American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 199, Issue 5 , Pages 543.e1-543.e7 , November 2008

GATA3 expression in estrogen receptor α-negative endometrial carcinomas identifies aggressive tumors with high proliferation and poor patient survival

  • Ingeborg B. Engelsen, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
    • Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprints: Ingeborg Bøe Engelsen, MD, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Haukeland University Hospital, 5021 Bergen, Norway
    • ,
  • Ingunn M. Stefansson, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
    • ,
  • Lars A. Akslen, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
    • Gade Institute, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
    • ,
  • Helga B. Salvesen, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
    • Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

Received 30 November 2007 ,Revised 4 March 2008 ,Accepted 29 April 2008.

References 

  1. Shang Y. Molecular mechanisms of oestrogen and SERMs in endometrial carcinogenesis. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6:360–368
  2. Lax SF. Molecular genetic pathways in various types of endometrial carcinoma: from a phenotypical to a molecular-based classification. Virchows Arch. 2004;444:213–223
  3. Cesena TI, Cui TX, Piwien-Pilipuk G, et al. Multiple mechanisms of growth hormone-regulated gene transcription. Mol Genet Metab. 2007;90:126–133
  4. Kouros-Mehr H, Slorach EM, Sternlicht MD, Werb Z. GATA-3 maintains the differentiation of the luminal cell fate in the mammary gland. Cell. 2006;127:1041–1055
  5. Mehra R, Varambally S, Ding L, et al. Identification of GATA3 as a breast cancer prognostic marker by global gene expression meta-analysis. Cancer Res. 2005;65:11259–11264
  6. Parikh P, Palazzo JP, Rose LJ, Daskalakis C, Weigel RJ. GATA-3 expression as a predictor of hormone response in breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;200:705–710
  7. Rhodes DR, Yu J, Shanker K, et al. ONCOMINE: a cancer microarray database and integrated data-mining platform. Neoplasia. 2004;6:1–6
  8. Usary J, Llaca V, Karaca G, et al. Mutation of GATA3 in human breast tumors. Oncogene. 2004;23:7669–7678
  9. Tlsty TD. Luminal cells GATA have it. Nat Cell Biol. 2007;9:135–136
  10. Hoch RV, Thompson DA, Baker RJ, Weigel RJ. GATA-3 is expressed in association with estrogen receptor in breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 1999;84:122–128
  11. Prat J. Prognostic parameters of endometrial carcinoma. Hum Pathol. 2004;35:649–662
  12. Engelsen IB, Stefansson I, Akslen LA, Salvesen HB. Pathologic expression of p53 or p16 in preoperative curettage specimens identifies high-risk endometrial carcinomas. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195:979–986
  13. Rose PG. Endometrial carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:640–649
  14. Salvesen HB, Iversen OE, Akslen LA. Prognostic significance of angiogenesis and Ki-67, p53, and p21 expression: a population-based endometrial carcinoma study. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1382–1390
  15. Salvesen HB, Das S, Akslen LA. Loss of nuclear p16 protein expression is not associated with promoter methylation but defines a subgroup of aggressive endometrial carcinomas with poor prognosis. Clin Cancer Res. 2000;6:153–159
  16. Scully RE, Silverberg SG, Wilkinson EJ, et al. Histological typing of female genital tract tumours (International histological classification of tumours). In:  Organization WH editors. Berlin (Germany): Berlin Heidelberg Springer-Verlag; 1994;
  17. Hoos A, Urist MJ, Stojadinovic A, et al. Validation of tissue microarrays for immunohistochemical profiling of cancer specimens using the example of human fibroblastic tumors. Am J Pathol. 2001;158:1245–1251
  18. Kononen J, Bubendorf L, Kallioniemi A, et al. Tissue microarrays for high-throughput molecular profiling of tumor specimens. Nat Med. 1998;4:844–847
  19. Tong Q, Hotamisligil GS. Developmental biology: cell fate in the mammary gland. Nature. 2007;445:724–726
  20. Elit L, Hirte H. Current status and future innovations of hormonal agents, chemotherapy and investigational agents in endometrial cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2002;14:67–73
  21. Alexieva-Figusch J, Van Putten WL, Blankenstein MA, Blonk-Van Der Wijst J, Klijn JG. The prognostic value and relationships of patient characteristics, estrogen and progestin receptors, and site of relapse in primary breast cancer. Cancer. 1988;61:758–768
  22. Oreskovic S, Babic D, Kalafatic D, Barisic D, Beketic-Oreskovic L. A significance of immunohistochemical determination of steroid receptors, cell proliferation factor Ki-67 and protein p53 in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2004;93:34–40
  23. Creasman WT. Prognostic significance of hormone receptors in endometrial cancer. Cancer. 1993;71:1467–1470
  24. Kleine W, Maier T, Geyer H, Pfleiderer A. Estrogen and progesterone receptors in endometrial cancer and their prognostic relevance. Gynecol Oncol. 1990;38:59–65
  25. Hu K, Zhong G, He F. Expression of estrogen receptors ER alpha and ER beta in endometrial hyperplasia and adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2005;15:537–541
  26. Pertschuk LP, Masood S, Simone J, et al. Estrogen receptor immunocytochemistry in endometrial carcinoma: a prognostic marker for survival. Gynecol Oncol. 1996;63:28–33
  27. Ludwig H. Prognostic factors in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1995;49(Suppl):S1–S7
  28. Mariani A, Sebo TJ, Katzmann JA, et al. HER-2/neu overexpression and hormone dependency in endometrial cancer: analysis of cohort and review of literature. Anticancer Res. 2005;25:2921–2927

 The study was supported by Helse Vest grants 911069 and 911351 and the Norwegian Cancer Society.

 Cite this article as: Engelsen IB, Stefansson IM, Akslen LA, et al. GATA3 expression in estrogen receptor α-negative endometrial carcinomas identifies aggressive tumors with high proliferation and poor patient survival. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:543.e1-543.e7.

PII: S0002-9378(08)00493-6

doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.04.043

American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 199, Issue 5 , Pages 543.e1-543.e7 , November 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution