples which included simple hyperplasia (n = 27), atypical complex hyperplasia (ACH) (n = 41), endometrioid carcinoma (n = 103), endometrial serous carcinoma (ESC) (n = 21) and clear cell carcinoma (CCC) (n = 9). A breast cancer with known CyclinD1 expression was selected as a positive control in each immunohistochemistry run. We also performed follow-up study to estimate patients' prognosis. CyclinD1 was significantly overexpressed in atypical complex hyperplasia (ACH), endometrioid carcinoma and clear cell carcinoma (CCC). The positive signaling of CyclinD1 was showed less than 40% in simple hyperplasia and endometrial serous carcinoma (ESC). The high expression of CyclinD1 was observed in metastasis carcinoma group more significantly than non-metastasis carcinoma group. Kaplan Meier analysis demonstrated that patients with high CyclinD1 expression had an obviously poor prognosis than patients without CyclinD1 staining (p < 0.05). Moreover, according to multivariate Cox regression analysis, CyclinD1 expression, as crucial as metastasis, was a risk marker for overall survival rate. CyclinD1 exhibited a promising potential to predict the prognosis of patients with endometrial carcinoma. However, the statistical analysis demonstrated that CyclinD1 exhibited a poor ability to differentiate neoplastic lesions from non-neoplastic lesions; thus, the application of CyclinD1 only is not so credible for differentiation between benign and malignant lesions.Virtual slides: The virtual slides for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1871063048950173.
    Diagnostic Pathology 08/2013; 8(1):138. DOI:10.1186/1746-1596-8-138 · 2.41 Impact Factor
Show more

Preview (2 Sources)

Download
0 Downloads
Available from