Advertisement

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 195–208 | Cite as

Urokinase (uPA) and its inhibitor PAI-1 are strong and independent prognostic factors in node-negative breast cancer

  • Fritz Jänicke
  • Manfred Schmitt
  • Lothar Pache
  • Kurt Ulm
  • Nadia Harbeck
  • Heinz Höfler
  • Henner Graeff
Article

Summary

Evidence has accumulated that invasion and metastasis in solid tumors require the action of tumor-associated proteases, which promote the dissolution of the surrounding tumor matrix and the basement membranes. The serine protease urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA), which is elevated in solid tumors, appears to play a key role in these processes.

We used enzyme-linked immunoassays (ELISA) to test for uPA antigen and its inhibitor PAI-1 in tumor tissue extracts of 247 breast cancer patients who were enrolled in a prospective study. The relation of these data to known prognostic factors and to other variables such as DNA analysis and cathepsin D was studied. Disease-free and overall survival were analyzed according to Cox's proportional hazard model.

The major new finding is that breast cancer patients with either high uPA (>2.97 ng/mg protein) or high content of the uPA inhibitor PAI-1 (>2.18 ng/mg protein) in their primary tumors have an increased risk of relapse and death. Multivariate analyses revealed uPA to be an independent and strong prognostic factor. The impact of uPA is as high as that of the lymph node status. In node-negative patients the impact of uPA is closely followed by that of PAI-1. Since uPA and PAI-1 are independent prognostic factors, the node-negative patients could be subdivided further by combining these two variables. In this refined analysis, patients whose primary tumors have lower levels of both antigens evidently have a very low risk of relapse (93% disease-free survival at three years) in contrast to patients with high uPA and high PAI-1 (55% disease-free survival at three years).

The combination of uPA and PAI-1 in our group of patients with axillary node-negative breast cancer allows us to identify the 45 percent of patients having an increased risk of relapse. Consequently, more than half of the patients had less than a 10% probability of relapse and thus would possibly be candidates for being spared the necessity of adjuvant therapy.

