Advertisement

Medical Oncology

, 34:156 | Cite as

A comparative study of Ki-67 antigen expression between luminal A and triple-negative subtypes of breast cancer

  • Umbelina Soares Borges
  • Danylo Rafhael Costa-Silva
  • João Paulo da Silva-Sampaio
  • Carla Solange Escórcio-Dourado
  • Airton Mendes CondeJr.
  • Viriato Campelo
  • Luiz Henrique Gebrim
  • Benedito Borges da SilvaEmail author
  • Pedro Vitor Lopes-Costa
Original Paper
  • 237 Downloads

Abstract

Tumor biomarkers such as hormone receptors, HER-2 and Ki-67 are used routinely in clinical practice for classification of molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Cell proliferation evaluated by Ki-67 antigen expression is important to determine tumor aggressiveness. However, there is a paucity of studies comparing Ki-67 expression in an expressive number of cells among molecular subtypes of breast cancer, particularly among less and more aggressive tumors, such as luminal A and triple-negative, which have led us to the present study. The current study included invasive ductal carcinoma samples of 59 patients, which were divided into two groups: luminal A (n = 29) and triple-negative (n = 30). For immunohistochemical reaction, the samples were incubated with monoclonal anti-Ki-67 antibody (clone MIB1) and cells expressing Ki-67 protein were identified by dark brown staining of the nuclei, counting at least 600 cells per slide. The mean percentages of stained nuclei were analyzed by Student’s t test (p < 0.05). The mean percentage of nuclei stained with anti-ki-67 was 10.14 and 77.22 in luminal A and triple-negative breast cancers, respectively (p < 0.0001). Our study showed a high cell proliferation of triple-negative breast cancer in comparison with luminal A, justifying its aggressiveness and poor clinical outcome.

Keywords

Breast cancer Molecular subtypes Luminal A Triple-negative Ki-67 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the patients who participated in the current study and the Post-Graduation Program of the Federal University of Piauí, Brazil.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Piauı´ (Teresina, Brazil; Approval No. 43447015.8.0000.5214). All research is in compliance with the terms of the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

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

References

  1. 1.
    Huang S, Chong N, Lewis NE, Jia W, Xie G, Garmire LX. Novel personalized pathway-based metabolomics models reveal key metabolic pathways for breast cancer diagnosis. Genome Med. 2016;8(1):34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ban KA, Godellas CV. Epidemiology of breast cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2014;23(3):409–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hadjiiski L, Sahiner B, Helvie MA, Chan HP, Roubidoux MA, Paramagul C, et al. Breast masses: computer-aided diagnosis with serial mammograms. Radiology. 2006;240(2):343–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Veisy A, Lotfinejad S, Salehi K, Zhian F. Risk of breast cancer in relation to reproductive factors in North-West of Iran, 2013–2014. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16(2):451–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Estimate 2016: Incidence of cancer in Brazil. National Cancer Institute (INCA). http://www.inca.gov.br/estimativa/2016.
  6. 6.
    Tang P, Tse GM. Immunohistochemical surrogates for molecular classification of breast carcinoma: a 2015 update. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016;140(8):806–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zardavas D, Irrthum A, Swanton C, Piccart M. Clinical management of breast cancer heterogeneity. Nat Ver Clin Oncol. 2015;12(7):381–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406(6797):747–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    El Benna H, Zribi A, Laabidi S, Haddaoui A, Mlika M, Skhiri H, et al. Ki-67: role in diagnosis, prognosis and follow-up after treatment of breast cancers. Tunis Med. 2015;93(12):737–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gerdes J, Schwab U, Lemke H, Stein H. Production of a mouse monoclonal antibody reactive with a human nuclear antigen associated with cell proliferation. Int J Cancer. 1983;31(1):13–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schlotter CM, Vogt U, Allgayer H, Brandt B. Molecular targeted therapies for breast cancer treatment. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10(4):211.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Glajcar A, Szpor J, Pacek A, Tyrak KE, Chan F, Streb J, et al. The relationship between breast cancer molecular subtypes and mast cell populations in tumor microenvironment. Virchows Arch. 2017;470(5):505–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Keam B, Im SA, Lee KH, Han SW, Oh DY, Kim JH, et al. Ki-67 can be used for further classification of triple negative breast cancer into two subtypes with different response and prognosis. Breast Cancer Res. 2011;13(2):R22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang W, Wu J, Zhang P, Fei X, Zong Y, Chen X, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of Ki-67 in triple-negative breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(21):31079–87.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Daidone MG, Silvestrini R. Prognostic and predictive role of proliferation indices in adjuvant therapy of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2001;30:27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    da Silva BB, Lopes IM. Gebrim LH Effects of raloxifene on normal breast tissue from premenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;95(2):99–103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Urruticoechea A, Smith IE, Dowsett M. Proliferation marker Ki-67 in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(28):7212–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldhirsch EP, Winer AS, Coates RD, Gelber M, Piccart-Gebhart B, Thürlimann H-J, et al. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(9):2206–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blows FM, Driver KE, Schmidt MK, Broeks A, van Leeuwen FE, Wesseling J, et al. Subtyping of breast cancer by immunohistochemistry to investigate a relationship between subtype and short and long term survival: a collaborative analysis of data for 10,159 cases from 12 studies. PLoS Med. 2010;7(5):e1000279.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yuan P, Xu B, Wang C, Zhang C, Sun M, Yuan L. Ki-67 expression in Luminal type breast cancer and its association with the clinicopathology of the cancer. Oncol Lett. 2016;11(3):2101–210.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    da Silva EZ, Jamur MC, Oliver C. Mast cell function: a new vision of an old cell. J Histochem Cytochem. 2014;62(10):698–738.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Maciel TT, Moura IC, Hermine O. The role of mast cells in cancers. F1000 prime report. 2015;7:09.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    de Souza Junior DA, Santana AC, da Silva EZ, Oliver C, Jamur MC. The role of mast cell specific chymases and tryptases in tumor angiogenesis. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:142359.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mandó P, Rizzo M, de la Puente CP, Maino M, Ponce C, Pombo MT, Amat M, et al. High histologic grade and high Ki-67 expression predict phenotypic alterations in node metastasis in primary breast cancers. J Breast Cancer. 2017;20(2):170–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kolečková M, Kolář Z, Ehrmann J, Kořínková G, Trojanec R. Age-associated prognostic and predictive biomarkers in patients with breast cancer. Oncol Lett. 2017;13(6):4201–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Umbelina Soares Borges
    • 1
  • Danylo Rafhael Costa-Silva
    • 2
  • João Paulo da Silva-Sampaio
    • 1
  • Carla Solange Escórcio-Dourado
    • 2
  • Airton Mendes CondeJr.
    • 1
  • Viriato Campelo
    • 1
  • Luiz Henrique Gebrim
    • 3
  • Benedito Borges da Silva
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Pedro Vitor Lopes-Costa
    • 1
  1. 1.Postgaduate Program in Health SciencesFederal University of PiauiTeresinaBrazil
  2. 2.Postgraduate ProgramNortheast Biotechnology Network (Rede Nordeste de Biotecnologia-RENORBIO)TeresinaBrazil
  3. 3.Department of MastologyFederal University of Sao PauloSao PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations