Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 524–529 | Cite as

P-Glycoprotein Expression in Indian Breast Cancer Patients with Reference to Molecular Subtypes and Response to Anthracycline-Based Chemotherapy—a Prospective Clinical Study from a Developing Country

  • Mudit Mehrotra
  • Akshay Anand
  • Kul Ranjan Singh
  • Surender Kumar
  • Nuzhat Husain
  • Abhinav Arun Sonkar
Original Article


Chemo-resistance is an important factor determining the response of tumor to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Our study was aimed to determine the role of P-glycoprotein (P-glyp) expression as a predictor of response to NACT in locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) patients with special reference to molecular subtypes. Sixty cases of locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) were subjected to trucut biopsy and the tissue samples were evaluated immunohistochemically for P-glyp, ER, PR, and Her 2 neu status. Pre- and post-NACT P-glyp expression was correlated with clinical response (using WHO criteria after three cycles of CEF regimen) and molecular subtypes. The change in the P-glyp expression before (pre-) and after (post-) NACT was statistically significant with higher stage (p = 0.02), hormonal negative molecular subtypes (p = 0.01), and poor clinical response (p = 0.01). Pre-NACT-positive P-glyp expression is associated with higher stage and hormonal negative molecular subtypes and poor clinical response. The increased expression of P-glyp induced by NACT likely explains the concept of acquired chemo-resistance and may prove as an intermediate checkpoint in determining chemo-sensitivity for further treatment so that additional doses of ineffective chemotherapy may be avoided in non-responders translating into better patient safety.


P-Glycoprotein Breast neoplasm Neoadjuvant chemotherapy Clinical response Molecular subtypes 


Author Contribution

MM contributed in the literature search, data acquisition, data analysis, and manuscript preparation and manuscript editing.

AA contributed in literature search, design, definition of intellectual content, data analysis, statistical analysis and manuscript preparation and editing.

KRS contributed in design, definition of intellectual content, data analysis, statistical analysis and manuscript preparation and editing.

SK contributed in literature search, data acquisition and manuscript preparation.

NH contributed in the data analysis, manuscript editing and review.