Key words

protease inhibitor urokinase uPA PAI-1 cathepsin D prognosis breast cancer axillary node-negative patients 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Danø K, Andreasen PA, Grøndahl-Hansen J, Kristensen P, Nielsen LS, Skriver L: Plasminogen activators, tissue degradation and cancer. Adv Cancer Res 44:139–266, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Markus G: The relevance of plasminogen activators to neoplastic growth. Enzyme 40:158–172, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blasi F: Surface receptors for urokinase plasminogen activator. Fibrinolysis 2:73–84, 1988Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mangel WF: Better reception for urokinase. Nature 344:488–489, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schlechte W, Murano G, Boyd D: Examination of the role of the urokinase receptor in human colon cancer mediated laminin degradation. Cancer Res 49:6064–6069, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stoppelli MP, Tacchetti C, Cubellis MV, Corti A, Hearing VJ, Cassani G, Appella E Blasi F: Autocrine saturation of pro-urokinase receptors on human A431 cells. Cell 45:675–684, 1986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vassalli JD, Baccino D, Belin D: A cellular binding site for the Mr 55,000 form of the human plasminogen activator, urokinase. J Cell Biol 100:86–92, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bachmann F: Thrombosis and haemostasis.In Verstraete M, Lijnen HR, Arnout J (eds). International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Leuven University Press, Leuven, 1987, pp 227–265Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kobayashi H, Schmitt M, Goretzki L, Chucholowski N, Calvete J, Kramer M, Günzler WA, Jänicke F, Graeff H: Cathepsin B efficiently activates the soluble and the tumor cell receptor-bound form of the proenzyme urokinase-type plasminogen activator (pro-uPA). J Biol Chem 266:5147–5152, 1990Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Burtin P, Chavanel G, André J: The plasmin system in human colonic tumors: an immunofluorescence study. Int J Cancer 35:307–314, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miles LA, Plow EF: Plasminogen receptors: Ubiquitous sites for cellular regulation of fibrinolysis. Fibrinolysis 2:61–71, 1988Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Trygvasson K: Extracellular matrix and its enzymatic degradation in tumor invasion (A review).In Liotta LA (ed) Influence of Tumor Development on the Host. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1989, pp. 72–83Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dvorak HF: Tumors: Wounds that do not heal. N Engl J Med 315:161–165, 1986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wilhelm O, Hafter R, Coppenrath E, Pflanz MA, Schmitt M, Babic R, Linke R, Gössner W, Graeff H: Fibrin-fibronectin compounds in human ovarian tumor ascites and their possible relation to the tumor stroma. Cancer Res 48:507–3514, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wilhelm O, Hafter R, Henschen A, Schmitt M, Graeff H: Role of plasmin in the degradation of the stroma-derived fibrin in human ovarian carcinoma. Blood 75:1673–1678, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Duffy MJ, Reilly D, O'Sullivan C, O'Higgins N, Fennelly JJ, Andreasen P: Urokinase-plasminogen activator, a new and independent prognostic marker in breast cancer. Cancer Res 50:6827–6829, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Duffy MJ, Reilly D, O'Sullivan C, O'Higgins N, Fennelly JJ: Urokinase plasminogen activator and prognosis in breast cancer. Lancet 335:108, 1990Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jänicke F, Schmitt M, Ulm K, Gössner W, Graeff H: Urokinase-type plasminogen activator antigen and early relapse in breast cancer. Lancet ii:1049, 1989Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jänicke F, Schmitt M, Hafter R, Hollrieder A, Babic R, Ulm K, Gössner W, Graeff H: Urokinase-type plasminogen activator (u-PA) antigen is a predictor of early relapse in breast cancer. Fibrinolysis 4:69–78, 1990Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jänicke F, Schmitt M, Graeff H: Clinical relevance of the urokinase-type and the tissue-type plasminogen activators and of their inhibitor PAI-1 in breast cancer. Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis 17:303–312, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Duffy M, O'Grady P, Devaney D, O'Siorain L, Fennelly JJ, Lijnen HJ: Urokinase-plasminogen activator, a marker for aggressive breast carcinomas. Cancer 62:531–533, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group: Systemic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic, or immune therapy. 133 randomised trials involving 31,000 recurrences and 24,000 deaths among 75,000 women. Lancet 339:1–15 + 71–85, 1992Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McGuire WL, Tandon AK, Allred DC, Chamness GC, Clark GM: How to use prognostic factors in axillary node-negative breast cancer patients. JNCI 82:1006–1015, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schmitt M, Kanayama N, Henschen A, Hollrieder A, Hafter R, Gulba D, Jänicke F, Graeff H: Elastase released from human granulocytes stimulated with N-formyl-chemotactic peptide prevents activation of tumor cell prourokinase. FEBS Lett 255:85–88, 1989Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schmitt M, Jänicke F, Hafter R, Hollrieder A, Kanayama N, Gulba D, Graeff H: Tumor-associated fibrinolysis in human breast cancer: Detection and quantitation of the urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) by ELISA and immunohistochemistry.In Matsuda M, Iwanaga S, Takada A, Henschen A (eds) Fibrinogen 4. Current Basic and Clinical Aspects. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1990, pp 213–222Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    McGuire WL, De La Garza M, Chamness GC: Evaluation of estrogen receptor assays in human breast cancer tissue. Cancer Res 37:637–639, 1977PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hedley DW: Flow cytometry using paraffin-embedded tissue: Five years on. Cytometry 10:229–241, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cox DR: Regression models and life-tables. J R Stat Soc (B) 34:187–220, 1972Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hawkins DM: Testing a sequence of observations for a shift in location. J Am Stat Assoc 72:180–186, 1977Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Segal MR, Bloch DA: A comparison of estimated proportional hazards models and regression trees. Stat Med 8:539–550, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olsen RA, Stone CJ: Classification and Regression Trees. Wadsworth, Belmont, 1984Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Altman DG, Andersen PK: Bootstrap investigation of the stability of a Cox regression model. Stat Med 8:771–783, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kaplan EL, Meier P: Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53:457–481, 1958Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Peto R, Peto J: Asymptotically efficient rank invariant procedures. J Royal Stat Soc (A) 135:185–207, 1972Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hähnel R, Woodings T, Vivian AB: Prognostic value of estrogen receptors in primary breast cancer. Cancer 44:671–675, 1979PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    McGuire WL: Prognostic factors for recurrence and survival in human breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 10:5–9, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Camiolo SM, Markus G, Piver MS: Plasminogen activator content of gynecological tumors and their metastases. Gynecol Oncol 26:364–373, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Harvey SR, Lawrence DD, Madeja JM, Abbey SJ, Markus G: Secretion of plasminogen activators by human colorectal and gastric tumor explants. Clin Exp Metastasis 6:431–450, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Markus G, Camiolo SM, Kohga S, Madeja JM, Mittelman A: Plasminogen activator secretion of human tumors in short-term organ culture, including a comparison of primary and metastatic colon tumors. Cancer Res 43:5517–5525, 1983PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Spyratos F, Maudelonde T, Brouillet J-P, Brunet M, Defrenne A, Andrieu C, Hacene K, Desplaces A, Rouesse J, Rochefort H: Cathepsin D: An independent prognostic factor for metastasis of breast cancer. Lancet ii:1115–1118, 1989Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tandon AT, Clark GM, Chamness GC, Chirgwin JM, McGuire WL: Cathepsin D and prognosis in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 322:297–302, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Thorpe SM, Rochefort H, Garcia M, Freiss G, Christensen IJ, Khalaf S, Paolucci F, Pau B, Rasmussen BB, Rose C: Association between high concentrations of Mr 52,000 cathepsin D and poor prognosis in primary human breast cancer. Cancer Res 49:6008–6014, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sigurdsson H, Baldetorp B, Borg A, Dalberg M, Fernö M, Killander D, Olsson H: Indicators of prognosis in node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 322:1045–1053, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Clark GM, Dressler LG, Owens MA, Pounds G, Oldaker T, McGuire WL: Prediction of relapse or survival in patients with node-negative breast cancer by DNA flow cytometry. N Engl J Med 320:627–633, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG, Levin WJ, Ullrich A, McGuire WL: Human breast cancer: Correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the Her-2/neu oncogene. Science 235:177–182, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fritz Jänicke
    • 1
  • Manfred Schmitt
    • 1
  • Lothar Pache
    • 1
  • Kurt Ulm
    • 2
  • Nadia Harbeck
    • 1
  • Heinz Höfler
    • 3
  • Henner Graeff
    • 1
  1. 1.Frauenklinik and Poliklinik der Technischen Universität MünchenFRG
  2. 2.Institut für Medizinische Statistik und Epidemiologie der Technischen Universität MünchenFRG
  3. 3.Institut für Allgemeine Pathologie und Pathologische Anatomie der Technischen Universität MünchenFRG

Personalised recommendations