Folia histochemica et cytobiologica · 2020
Wilms' tumor 1 antigen immunoreactivity in epithelial ovarian cancer - diagnostic and prognostic value.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zarychta Elzbieta, Lepinay Katarzyna, Szubert Sebastian, Jozwicki Jakub, Misiak Jan, Brozyna Anna A, Kosinska-Kaczynska Katarzyna, Lewandowska Agnieszka, Malicka Ewa, Makarewicz Adrianna, Rhone Piotr, Jozwicki Wojciech
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Ovarian cancer is a heterogeneous disease, with a number of different histological subtypes with various responses to treatment. Wilms' tumor 1 (WT1) immunoreactivity is used to distinguish between OC's various subtypes. However, little is known about the protein's role as a prognostic factor. Thus, the main aim of our study was to evaluate the relationship between WT1 expression and patient overall survival (OS) and lymph node metastases.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study group consisted of 164 women aged 22-84, diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). WT1 expression in histological slides was assessed by immunohistochemistry.
RESULTS: Serous tumors were the most common subtype among EOC (n = 126; 76.8%), followed by endometrioid (n = 20; 12.2%), clear-cell (n = 14; 8.5%) and mucinous cancer (n = 4; 2.4%). Of all serous EOC, WT1-positive tumors accounted for 75.6% of cases and this number was significantly higher than in other histological subtypes (p < 0.0001). Patients with lymph node metastases were more likely to have WT1-positive than WT1-negative tumors (p = 0.006). There was no significant correlation between WT1 immunoreactivity and OS across the whole study group of EOC patients (p = 0.6); however, in the group of non-serous (mucinous, endometrioid and clear-cell) EOC subjects, WT1 immunoreactivity was associated with shorter OS (p = 0.046).
CONCLUSIONS: WT1 immunoreactivity may be helpful in differentiating primary epithelial serous carcinomas from non-serous ovarian cancers; however, its prognostic role in EOC is rather uncertain.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study group consisted of 164 women aged 22-84, diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). WT1 expression in histological slides was assessed by immunohistochemistry.
RESULTS: Serous tumors were the most common subtype among EOC (n = 126; 76.8%), followed by endometrioid (n = 20; 12.2%), clear-cell (n = 14; 8.5%) and mucinous cancer (n = 4; 2.4%). Of all serous EOC, WT1-positive tumors accounted for 75.6% of cases and this number was significantly higher than in other histological subtypes (p < 0.0001). Patients with lymph node metastases were more likely to have WT1-positive than WT1-negative tumors (p = 0.006). There was no significant correlation between WT1 immunoreactivity and OS across the whole study group of EOC patients (p = 0.6); however, in the group of non-serous (mucinous, endometrioid and clear-cell) EOC subjects, WT1 immunoreactivity was associated with shorter OS (p = 0.046).
CONCLUSIONS: WT1 immunoreactivity may be helpful in differentiating primary epithelial serous carcinomas from non-serous ovarian cancers; however, its prognostic role in EOC is rather uncertain.