
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Molecular Oncology, Markers, Clinical Correlates |
Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Central Hospital [J. S.], and Department of Pathology, the Hartman Institute and Helsinki University Central Hospital [K. v. B., E. S.], 00290 Helsinki, Finland; University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden [C. B.]; University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden [N-O. B.]; University Hospital, Lund, Sweden [P. M.]; Rogaland Central Hospital, Stavanger, Norway [I. M.]; Ullevål Hospital, Oslo, Norway [B. O.]); University Hospital of Tromsoe, Norway [E. W.]; Estonian Cancer Center, Estonia [V. V.]; and The Burnham Institute, La Jolla, California [S. T., J. C. R.]
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Experimental Design: Between October 1994 and October 1997, 283 patients with advanced breast cancer were included in a multicenter randomized study comparing docetaxel (D) to sequential methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (MF) after anthracycline failure. The response rates (complete response + partial response) were 42 and 21% in the D and MF arms, respectively (P < 0.001). In 126 patients, histological blocks of primary tumors were available for immunohistochemical analysis of bax, bcl-2, bcl-xL, bag-1, fas and fasL.
Results: Of the investigated factors, bag-1 correlated positively with bax, bcl-2, and fasL, and fasL correlated positively with fas and bax. None of these apoptosis-related factors was associated with a response to chemotherapy either in the whole patient population or in the D or MF arms. Interestingly, low bcl-2 expression was associated with shorter time to progression (P = 0.02) and shorter overall survival (OS; P = 0.001). High fasL expression showed a trend toward shorter OS. In multivariate backwards stepwise Cox analysis, in which histological grade and estrogen receptor status (ER) were also included, bcl-2 (P = 0.01) and fasL (P = 0.005) remained highly significantly associated with OS, whereas histological grade and ER lost their significance.
Conclusions: None of the investigated apoptosis-related factors of primary tumor could predict the later response to either D or MF treatment. However, fasL and bcl-2 were strong prognostic factors. Patients who had tumors with high fasL and low bcl-2 expression had the shortest OS.
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Mitochondrial and cell-surface death receptor-mediated apoptosis are the two principal pathways leading to programmed cell death (3) . The mitochondrial pathway is thought to play a major role in response to cancer treatments and is mediated by the bcl-2 family proteins. More than 20 members of this family have been described thus far in humans. A positive ratio between pro- and antiapoptotic bcl-2 family members leads to cytochrome c release from mitochondria, which triggers the final execution of cell death by the caspase cascade. bcl-2 and bcl-xL are antiapoptotic bcl-2 family proteins, whereas bax is a proapoptotic bcl-2 family protein. bag-1 is a multifunctional protein that blocks apoptosis and interacts with several types of proteins including the bcl-2 family (4) .
The fas receptor belongs to the family of tumor necrosis factor-related death receptors, and fasL is its corresponding ligand. Binding of a death ligand to its corresponding death receptor activates the other major apoptotic pathway. Down-regulation of fas has been shown in some carcinomas including breast cancer (5) , whereas fasL is sometimes overexpressed in many human tumors including breast cancer (6 , 7) . Some preclinical studies suggest that classic anticancer agents also require the death receptor fas and its corresponding ligand (fasL) to induce cell death (8 , 9) .
Currently, no tumor biological factor is available for clinical use for predicting chemotherapy response in breast cancer, in contrast to the ER status, which predicts the response to hormonal treatment. In addition to metastatic breast cancer, such factors could also be used in the choice of neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the utility of some bcl-2 family proteins fas and fasL as predictive indicators for chemotherapy response in advanced breast cancer.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2 and have no more than one previous chemotherapy regimen for advanced disease (multiple endocrine treatments and radiotherapy were allowed). Only patients with measurable metastatic lesions or nonmeasurable but evaluable metastatic lesions were eligible. Response evaluation was done after every third course, at treatment discontinuation, and every 3 months during follow-up. Partial response and complete responses were confirmed within 46 weeks after first identification of objective response. Response evaluation was performed according to WHO recommendations (11)
. The main patient and tumor characteristics of the 126 analyzed patients are seen in Table 1
|
Cells were considered positive only when a distinct cellular micropunctate pattern of staining was seen, except for bag-1, for which nuclear staining was also accepted. The percentage of immunoreactive cells was evaluated as the amount of positive tumor cells per all of the tumor cells on the section. All of the stained sections were scored by two investigators (J. S., E. S.), who were blinded to the clinical data. Median values were used as the cutpoints for low and high expression.
Statistical Methods.
Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for the investigated tumor biological factors. For the statistical analysis of response prediction, we divided clinical response into two categories: response [complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)] and nonresponse [stable disease (SD) and progression (PD)]. Associations between tumor biological factors and response to treatment were tested with logistic regression model with the tested tumor biological factors regarded as continuous variables. The univariate and multivariate analysis of TTP and OS were done by the Cox regression model. All of the analyses were performed in the whole immunohistochemical study population (n = 126) as well as in the docetaxel and MF arms separately. In the analyses of response and TTP in the whole patient population, in addition to the investigated tumor biological factors, given treatment was also included, because, in the whole randomized trial population (n = 283), the treatment arm had significant impact on treatment outcome. Three patients in the docetaxel group had a nonevaluable response and were excluded from the analyses of response.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Of the 126 investigated tumors, the median value for bax staining was 5%; for bcl-2, 5%; for bcl-xL, 50%; for bag-1, 60%; for fas, 5%; and for fasL, 20% (Table 1)
. The correlation between the investigated tumor factors is shown in Table 2
. Of the investigated factors, bag-1 correlated positively with bax, bcl-2, and fasL, and fasL correlated positively with fas and bax. bcl-2 expression correlated positively with ER. None of the other apoptosis-related tumor biological factors were associated with ER (data not shown).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In the current study, bax, bcl-2, bcl-xL, bag-1, fasR, and fasL were not predictive factors for chemotherapy response in advanced breast cancer. Previously in breast cancer, the majority of studies have shown no relationship between bcl-2 expression and response to chemotherapy (17, 18, 19, 20, 21) , although in one study, bcl-2 overexpression predicted a worse response to chemotherapy (22) . Interestingly, the first clinical study on the predictive value of bax demonstrated that patients having primary tumors with reduced levels of bax showed worse response rates to chemotherapy, especially in the subgroup of patients treated with a lower-dose-intensity regimen of chemotherapy (17) . No association between bax expression and response to chemotherapy was seen in the current study or in another study in the neoadjuvant setting (20) . Notably, these two studies did not investigate dose intensity on the contrary to the study by Krajewski et al. (17) . This suggests that bax may still be a useful marker in selecting patients for more intense treatment schedules instead of weekly treatment schedules, although the findings should be confirmed in other studies with various dose intensities.
bcl-2 expression was associated with a better prognosis in the current study, which is in line with previous studies. Theoretically, this seems paradoxical because, in preclinical models, bcl-2 overexpression provides a survival advantage. One possible explanation for this phenomenon is that bcl-2 positive tumors often have ERs and a more favorable prognosis. Indeed, estrogen has been shown to be a positive regulator of bcl-2 gene expression in breast cancer cell lines (23) . Furthermore, in the present study, bcl-2 expression correlated positively with ER positivity.
Bag-1 expression has previously been associated either with better (24) or with worse (25) prognosis in early breast cancer, but bag-1 was not any prognostic indicator in the current study. This may be explained by a different patient population, i.e., the patients in the current study represented metastatic disease. Moreover, in the current study, we did not analyze nuclear and cytoplasmic expression of bag-1 separately. Notably, in the previous studies, the cytosolic pattern of staining indicated a better prognosis (24) , and the nuclear pattern of staining a worse prognosis (25) .
To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first one to assess the clinical utility of fas or fasL as predictive indicators for chemotherapy response. Neither of them predicted a response to chemotherapy. Interestingly, fasL was a strong prognostic factor: in the multivariate analysis it remained statistically the most significant indicator of OS, whereas ER and histological grade lost their significance. Patients whose tumors had both high bcl-2 expression and low fasL expression survived significantly longer than others. This is in line with a previous study in which a ratio of fasL:fas mRNA transcripts of >1 has been found to be an indicator of shorter disease-free survival in breast cancer patients (26) . fasL may thus appear as a novel prognostic indicator for breast cancer, although these preliminary findings need to be confirmed in studies with more patients with early-stage disease.
Initially the fas/fasL system was identified as eliminating unwanted cells by apoptosis, such as the peripheral deletion of activated mature T cells at the end of an immune response or the killing of targets by CTLs and by NK cells (27) . Up-regulation of fasL expression has been found in various human tumors, possibly promoting the escape of tumor cells from an attack by the cellular immune system. Theoretically, a tumor could do this by binding its fasL to a fas receptor of a NK cell or a CTL, which would lead to death of the NK cell or the CTL. This may be the biological rationale for our finding that tumors typically express fasL in their peripheral invasive areas.
