Iranian Journal of Pathology

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

News

Open Access Policy

Peer Review Process

Guidelines for Reviewers

Immunoexpression of the GCDFP-15 Marker in Different Grades of Breast Carcinoma

Document Type : Original Research

Authors

1 Department of Pathology, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

2 Cancer Research Center, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

3 Department of Clinical Oncology and Radiotherapy, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

Abstract

Background & Objective: During the last decade, biological markers of breast cancer have been considered to predict the degree of histology, behavior, and extent of tumor invasion and the possibility of lymph node involvement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the expression of GCDFP-15 in different grades of invasive ductal carcinoma, as the most common type of breast cancer.
Methods: In this retrospective study, paraffin blocks of tumors of 60 breast cancer patients registered in the histopathology laboratory of Imam Khomeini Hospital in Ahvaz between 2019 and 2020 were reviewed. Information on grade, invasion, stage and lymph node involvement was extracted from the pathology reports and immunohistochemical staining for GCDFP-15 was performed. Data were analyzed by SPSS 22.
Results: GCDFP-15 marker expression was observed in 20 out of 60 breast cancer patients (33.3%). GCDFP-15 staining intensity was weak in 7 cases (35%), moderate in 8 cases (40%), and strong in 5 cases (25%). The patient's age and sex showed no significant relationship with the expression of GCDFP-15 and intensity of staining. Expression of the GCDFP-15 marker was correlated significantly with tumor grade, stage, and vascular invasion (P<0.05)) and its expression was higher in tumors with a lower grade, less depth of invasion, and no vascular invasion but unrelated to perineural invasion, lymph node involvement, and tumor size. The intensity of staining for GCDFP-15 showed significant relationship with the tumor grade (P<0.0001) but unrelated to the other factors.
Conclusion: GCDFP-15 marker may be significantly associated with tumor grade, depth of invasion, and vascular invasion, thus can be used as a prognostic marker.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References
  1. Łukasiewicz S, Czeczelewski M, Forma A, Baj J, Sitarz R, Stanisławek A. Breast Cancer-Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Classification, Prognostic Markers, and Current Treatment Strategies-An Updated Review. Cancers. 2021;13(17):4287. [DOI:10.3390/cancers13174287] [PMID] [PMCID]
  2. Piechocki M, Koziołek W, Sroka D, Matrejek A, Miziołek P, Saiuk N, et al. Trends in Incidence and Mortality of Gynecological and Breast Cancers in Poland (1980-2018). Clinl Epidemiol. 2022;14:95-114. [DOI:10.2147/CLEP.S330081] [PMID] [PMCID]
  3. Yin J, Lin C, Jiang M, Tang X, Xie D, Chen J, et al. CENPL, ISG20L2, LSM4, MRPL3 are four novel hub genes and may serve as diagnostic and prognostic markers in breast cancer. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):1-15. [DOI:10.1038/s41598-021-95068-6] [PMID] [PMCID]
  4. Sledge GW, Mamounas EP, Hortobagyi GN, Burstein HJ, Goodwin PJ, Wolff AC. Past, present, and future challenges in breast cancer treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(19):1979-86. [DOI:10.1200/JCO.2014.55.4139] [PMID] [PMCID]
  5. Youn HJ, Han W. A Review of the Epidemiology of Breast Cancer in Asia: Focus on Risk Factors. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2020;21(4):867-80. [DOI:10.31557/APJCP.2020.21.4.867] [PMID] [PMCID]
  6. Feng Y, Spezia M, Huang S, Yuan C, Zeng Z, Zhang L, et al. Breast cancer development and progression: Risk factors, cancer stem cells, signaling pathways, genomics, and molecular pathogenesis. Genes Dis. 2018;5(2):77-106. [DOI:10.1016/j.gendis.2018.05.001] [PMID] [PMCID]
  7. Molina R, Barak V, van Dalen A, Duffy MJ, Einarsson R, Gion M, et al. Tumor markers in breast cancer- European Group on Tumor Markers recommendations. Tumour Biol. 2005;26(6):281-93. [DOI:10.1159/000089260] [PMID]
  8. Kabel AM. Tumor markers of breast cancer: New prospectives. J Oncol Sci. 2017;3(1):5-11. [DOI:10.1016/j.jons.2017.01.001]
  9. Sharma S, Mehra R. Conventional machine learning and deep learning approach for multi-classification of breast cancer histopathology images-a comparative insight. J Digital Imag. 2020;33(3):632-54. [DOI:10.1007/s10278-019-00307-y] [PMID] [PMCID]
  10. Ni Y-B, Tsang J, Shao M-M, Chan S-K, Cheung S-Y, Tong J, et al. GATA-3 is superior to GCDFP-15 and mammaglobin to identify primary and metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;169(1):25-32. [DOI:10.1007/s10549-017-4645-2] [PMID]
  11. Celis JE, Moreira JM, Gromova I, Cabezon T, Gromov P, Shen T, et al. Characterization of breast precancerous lesions and myoepithelial hyperplasia in sclerosing adenosis with apocrine metaplasia. Mol Oncol. 2007;1(1):97-119. [DOI:10.1016/j.molonc.2007.02.005] [PMID] [PMCID]
  12. Mazoujian G, Bodian C, Haagensen DE, Jr., Haagensen CD. Expression of GCDFP-15 in breast carcinomas. Relationship to pathologic and clinical factors. Cancer. 1989;63(11):2156-61. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19890601)63:11<2156::AID-CNCR2820631115>3.0.CO;2-B [DOI:10.1002/1097-0142(19890601)63:113.0.CO;2-B] [PMID]
  13. Quinn CM, D'Arcy C, Wells C. Apocrine lesions of the breast. Virchows Arch. 2022;480(1):177-89. [DOI:10.1007/s00428-021-03185-4] [PMID] [PMCID]
  14. Vranic S, Schmitt F, Sapino A, Costa JL, Reddy S, Castro M, et al. Apocrine carcinoma of the breast: a comprehensive review. Histol Histopathol. 2013;28(11):1393-409.
  15. Fiel MI, Cernaianu G, Burstein DE, Batheja N. Value of GCDFP-15 (BRST-2) as a specific immunocytochemical marker for breast carcinoma in cytologic specimens. Acta Cytol. 1996;40(4):637-41. [DOI:10.1159/000333931] [PMID]
  16. Darb-Esfahani S, von Minckwitz G, Denkert C, Ataseven B, Hogel B, Mehta K, et al. Gross cystic disease fluid protein 15 (GCDFP-15) expression in breast cancer subtypes. BMC Cancer. 2014;14(1):546. [DOI:10.1186/1471-2407-14-546] [PMID] [PMCID]
  17. Li X, Zhang Y, Jia L, Xing Y, Zhao B, Sui L, et al. Downregulation of Prolactin-Induced Protein Promotes Osteogenic Differentiation of Periodontal Ligament Stem Cells. Med Sci Monit. 2021;27:e930610. [DOI:10.12659/MSM.930610]
  18. Mazoujian G, Pinkus GS, Davis S, Haagensen DE, Jr. Immunohistochemistry of a gross cystic disease fluid protein (GCDFP-15) of the breast. A marker of apocrine epithelium and breast carcinomas with apocrine features. Am J Pathol. 1983;110(2):105-12.
  19. Celis JE, Gromova I, Gromov P, Moreira JM, Cabezón T, Friis E, et al. Molecular pathology of breast apocrine carcinomas: a protein expression signature specific for benign apocrine metaplasia. FEBS Lett. 2006;580(12):2935-44. [DOI:10.1016/j.febslet.2006.03.080] [PMID]
  20. Wick MR, Lillemoe TJ, Copland GT, Swanson PE, Manivel JC, Kiang DT. Gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 as a marker for breast cancer: immunohistochemical analysis of 690 human neoplasms and comparison with alpha-lactalbumin. Hum Pathol. 1989;20(3):281-7. [DOI:10.1016/0046-8177(89)90137-8] [PMID]
  21. Debily MA, Marhomy SE, Boulanger V, Eveno E, Mariage-Samson R, Camarca A, et al. A functional and regulatory network associated with PIP expression in human breast cancer. PLoS One. 2009;4(3):e4696. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0004696] [PMID] [PMCID]
  22. Urbaniak A, Jablonska K, Podhorska-Okolow M, Ugorski M, Dziegiel P. Prolactin-induced protein (PIP)-characterization and role in breast cancer progression. Am J Cancer Res. 2018;8(11):2150-64.
  23. Luo MH, Huang YH, Ni YB, Tsang JY, Chan SK, Shao MM, et al. Expression of mammaglobin and gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 in breast carcinomas. Hum Pathol. 2013;44(7):1241-50. [DOI:10.1016/j.humpath.2012.10.009] [PMID]
  24. Villarroel Salinas J, Ortiz Hidalgo C, Soria Cespedes D. [Immunohistochemical comparison between GCDFP-15 and estrogen and progesterone receptors in the diagnosis of metastatic carcinoma of the breast]. Gac Med Mex. 2012;148(3):213-7.
  25. Hall RE, Clements JA, Birrell SN, Tilley WD. Prostate-specific antigen and gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 are co-expressed in androgen receptor-positive breast tumours. Br J Cancer. 1998;78(3):360-5. [DOI:10.1038/bjc.1998.499] [PMID] [PMCID]
  26. Lewis GH, Subhawong AP, Nassar H, Vang R, Illei PB, Park BH, et al. Relationship between molecular subtype of invasive breast carcinoma and expression of gross cystic disease fluid protein 15 and mammaglobin. Am J Clin Pathol. 2011;135(4):587-91. [DOI:10.1309/AJCPMFR6OA8ICHNH] [PMID] [PMCID]
  27. El Hag MI, Hag AM, Ha JP, Michael CW. Comparison of GATA-3, mammaglobin, GCDFP-15 expression in breast carcinoma in serous effusions: A cell-block micro-array study. Pleura Peritoneum. 2017;2(3):143-8. [DOI:10.1515/pp-2017-0014] [PMID] [PMCID]
  28. Bhargava R, Beriwal S, Dabbs DJ. Mammaglobin vs GCDFP-15: an immunohistologic validation survey for sensitivity and specificity. Am J Clin Pathol. 2007;127(1):103-13. [DOI:10.1309/TDP92PQLDE2HLEET] [PMID]
  29. Huo L, Zhang J, Gilcrease MZ, Gong Y, Wu Y, Zhang H, et al. Gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 and mammaglobin A expression determined by immunohistochemistry is of limited utility in triple-negative breast cancer. Histopathology. 2013;62(2):267-74. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2559.2012.04344.x] [PMID] [PMCID]
  30. Fritzsche FR, Thomas A, Winzer KJ, Beyer B, Dankof A, Bellach J, et al. Co-expression and prognostic value of gross cystic disease fluid protein 15 and mammaglobin in primary breast cancer. Histol Histopathol. 2007;22(11):1221-30.
Iranian Journal of Pathology
Volume 18, Issue 1
January 2023
Pages 75-81
Files
History
  • Receive Date: 10 August 2022
  • Revise Date: 11 December 2022
  • Accept Date: 08 January 2023
Share
How to cite
Statistics