朱偉良 談炎 王旭芬 程錦玲 張磊 方琦 談珂嵐 楊瀾 王磊
常州市第一人民醫(yī)院乳腺外科,△病理科,江蘇 常州 213003
Ki-67在乳腺癌各亞型中的表達(dá)及意義
朱偉良 談炎△王旭芬 程錦玲 張磊 方琦 談珂嵐 楊瀾 王磊
常州市第一人民醫(yī)院乳腺外科,△病理科,江蘇 常州 213003
背景與目的:目前公認(rèn)的指導(dǎo)乳腺癌治療和預(yù)后預(yù)測的生物學(xué)指標(biāo)有雌激素受體(estrogen receptor,ER)、孕激素受體(progesterone,PR)和人表皮生長因子受體2(human epidermal growth factor receptor-2,HER-2)。近年來Ki-67逐漸成為一個新的研究熱點(diǎn),眾多研究提示,Ki-67很可能是繼HER-2之后又一個重要的生物指標(biāo)。本研究旨在分析Ki-67在不同亞型的乳腺癌中的表達(dá)及臨床意義。方法:收集常州市第一人民醫(yī)院乳腺外科2010年1月—12月收治的252例乳腺癌患者的臨床病理資料,通過免疫組化(immunohistochemistry,IHC)方法測定手術(shù)后乳腺癌組織的ER、PR、HER-2和Ki-67的表達(dá)以區(qū)分不同的乳腺癌亞型。結(jié)果:Ki-67指數(shù)在不同年齡及不同淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移狀態(tài)間差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。腫瘤直徑>2 cm的患者Ki-67指數(shù)顯著高于直徑≤2 cm的患者(P=0.001)。病理分期為Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ期患者的Ki-67指數(shù)均顯著高于病理分期為0期的患者(P<0.05),但是Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ期患者間的Ki-67指數(shù)差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。ER陰性、PR陰性、HER-2陽性的患者的Ki-67指數(shù)均顯著高于其對應(yīng)的ER陽性、PR陽性和HER-2陰性的患者(P<0.05)。Luminal B型、HER-2過表達(dá)型和三陰型的Ki-67指數(shù)均顯著高于Luminal A型(P<0.001),而Luminal B型、HER-2過表達(dá)型和三陰型三者間的Ki-67指數(shù)差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。結(jié)論:Ki-67結(jié)合其他生物指標(biāo)對預(yù)測乳腺癌的預(yù)后有一定意義,值得和ER、PR和HER-2同時(shí)進(jìn)行檢測。
乳腺癌;臨床病理特征;Ki-67;雌激素受體;孕激素受體;人表皮生長因子受體2
雌激素受體(estrogen receptor,ER)、孕激素受體(progesterone,PR)和人表皮生長因子受體2(human epidermal growth factor receptor-2,HER-2)是目前公認(rèn)的指導(dǎo)乳腺癌治療和預(yù)后預(yù)測的生物學(xué)指標(biāo)。近年來,Ki-67逐漸成為一個新的研究熱點(diǎn)。本研究通過對252例乳腺癌患者的臨床資料進(jìn)行分析,探討Ki-67在乳腺癌各亞型中的表達(dá)及臨床意義。
選取常州市第一人民醫(yī)院2010年1月—2010年12月接受手術(shù)治療的乳腺癌患者,篩選出滿足下列條件的病例:①女性;②可手術(shù);③術(shù)后均經(jīng)常規(guī)石蠟切片病理檢查確診為乳腺癌;④進(jìn)行了腋窩淋巴結(jié)清掃;⑤術(shù)前未接受過放療、化療和內(nèi)分泌治療。共獲得252例乳腺癌患者的臨床病理資料?;颊吣挲g20~83歲,中位年齡54歲,年齡≤35歲者11例(4.4%),>35歲者241例(95.6%)。Tis10例(4.0%),T1117例(46.4%),T2121例(48.0%),T33例(1.2%),T41例(0.4%)。腋窩淋巴結(jié)有轉(zhuǎn)移者89例(35.3%),無轉(zhuǎn)移者163例(64.7%)。按照第六版AJCC乳腺癌TNM病理分期標(biāo)準(zhǔn):0期10例(4.0%),Ⅰ期85例(33.7%),Ⅱ期124例(49.2%),Ⅲ期33例(13.1%)。組織學(xué)類型:浸潤性導(dǎo)管癌227例(90.1%),浸潤性小葉癌5例(2.0%),導(dǎo)管原位癌10例(4.0%),其他類型10例(4.0%)。
SP9000試劑盒及免疫組化染色一抗Ki-67(ZM0166)、HER-2(ZM0065)、ER(ZA0102)、PR(ZA0255)。
