Taxol-resistance-associated gene-3 (TRAG-3/CSAG2) expression is predictive for clinical outcome in ovarian carcinoma patients
- 151 Downloads
An obstacle in chemotherapy of ovarian cancer is the development of drug resistance. Taxol (paclitaxel)-resistance-associated gene-3 (TRAG-3/CSAG2) was found to be overexpressed in a paclitaxel-resistant ovarian carcinoma cell line. However, clinical impact of TRAG-3 in ovarian carcinoma has not been demonstrated previously. For demonstration of potential clinical impact of TRAG-3, immunohistochemistry was applied to determine TRAG-3 protein expression in specimens obtained from ovarian carcinoma patients (n = 37) who received a paclitaxel-based chemotherapy at two different time points, initial laparotomy before chemotherapy, and secondary cytoreduction after chemotherapy. The TRAG-3-specific immunohistochemical staining was correlated with clinical outcome. In ovarian carcinoma specimens obtained at the initial laparotomy, an advantage in overall (P < 0.001) and progression-free (P = 0.003) survival for patients with weak TRAG-3 expression could be demonstrated. Tumor specimens excised at secondary cytoreduction procedure were not predictive for clinical outcome. In summary, TRAG-3 was found to be a prognostic factor for the prediction of clinical outcome after the application of paclitaxel-based chemotherapy.
KeywordsOvarian carcinoma Paclitaxel TRAG-3 CSAG2 Chemotherapy
This study was supported in part by the “Berliner Krebsgesellschaft e.V.” and by grant LA 1039/2-3 of the “Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft”.
- 14.Ozols RF, Schwartz PE, Eifel PJ (2001) Ovarian cancer, fallopian tube carcinoma and peritoneal carcinoma. In: De Vita Jr. VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (eds) Cancer: principles & practice of oncology, 6th edn. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 1597–1632Google Scholar
- 19.Sobin LH, Wittekind C (eds) (2002) TNM classification of malignant tumors (UICC). Wiley-Liss, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 20.Stewart BW, Kleihues P (eds) (2003) World cancer report. IARC, Lyon, pp 220–222Google Scholar