AAS contributed in the concept, design, and definition of intellectual content, manuscript editing and review.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F (2013) GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC Cancer Base No. 11 [Internet]. International Agency for Research on Cancer, LyonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deo SV, Bhutani M, Shukla NK, Raina V, Rath GK, Purkayasth J (2003) Randomized trial comparing neo-adjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in operable locally advanced breast cancer (T4b N0-2 M0). J Surg Oncol 84:192–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Charfare H, Limongelli S, Purushotham AD (2005) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Br J Surg 92:14–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heys SD, Chaturvedi S (2003) Primary chemotherapy in breast cancer: the beginning of the end or end of the beginning for the surgical oncologist? World J Surg Oncol 1(1):14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chintamani, Singhal V, Singh JP, Lyall A, Saxena S, Bansal A (2004) Is drug induced toxicity a good predictor of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer? – a prospective clinical study. BMC Cancer 4:48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smith IE, Detre S, Burton SA, Salter J, A'Hern R, Walsh G et al (1998) Reduced apoptosis and proliferation and increased Bcl-2 in residual breast cancer following preoperative chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 48:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nielsen DL (2004) Mechanisms and functional aspects of multidrug resistance in Ehrlich ascites tumor cells. Dan Med Bull 51:393–414PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fung KL, Gottesman MM (2009) A synonymous polymorphism in a common MDR1 (ABCB1) haplotype shapes protein function. Biochim Biophys Acta 1794:860–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kerr JF, Winterford CM, Hormon BV (1994) Apoptosis: its significance in cancer and cancer therapy. Cancer 73:2013–2026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hortobagyi GN, Ames FC, Buzdar AU, Kau SW, Mc Neese MD, Paulus D et al (1988) Management of stage lIl primary breast cancer with primary chemotherapy, surgery and radiotherapy. Cancer 62:2507–2516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McCready DR, Hortobagyi GN, Kau SW, Smith TL, Buzdar AU, Balch CM (1989) The prognostic significance of lymph node metastases after preoperative chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer. Arch Surg 124:21–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gerlach JH, Kartner N, Bell DR, Ling V (1986) Multidrug resistance. Cancer Surv 5:25–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wishart GC, Plumb JA, Going JJ, McNicol AM, McArdle CS, Tsuruo T et al (1990) P-glycoprotein expression in primary breast cancer detected by immunocytochemistry with two monoclonal antibodies. Br J Cancer 62:758–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schneider J, Bak M, Efferth T, Kaufmann M, Mattern J, Volm M (1989) Pglycoprotein expression in treated and untreated human breast cancer. Br J Cancer 60:815–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chan HS, Bradley G, Thorner P, Haddad G, Gallie BL, Ling V (1988) A sensitive method for immunocytochemical detection of P-glycoprotein in multidrug-resistant human ovarian carcinoma cell lines. Lab Investig 59:870–875PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Merkel DE, Fuqua SA, Tandon AK, Hill SM, Buzdar AU, McGuire WL (1989) Electrophoretic analysis of 248 clinical breast cancer specimens for p-glycoprotein overexpression or gene amplification. J Clin Oncol 7:1129–1136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dalton WS, Grogan TM, Meltzer PS, Scheper RJ, Durie BG, Taylor CW et al (1989) Drug resistance in multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma; detection of p-glycoprotein circumvention by addition of verapamil to chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 7:415–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chan HS, Thorner PS, Haddad G, Ling V (1990) Immunohistochemical detection of p-glycoprotein: prognostic correlation in soft tissue sarcoma of childhood. J Clin Oncol 8:689–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sugawara I, Kataoka I, Morishita Y, Hamada H, Tsuruo T, Itoyama S et al (1988) Tissue distribution of p-glycoprotein encoded by a multidrug resistant gene as revealed by a monoclonal antibody, MRK16. Cancer Res 48:1926–1929PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Koh EH, Chung HC, Lee KB, Lim HY, Kim JH, Roh JK et al (1992) The value of immunohistochemical detection of pglycoprotein in breast cancer before and after induction chemotherapy. Yonsei Med J 33:137–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chung HC, Rha SY, Kim JH, Roh JK, Min JS, Lee KS et al (1997) P-glycoprotein: the immediate end point of drug resistance to induction chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 42:65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ro J, Shin A, Ro JY, Fritsche H, Hortobagyi G, Blick M (1990) Immunohistochemical analysis of P-glycoprotein expression correlated with chemotherapy resistance in locally advanced breast cancer. Hum Pathol 21:787–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Verrelle P, Meissonnier F, Fonck Y, Feillel V, Dionet C, Kwiatkowski F et al (1991) Clinical relevance of immunohistochemical detection of multidrug resistance P-glycoprotein in breast carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 83:111–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Eltahir A, Heys SD, Hutcheon AW, Sarkar TK, Smith I, Walker LG et al (1998) Treatment of large and locally advanced breast cancer using neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Am J Surg 175:127–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Moliterni ZM, Brambilla C (1995) Adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in node-positive breast cancer: the results of 20 years of follow-up. N Engl J Med 332:901–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vishnukumar S, Umamaheswaran G, Anichavezhi D, Indumathy S, Adithan C, Srinivasan K et al (2013) P-glycoprotein expression as a predictor of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Indian J Cancer 50:195–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tashbaeva RE, Hwang DN, Song GS, Choi NH, Lee JH, Lyoo YS et al (2007) Cellular characterization of multidrug resistance P-glycoprotein, alpha fetoprotein, and neovascular endothelium-associated antigens in canine hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhotic liver. Vet Pathol 44:600–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Singh G, Singh DP, Gupta D, Muralikrishna BV (1996) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 61:38–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Morrow M, Braverman A, Thelmo W, Sohn CK, Sand J, Mora M et al (1986) Multimodal therapy for locally advanced breast cancer. Arch Surg 121:1291–1296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Linn SC, Giaccone G, Van Diest PJ, Blokhuis WM, van der Valk P, van Kalken CK et al (1995) Prognostic relevance of p-glycoprotein expression in breast cancer. Ann Oncol 6:679–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Trock BJ, Leonassa F, Clarke R (1997) Multidrug resistance in breast cancer: a meta-analysis of MDR1/gp170 expression and its possible functional significance. J Natl Cancer Inst 89:917–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    De Lena M, Zucali R, Viganotti G, Valagussa P, Bonadonna G (1978) Combination chemotherapy, radiotherapy approach in locally advanced breast cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1:53–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sataloff DM, Mason BA, Prestipino AJ, Seinige UL, Lieber CP, Baloch Z (1995) Pathological response to induction chemotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of breast, a determinant of out come. J Am Coll Surg 180:297–306Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Association of Surgical Oncology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of General SurgeryKing George’s Medical UniversityLucknowIndia
  2. 2.Department of Endocrine SurgeryKing George’s Medical UniversityLucknowIndia
  3. 3.Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical SciencesLucknowIndia
  4. 4.King George’s Medical UniversityLucknowIndia

Personalised recommendations