Advertisement

Virchows Archiv

, Volume 469, Issue 5, pp 547–552 | Cite as

ESR1, ERBB2, and Ki67 mRNA expression predicts stage and grade of non-muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma (NMIBC)

  • Johannes Breyer
  • Ralph M. Wirtz
  • Mark Laible
  • Kornelia Schlombs
  • Philipp Erben
  • Maximilian Christian Kriegmair
  • Robert Stoehr
  • Sebastian Eidt
  • Stefan Denzinger
  • Maximilian Burger
  • Arndt Hartmann
  • Wolfgang Otto
Original Article

Abstract

Pathological staging and grading are crucial for risk assessment in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Molecular grading might support pathological evaluation and minimize interobserver variability. In this study, the well-established breast cancer markers ESR1, PGR, ERBB2, and MKI67 were evaluated as potential molecular markers to support grading and staging in NMIBC. We retrospectively analyzed clinical data and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues (FFPE) of patients with NMIBC. Messenger RNA (mRNA) expression of the aforementioned markers was measured by single-step reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) using RNA-specific TaqMan assays. Relative gene expression was determined by normalization to two reference genes (CALM2 and B2M) using the 40−ΔΔCT method and correlated to histopathological stage and grade. Pathological assessment was performed by an experienced uropathologist. Statistical analysis was performed using the SAS software JMP 9.0.0 version and GraphPad Prism 5.04. Of 381 cases of NMIBC, samples of 100 pTa and 255 pT1 cases were included in the final study. Spearman rank correlation revealed significant correlations between grade and expression of MKI67 (r = 0.52, p < 0.0001), ESR1 (r = 0.25, p < 0.0001), and ERBB2 (r = 0.18, p = 0.0008). In Mann-Whitney tests, MKI67 was significantly different between all grades (p < 0.0001), while ESR1 (p = 0.0006) and ERBB2 (p = 0.027) were significantly different between G2 and G3. Higher expression of MKI67 (r = 0.49; p < 0.0001), ERBB2 (r = 0.22; p < 0.0001), and ESR1 (r = 0.18; p = 0.0009) mRNA was positively correlated with higher stage. MKI67 (p < 0.0001), ERBB2 (p = 0.0058), and PGR (p = 0.0007) were significantly different between pTa and pT1. In NMIBC expression of ESR1, ERBB2 and MKI67 are significantly different between stage and grade. This potentially provides objective parameters for pathological evaluation.

Keywords

NMIBC ERBB2 ESR1 MKI67 Stage Grade 

Abbreviations

ESR1/ER

Estrogen receptor alpha

ERBB2/HER2

erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2

Cq

Quantification cycle

FFPE

Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded

GOI

Gene of interest

HR

Hazard ratio

mRNA

Messenger ribonucleic acid

MKI67/Ki67

Marker of proliferation Ki-67

PGR/PgR

Progesterone receptor

REF

Reference gene

RT-qPCR

Reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Sefanie Herlein for excellent technical support.

Compliance with ethical standards

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all the individual participants included in the study.

Funding

The work on this topic was funded by the German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe), grant number 110,541.

Conflict of interest

RMW and SE are founders of STRATIFYER Molecular Pathology GmbH. RMW is an employee of STRATIFYER Molecular Pathology GmbH. ML and KS are employees of BioNTech Diagnostics GmbH.

Supplementary material

428_2016_2002_Fig5_ESM.gif (81 kb)
Fig. S1

(GIF 80 kb)

428_2016_2002_MOESM1_ESM.tif (23 kb)
High Resolution (TIFF 22 kb)
428_2016_2002_Fig6_ESM.gif (249 kb)
Fig. S2

(GIF 249 kb)

428_2016_2002_MOESM2_ESM.tif (177 kb)
High Resolution (TIFF 177 kb)
428_2016_2002_Fig7_ESM.gif (173 kb)
Fig. S3

(GIF 173 kb)