采用免疫組化二步法(以PV-9000通用型二步法檢測試劑盒為例)進(jìn)行病理診斷。石蠟切片脫蠟,蒸餾水沖洗后,PBS浸泡5 min,置于pH為6.0的枸櫞酸緩沖液中,在高壓鍋中,于120 ℃抗原修復(fù)6 min,冷卻至室溫。采用3%H2O2室溫溫育5~10 min,以消除內(nèi)源性過氧化物酶的活性,PBS沖洗共3次,每次2 min。分別滴加Ki-67、HER-2、ER、PR一抗工作液,37 ℃溫育1~2 h或4 ℃過夜。PBS沖洗3次,每次2 min。滴加試劑1(Polymer Helper),室溫或37℃溫育20 min,PBS沖洗3次,每次2 min。滴加試劑2(多聚過氧化物酶抗鼠及抗兔抗體),室溫或37 ℃溫育20~30 min,PBS沖洗3次,每次2 min。DAB顯色劑顯色4~8 min。自來水充分沖洗,蘇木素復(fù)染,脫水透明、封片。
ER和PR陽性判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn):腫瘤細(xì)胞無細(xì)胞核棕黃染色或少于5%的細(xì)胞核較弱棕黃染色為陰性,>5%的細(xì)胞核棕黃染色則為陽性。Ki-67陽性染色定位于細(xì)胞核,按視野中陽性細(xì)胞所占的比例進(jìn)行計(jì)數(shù),以任意5個高倍鏡視野中陽性細(xì)胞所占比例的平均值定義為陽性細(xì)胞百分比并作為評定依據(jù)。HER-2陽性判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn):細(xì)胞膜棕黃染色為陽性。無細(xì)胞染色或<10%的細(xì)胞膜較弱染色為(-);>10%的細(xì)胞膜部分較弱染色為(+);>10%的細(xì)胞膜完全較弱到中等染色為(++);>10%的細(xì)胞膜完全強(qiáng)染色為(+++)。由于未對HER-2(++)的病例進(jìn)一步進(jìn)行FISH檢測,本研究將檢查結(jié)果(++)及以下者定義為陰性,(+++)者定義為陽性。
采用SPSS 16.0統(tǒng)計(jì)軟件包進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)處理,采用χ2檢驗(yàn),P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
Ki-67在乳腺癌組織和正常乳腺組織中的表達(dá)情況見圖1和圖2。年齡≤35歲和>35歲的患者間Ki-67指數(shù)差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P=0.087)。腫瘤直徑>2 cm的患者Ki-67指數(shù)高于腫瘤直徑≤2 cm者(P=0.001)。淋巴結(jié)無轉(zhuǎn)移和有轉(zhuǎn)移間Ki-67指數(shù)差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P=0.297)。病理分期為Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ期者的Ki-67指數(shù)均顯著高于病理分期為0期者(P<0.05),但Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ期三者間的Ki-67指數(shù)差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。ER(-)者的Ki-67指數(shù)顯著高于ER(+)者(P<0.001)。PR(-)者的Ki-67指數(shù)顯著高于PR(+)者(P<0.001)。HER-2(+)者的Ki-67指數(shù)顯著高于HER-2(-)者(P=0.013,表1)。
Luminal A型76例(30.2%),Ki-67指數(shù)均值為7.28。Luminal B型98例(38.9%),Ki-67指數(shù)均值為33.21。HER-2過表達(dá)型16例(6.3%),Ki-67指數(shù)均值為35.31。三陰型62例(24.6%),Ki-67指數(shù)均值為36.0(表2)。
表 2 Ki-67與乳腺癌亞型的關(guān)系Tab. 2 The relationship between Ki-67 and subtype of breast cancer
Luminal B型、HER-2過表達(dá)型和三陰型的Ki-67指數(shù)均顯著高于Luminal A型(P<0.001)。Luminal B型、HER-2過表達(dá)型和三陰型三者間的Ki-67指數(shù)差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。
Ki-67是1983年由Gerdes等發(fā)現(xiàn)的一種在增殖細(xì)胞中表達(dá)的核抗原。Ki-67抗原在G0期不表達(dá),在G1期和S期早期表達(dá)水平比較低,在S期后期和G2期表達(dá)明顯增加,在M期達(dá)到高峰,在細(xì)胞分裂的后期和末期迅速下降。鑒于Ki-67的這個特點(diǎn),其被認(rèn)為是有效評估細(xì)胞增殖的一個重要指標(biāo)。有研究發(fā)現(xiàn),Ki-67在正常乳腺組織和乳腺癌組織中的表達(dá)存在差異,正常乳腺組織和臨近乳腺纖維腺瘤的乳腺組織中Ki-67呈低表達(dá)(<3%)[1-3]。Fasanella等[4]報(bào)道315例乳腺癌的Ki-67陽性指數(shù)為36%±14%,與本研究結(jié)果有一定差異。
本研究結(jié)果顯示,Ki-67在不同年齡的患者之間差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P=0.087)。關(guān)于Ki-67和腫瘤大小的關(guān)系,有研究結(jié)果顯示,兩者呈正相關(guān)[5-6],亦有研究結(jié)果顯示,兩者間無關(guān)[7]或者呈負(fù)相關(guān)[8]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,腫瘤較大者Ki-67指數(shù)較高(P=0.001)。對于Ki-67和腋窩淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移的關(guān)系,大部分研究認(rèn)為,Ki-67和淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移呈正相關(guān)[8],也有研究認(rèn)為兩者無關(guān)[7,9-10],還有研究報(bào)道呈負(fù)相關(guān)[11]。本研究的結(jié)果顯示,Ki-67與淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移無明顯相關(guān)(P=0.297)。Ki-67與病理分期相關(guān)(P=0.027),進(jìn)一步分析的結(jié)果顯示,病理分期為Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ期的患者Ki-67指數(shù)均顯著高于病理分期為0期者(P<0.05),但Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ期三者間的Ki-67指數(shù)差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。結(jié)果提示,Ki-67指數(shù)主要與腫瘤局部的增殖相關(guān),不能反應(yīng)區(qū)域淋巴結(jié)的狀態(tài)。
目前,多數(shù)研究認(rèn)為Ki-67與ER、PR呈負(fù)相關(guān)[5,9-10,12-14],也有報(bào)道呈正相關(guān)[15]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,ER、PR表達(dá)陰性者Ki-67指數(shù)顯著高于ER、PR表達(dá)陽性者(P<0.001)。由于ER、PR陽性的乳腺癌對內(nèi)分泌治療敏感,預(yù)后較ER、PR陰性的乳腺癌好,可以推測Ki-67高表達(dá)的乳腺癌患者預(yù)后可能較差。目前已有數(shù)個研究證實(shí),Ki-67和HER-2表達(dá)呈正相關(guān)[10,13,16],但也有負(fù)相關(guān)的報(bào)道[17-18]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,HER-2陽性者Ki-67指數(shù)顯著高于HER-2陰性者(P=0.013)。由于HER-2過度表 達(dá)的乳腺癌患者預(yù)后較差已成定論,可以由此推測Ki-67高表達(dá)的乳腺癌患者預(yù)后較差。
本研究中的三陰型乳腺癌患者共62例(24.6%),其比例與周波等[19]報(bào)道的26.8%接近。進(jìn)一步發(fā)現(xiàn)不同的乳腺癌亞型的Ki-67指數(shù)有一定區(qū)別。Luminal B型、HER-2過表達(dá)型和三陰型的Ki-67指數(shù)均顯著高于Luminal A型(P<0.001),而Luminal B型、HER-2過表達(dá)型和三陰型三者間的Ki-67指數(shù)差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。
本研究結(jié)果提示,在乳腺癌的發(fā)生、發(fā)展過程中,Ki-67與ER、PR、HER-2之間可能存在著特殊的關(guān)系,Ki-67高表達(dá)可能是一個不良預(yù)后因素。由于目前尚缺乏統(tǒng)一的Ki-67檢測和評估方案,而且缺乏大樣本的前瞻性研究,Ki-67還不能作為公認(rèn)的乳腺癌預(yù)后指標(biāo)。盡管如此,Ki-67很可能是繼HER-2之后的又一個重要的生物指標(biāo)[20],將在乳腺癌的預(yù)后和指導(dǎo)治療方面發(fā)揮越來越重要的作用。
[1]HARPER-WYNNE C, ROSS G, SACKS N, et al. Effects of the aromatase inhibitor letrozole on normal breast epithelial cell proliferation and metabolic indices in postmenopausal women: a pilot study for breast cancer prevention[J].Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2002, 11(7): 614-621.
[2]CLARKE R B, HOWELL A, POTTEN C S, et al. Dissociation between steroid receptor expression and cell proliferation in the human breast[J]. Cancer Res, 1997, 57(22): 4987-4991.
[3]de LIMA G R, FACINA G, SHIDA J Y, et al. Effects of low dose tamoxifen on normal breast tissue from premenopausal women[J]. Eur J Cancer, 2003, 39(7): 891-898.
[4]FASANELLA S, LEONARDI E, CANTALONI C, et al.Proliferative activity in human breast cancer: Ki-67 automated evaluation and the influence of different Ki-67 equivalent antibodies[J]. Diagn Pathol, 2011, 6(Suppl 1): 7.
[5]LIU S, EDGERTON S M, MOORE D H 2ND, et al. Measures of cell turn over (proliferation and apoptosis) and their association with survival in breast cancer[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2001, 7(6): 1716-1723.
[6]MOLINO A, MICCIOLO R, TURAZZA M, et al. Ki-67 immunostaining in 322 primary breast cancers: associations with clinical and pathological variables and prognosis[J].Int J Cancer, 1997, 74(4): 433-437.
[7]BHATAVDEKAR J M, PATEL D D, SHAH N G, et al.Prognostic significance of immunohistochemically localized biomarkers in stage Ⅱ and stage Ⅲ breast cancer: a multivariate analysis[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2000, 7(4): 305-311.
[8]BROWN R W, ALLRED C D, CLARK G M, et al. Prognostic value of Ki-67 compared to S-phase fraction in axillary nodenegative breast cancer[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 1996, 2(3):585-592.
[9]SPYRATOS F, FERRERO-POUS M, TRASSARD M, et al.Correlation between MIB-1 and other proliferation markers:clinical implications of the MIB-1 cut off value[J]. Cancer,2002, 94(8): 2151-2159.
[10]BOTTINI A, BERRUTI A, BERSIGA A, et al. Relationship between tumour shrinkage and reduction in Ki-67 expression after primary chemotherapy in human breast cancer[J]. Br J Cancer, 2001, 85(8): 1106-1112.
[11]WEIKEL W, BECK T, MITZE M, et al. Immunohistochemical evaluation of growth fractions in human breast cancers using monoclonal antibody Ki-67[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat,1991, 18(3): 149-154.
[12]BADER AA, TIO J, PETRU E, et al. T1breast cancer:identification of patients at low risk of axillary lymph node metastases[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2002, 76(1): 11-17.
[13]TRIHIA H, MURRAY S, PRICE K, et al. Ki-67 expression in breast carcinoma: its association with grading systems, clinical parameters, and other prognostic factors--a surrogate marker?[J]. Cancer, 2003, 97(5): 1321-1331.
[14]URRUTICOECHEA A, SMITH I E, DOWSETT M.Proliferation marker Ki-67 in early breast cancer[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2005, 23(28): 7212-7220.
[15]PINDER S E, WENCYK P, SIBBERING D M, et al.Assessment of the new proliferation marker MIB1 in breast carcinoma using image analysis: associations with other prognostic factors and survival[J]. Br J Cancer, 1995,71(1): 146-149.
[16]RUDOLPH P, OLSSON H, BONATZ G, et al. Correlation between p53, c-erbB-2, and topoisomerase Ⅱ alpha expression, DNA ploidy, hormonal receptor status and proliferation in 356 node-negative breast carcinomas:prognostic implications[J]. J Pathol, 1999, 187(2): 207-216.
[17]GASPARINI G, POZZA F, MELI S, et al. Breast cancer cell kinetics: immunocytochemical determination of growth fractions by monoclonal antibody Ki-67 and correlation with flow cytometric S-phase and with some features of tumor aggressiveness[J]. Anticancer Res, 1991, 11(6): 2015-2021.
[18]NICHOLSON R I, MCCLELLAND R A, FINLAY P, et al.Relationship between EGF-R, c-erbB-2 protein expression and Ki-67 immunostaining in breast cancer and hormone sensitivity[J]. Eur J Cancer, 1993, 29(7): 1018-1023.
[19]周波, 謝菲, 王思源, 等. 紫杉類聯(lián)合蒽環(huán)類的新輔助化療方案治療三陰乳腺癌的療效及預(yù)后[J]. 中國癌癥雜志,2009, 19(2): 129-132.
[20]CUZICK J, DOWSETT M, PINEDA S, et al. Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor,Ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the genomic health recurrence score in early breast cancer[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2011, 29(32): 4273-4278.
The expression and significance of Ki-67 in different subtype of breast cancer
ZHU Wei-liang,TAN Yan, WANG Xu-fen, CHENG Jin-ling, ZHANG Lei, FANG Qi, TAN Ke-lan, YANG Lan, WANG Lei(Department of Breast Surgery, The First People’s Hospital of Changzhou, Changzhou Jiangsu 213003, China)
ZHU Wei-liang E-mail:lancezwl@sina.com
Background and purpose:The established prognostic and predictive parameters of breast cancer were estrogen-receptor (ER), progesterone-receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2) status.The Ki-67 is now becoming a new research focus, and many researches showed that Ki-67 is an important biomarker after HER-2. This research aimed to study the expression and significance of Ki-67 in different subtypes of breast cancer.Methods:Clinical and pathological data of breast cancer patients, treated in Department of Breast Surgery, The First People’s Hospital of Changzhou from Jan. 2010 to Dec. 2010, were collected and analyzed. Immunohistochemical method was used to detect the expression of ER, PR, HER-2 and Ki-67 of these patients.Results:There were no correlations between the expression of Ki-67 and age or node metastasis of breast cancer patients, although there were significant differences in different tumor size of patients (P=0.001). The expressions of Ki-67 in stage Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲpatients were significantly higher than those in stage 0 patients, while there was no significant difference between the three mutually. The expressions of Ki-67 in ER negative patients were significantly higher than ER positive patients,and this trendency extended to PR negative and HER-2 positive patients (P<0.05). The expressions of Ki-67 in Luminal B subtype, HER-2 over-expression subtype and basal like subtype were significantly higher than in Luminal A subtype(P<0.001), but there was no significant difference between the three mutually.Conclusion:Ki-67 provides prognostic information combined with other biologic markers, and co-detection of Ki-67, ER, PR and HER-2 may be useful.
Breast cancer; Clinicopathological characteristics; Ki-67; ER; PR; HER-2
10.3969/j.issn.1007-3969.2012.05.005
R737.9
A
1007-3639(2012)05-0347-05
朱偉良 E-mail:lancezwl@sina.com
2011-12-02
2012-04-02)