Emerging clinical evidence has not thus far demonstrated any clear connection between defective apoptotic pathways and treatment failure. The heterogeneous results may be attributable to the following reasons. Firstly, because of the multiplicity and redundancy of apoptotic pathways, defects at one site may lead to the activity of another pathway. Secondly, the genetics of human tumors is so variable that simple comparisons may be inadequate to find biologically relevant correlations. It is probable that whole apoptotic pathways instead of single mediators or proteins should be investigated; the recent applications of microarrays and proteomics may help in this respect. Finally, much work is still needed to understand when and how these multiple apoptotic pathways contribute to chemosensitivity.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
1 Supported by a State subsidy for research and development to Helsinki University Central Hospital. ![]()
2 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4, 00290 Helsinki, Finland. E-mail: johanna.sjostrom{at}hus.fi ![]()
3 The abbreviations used are: MF, sequential methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (treatment); TTP, time to progression; OS, overall survival; ER, estrogen receptor; NK, natural killer. ![]()
Received 7/ 3/01; revised 12/21/01; accepted 12/27/01.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R A Walker Immunohistochemical markers as predictive tools for breast cancer J. Clin. Pathol., June 1, 2008; 61(6): 689 - 696. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. R. Rajendran and G. D. Kao "No Turning Bax" in the Combined Battle against Prostate Cancer: Clin. Cancer Res., June 15, 2007; 13(12): 3435 - 3438. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Diaz, S. Minton, C. Cox, T. Bowman, T. Gritsko, R. Garcia, I. Eweis, M. Wloch, S. Livingston, E. Seijo, et al. Activation of Stat3 in Primary Tumors from High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients Is Associated with Elevated Levels of Activated Src and Survivin Expression Clin. Cancer Res., January 1, 2006; 12(1): 20 - 28. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. J. Kim, Y. Miyoshi, T. Taguchi, Y. Tamaki, H. Nakamura, J. Yodoi, K. Kato, and S. Noguchi High Thioredoxin Expression Is Associated with Resistance to Docetaxel in Primary Breast Cancer Clin. Cancer Res., December 1, 2005; 11(23): 8425 - 8430. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Hachem and R. B. Gartenhaus Oncogenes as molecular targets in lymphoma Blood, September 15, 2005; 106(6): 1911 - 1923. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Kondo, H. Nagano, H. Wada, B. Damdinsuren, H. Yamamoto, N. Hiraoka, H. Eguchi, A. Miyamoto, T. Yamamoto, H. Ota, et al. Combination of IFN-{alpha} and 5-Fluorouracil Induces Apoptosis through IFN-{alpha}/{beta} Receptor in Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells Clin. Cancer Res., February 1, 2005; 11(3): 1277 - 1286. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. D. Kennedy, J. E. Quinn, P. B. Mullan, P. G. Johnston, and D. P. Harkin The Role of BRCA1 in the Cellular Response to Chemotherapy J Natl Cancer Inst, November 17, 2004; 96(22): 1659 - 1668. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Kurokawa, R. Matoba, H. Nagano, M. Sakon, I. Takemasa, S. Nakamori, K. Dono, K. Umeshita, N. Ueno, S. Ishii, et al. Molecular Prediction of Response to 5-Fluorouracil and Interferon-{alpha} Combination Chemotherapy in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Clin. Cancer Res., September 15, 2004; 10(18): 6029 - 6038. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Bagheri-Yarmand, A. H. Talukder, R.-A. Wang, R. K. Vadlamudi, and R. Kumar Metastasis-associated protein 1 deregulation causes inappropriate mammary gland development and tumorigenesis Development, July 15, 2004; 131(14): 3469 - 3479. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. B. Flick, D. O'Malley, T. Rutherford, S. Rodov, M. Kamsteeg, X.-Y. Hao, P. Schwartz, B. M. Kacinski, and G. Mor Apoptosis-Based Evaluation of Chemosensitivity in Ovarian Cancer Patients Reproductive Sciences, May 1, 2004; 11(4): 252 - 259. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Botti, S. Buglioni, M. Benevolo, D. Giannarelli, P. Papaldo, F. Cognetti, P. Vici, F. Di Filippo, F. Del Nonno, F. M. Venanzi, et al. Altered Expression of FAS System Is Related to Adverse Clinical Outcome in Stage I-II Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Adjuvant Anthracycline-Based Chemotherapy Clin. Cancer Res., February 15, 2004; 10(4): 1360 - 1365. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Nakahara, K. Nakamura, N. Yamanaka, E. Baba, M. Wada, H. Matsunaga, H. Noshiro, M. Tanaka, T. Morisaki, and M. Katano Cyclosporin-A Enhances Docetaxel-Induced Apoptosis through Inhibition of Nuclear Factor-{kappa}B Activation in Human Gastric Carcinoma Cells Clin. Cancer Res., November 1, 2003; 9(14): 5409 - 5416. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. H. Maclean, U. B. Keller, C. Rodriguez-Galindo, J. A. Nilsson, and J. L. Cleveland c-Myc Augments Gamma Irradiation-Induced Apoptosis by Suppressing Bcl-XL Mol. Cell. Biol., October 15, 2003; 23(20): 7256 - 7270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Meeting Abstracts Online |