428_2016_2002_MOESM3_ESM.tif (38 kb)
High Resolution (TIFF 38 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F (2015) Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 136:359–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Babjuk M, Burger M, Zigeuner R, Shariat SF, van Rhijn BW, Comperat E, Sylvester RJ, Kaasinen E, Böhle A, Palou Redorta J, Roupret M (2013) EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2013. Eur Urol 64:639–653CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Prout GR Jr, Barton BA, Griffin PP, Friedell GH (1992) Treated history of noninvasive grade 1 transitional cell carcinoma. The National Bladder Cancer Group. J Urol 148:1413–1419PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Otto W, Denzinger S, Fritsche HM, Burger M, Rößler W, Bertz S, May M, Hartmann A, Hofstädter F, Wieland WF, Eder F (2013) Introduction and first clinical application of a simplified immunohistochemical validation system confirms prognostic impact of KI-67 and CK20 for stage T1 urothelial bladder carcinoma: single-center analysis of eight biomarkers in a series of three hundred six patients. Clin Genitourin Cancer 11:537–544CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sylvester RJ, van der Meijden A, Oosterlinck W, Witjes JA, Bouffioux C, Denis L, Newling DW, Kurth K (2006) Predicting recurrence and progression in individual patients with stage Ta, T1 bladder cancer using EORTC risk tables: a combined analysis of 2596 patients from seven EORTC trials. Eur Urol 49:466–465CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Limas C, Bigler A, Bair R, Bernhart P, Reddy P (1993) Proliferative activity of urothelial neoplasms: comparison of BrdU incorporation, Ki67 expression, and nucleolar organiser regions. J Clin Pathol 46:159–165CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang L, Feng C, Ding G, Ding Q, Zhou Z, Jiang H, Wu Z (2014) Ki67 and TP53 expressions predict recurrence of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Tumour Biol 35:2989–2995CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (2014) Comprehensive molecular characterization of urothelial bladder carcinoma. Nature 507:315–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Choi W, Porter S, Kim S, Willis D, Plimack ER, Hoffman-Censits J, Roth B, Cheng T, Tran M, Lee IL, Melquist J, Bondaruk J, Majewski T, Zhang S, Pretzsch S, Baggerly K, Siefker-Radtke A, Czerniak B, Dinney CP, McConkey DJ (2014) Identification of distinct basal and luminal subtypes of muscle-invasive bladder cancer with different sensitivities to frontline chemotherapy. Cancer Cell 25:152–165CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sjödahl G, Lauss M, Lövgren K, Chebil G, Gudjonsson S, Veerla S, Patschan O, Aine M, Fernö M, Ringnér M, Månsson W, Liedberg F, Lindgren D, Höglund M (2012) A molecular taxonomy for urothelial carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 18:3377–3386CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Otto W, Denzinger S, Fritsche HM, Burger M, Wieland WF, Hofstädter F, Hartmann A, Bertz S (2011) The WHO classification of 1973 is more suitable than the WHO classification of 2004 for predicting survival in pT1 urothelial bladder cancer. BJU Int 107:404–408CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rodríguez-Alonso A, Pita-Fernández S, González-Carreró J, Nogueira-March JL (2002) p53 and ki67 expression as prognostic factors for cancer-related survival in stage T1 transitional cell bladder carcinoma. Eur Urol 41:182–188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lopez-Beltran A, Luque RJ, Alvarez-Kindelan J, Quintero A, Merlo F, Carrasco JC, Requena MJ, Montironi R (2004) Prognostic factors in stage T1 grade 3 bladder cancer survival: the role of G1-S modulators (p53, p21Waf1, p27kip1, Cyclin D1, and Cyclin D3) and proliferation index (ki67-MIB1). Eur Urol 45:606–612CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gontero P, Gillo A, Fiorito C, Oderda M, Pacchioni D, Casetta G, Peraldo F, Zitella A, Tizzani A, Ricceri F (2014) Prognostic factors of ‘high-grade’ Ta bladder cancers according to the WHO 2004 classification: are these equivalent to ‘high-risk’ non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer? Urol Int 92:136–142CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kumar S, Prajapati O, Vaiphei K, Parmar KM, Sriharsha AS, Singh SK (2015) Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2/neu overexpression in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and its prognostic significance: is it worth hype? South Asian J Cancer 4:115–117CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jalali Nadoushan MR, Taheri T, Jouian N, Zaeri F (2007) Overexpression of HER-2/neu oncogene and transitional cell carcinoma of bladder. Urol J 4:151–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhao J, Xu W, Zhang Z, Song R, Zeng S, Sun Y, Xu C (2015) Prognostic role of HER2 expression in bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urol Nephrol 47:87–94CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Amsellem-Ouazana D, Bièche I, Molinié V, Elie C, Vieillefond A, Tozlu S, Botto H, Debré B, Lidereau R (2006) Is quantitative real-time RT-PCR an adjunct to immunohistochemistry for the evaluation of ErbB2 status in transitional carcinoma of the bladder? Eur Urol 49:1035–1042CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chen PC, Yu HJ, Chang YH, Pan CC (2013) Her2 amplification distinguishes a subset of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancers with a high risk of progression. J Clin Pathol 66:113–119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Iyer G, Al-Ahmadie H, Schultz N, Hanrahan AJ, Ostrovnaya I, Balar AV, Kim PH, Lin O, Weinhold N, Sander C, Zabor EC, Janakiraman M, Garcia-Grossman IR, Heguy A, Viale A, Bochner BH, Reuter VE, Bajorin DF, Milowsky MI, Taylor BS, Solit DB (2013) Prevalence and co-occurrence of actionable genomic alterations in high-grade bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol 31:3133–3140CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rajjayabun PH, Keegan PE, Lunec J, Mellon JK (2005) erbB receptor expression patterns in human bladder cancer. Urology 66:196–200CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tan W, Boorjian S, Advani P, Farmer S, Lohse C, Cheville J, Kwon E, Leibovich B (2015) The estrogen pathway: estrogen receptor-α, progesterone receptor, and estrogen receptor-β expression in radical cystectomy urothelial cell carcinoma specimens. Clin Genitourin Cancer 13:476–484CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shen SS, Smith CL, Hsieh JT, Yu J, Kim IY, Jian W, Sonpavde G, Ayala GE, Younes M, Lerner SP (2006) Expression of estrogen receptors-alpha and -beta in bladder cancer cell lines and human bladder tumor tissue. Cancer 106:2610–2616CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hsu I, Vitkus S, Da J, Yeh S (2013) Role of oestrogen receptors in bladder cancer development. Nat Rev Urol 10:317–326CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Teng J, Wang ZY, Jarrard DF, Bjorling DE (2008) Roles of estrogen receptor alpha and beta in modulating urothelial cell proliferation. Endocr Relat Cancer 15:351–364CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hoffman KL, Lerner SP, Smith CL (2013) Raloxifene inhibits growth of RT4 urothelial carcinoma cells via estrogen receptor-dependent induction of apoptosis and inhibition of proliferation. Horm Cancer 4:24–35CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johannes Breyer
    • 1
  • Ralph M. Wirtz
    • 2
    • 3
  • Mark Laible
    • 4
  • Kornelia Schlombs
    • 4
  • Philipp Erben
    • 5
  • Maximilian Christian Kriegmair
    • 5
  • Robert Stoehr
    • 6
  • Sebastian Eidt
    • 3
  • Stefan Denzinger
    • 1
  • Maximilian Burger
    • 1
  • Arndt Hartmann
    • 6
  • Wolfgang Otto
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of UrologyUniversity of RegensburgRegensburgGermany
  2. 2.STRATIFYER Molecular Pathology GmbHCologneGermany
  3. 3.Institute of Pathology at the St Elisabeth Hospital Köln-HohenlindCologneGermany
  4. 4.BioNTech Diagnostics GmbHMainzGermany
  5. 5.Department of UrologyUniversity of MannheimMannheimGermany
  6. 6.Institute of PathologyUniversity of Erlangen-NurembergErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations