Display options
Cite
Sallum LF, Andrade L, Ramalho S, et al. WT1, p53 and p16 expression in the diagnosis of low- and high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas and their relation to prognosis. Oncotarget. 2018;9(22):15818-15827doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.24530.
Sallum, L. F., Andrade, L., Ramalho, S., Ferracini, A. C., de Andrade Natal, R., Brito, A. B. C., Sarian, L. O., & Derchain, S. (2018). WT1, p53 and p16 expression in the diagnosis of low- and high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas and their relation to prognosis. Oncotarget, 9(22), 15818-15827. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.24530
Sallum, Luis Felipe, et al. "WT1, p53 and p16 expression in the diagnosis of low- and high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas and their relation to prognosis." Oncotarget vol. 9,22 (2018): 15818-15827. doi: https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.24530
Sallum LF, Andrade L, Ramalho S, Ferracini AC, de Andrade Natal R, Brito ABC, Sarian LO, Derchain S. WT1, p53 and p16 expression in the diagnosis of low- and high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas and their relation to prognosis. Oncotarget. 2018 Feb 19;9(22):15818-15827. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.24530. eCollection 2018 Mar 23. PMID: 29662608; PMCID: PMC5882299.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Oncotarget. 2018 Feb 19;9(22):15818-15827. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.24530. eCollection 2018 Mar 23.

WT1, p53 and p16 expression in the diagnosis of low- and high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas and their relation to prognosis.

Oncotarget

Luis Felipe Sallum, Liliana Andrade, Susana Ramalho, Amanda Canato Ferracini, Rodrigo de Andrade Natal, Angelo Borsarelli Carvalho Brito, Luis Otávio Sarian, Sophie Derchain

Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, State University of Campinas, Campinas, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
  2. Department of Pathology, University of Campinas, Campinas, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
  3. Program in Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas, Campinas, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
  4. Laboratory of Investigative and Molecular Pathology, State University of Campinas, Campinas, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
  5. Laboratory of Cancer Genetics, State University of Campinas, Campinas, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.

PMID: 29662608 PMCID: PMC5882299 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.24530

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic value of the immunohistochemical expression of WT1, p53 and p16 in low- (LGSOCs) and high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (HGSOCs).

RESULTS: HGSOC had a significantly higher proportion of advanced stage disease, higher CA125 levels, higher proportion of post-surgery residual disease and higher recurrence or disease progression. WT1 was expressed in 71.4% of LGSOCs and in 57.1% of HGSOCs (

METHODS: 21 LGSOC and 85 HGSOC stage I-IV cases were included. The morphological classification was assessed according to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed in tissue microarray slides. IHC p53/p16 index was compared with the morphological classification.

CONCLUSIONS: The IHC p53/p16 index was a good marker for the differentiation of LGSOC and HGSOC, but the morphologic classification showed a better association with survival. FIGO stage and post-surgery residual disease remained the only independent prognostic factors for survival.

Keywords: Pathology; cystadenocarcinoma; diagnoses; prognosis; serous; survival

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Mod Pathol. 2011 Apr;24(4):512-21 - PubMed
  2. Pathol Int. 2013 May;63(5):252-9 - PubMed
  3. Drug Resist Updat. 2016 Jan;24:55-69 - PubMed
  4. Histopathology. 2007 May;50(6):773-9 - PubMed
  5. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2016 May;35(3):209-21 - PubMed
  6. Nature. 1990 Jul 12;346(6280):194-7 - PubMed
  7. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2009 Mar;28(2):179-86 - PubMed
  8. Int J Cancer. 2005 Mar 20;114(2):202-8 - PubMed
  9. Cancer. 2003 Jan 15;97(2):389-404 - PubMed
  10. Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Jun;133(3):401-4 - PubMed
  11. Gynecol Oncol. 2016 Mar;140(3):494-502 - PubMed
  12. J Pathol. 2010 Oct;222(2):191-8 - PubMed
  13. Gynecol Oncol. 2007 Aug;106(2):318-24 - PubMed
  14. BMC Cancer. 2006 Apr 11;6:90 - PubMed
  15. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015 May 01;8(5):5642-9 - PubMed
  16. Histopathology. 2016 Mar;68(4):615-8 - PubMed
  17. Int J Cancer. 2004 Apr 10;109(3):385-92 - PubMed
  18. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Dec;19(13):4059-67 - PubMed
  19. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005 Feb;29(2):218-24 - PubMed
  20. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001 Aug;116(2):246-52 - PubMed
  21. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2006 Oct;60(1):19-37 - PubMed
  22. Gynecol Oncol. 2012 Jan;124(1):10-4 - PubMed
  23. Annu Rev Pathol. 2014;9:27-45 - PubMed
  24. Am J Pathol. 2016 Apr;186(4):733-47 - PubMed
  25. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Jul 22;94(15):8132-7 - PubMed
  26. Histopathology. 2014 Jun;64(7):1004-13 - PubMed
  27. PLoS Med. 2008 Dec 2;5(12):e232 - PubMed
  28. Anticancer Res. 2014 May;34(5):2331-40 - PubMed
  29. Oncotarget. 2016 Oct 4;7(40):64665-64673 - PubMed
  30. Cancer. 2012 Jun 15;118(12):3087-94 - PubMed
  31. Gynecol Oncol. 2000 Mar;76(3):369-72 - PubMed
  32. Nature. 2015 May 28;521(7553):489-94 - PubMed
  33. Oncol Lett. 2016 Nov;12 (5):3264-3272 - PubMed
  34. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011 Feb;21(2):419-23 - PubMed
  35. Adv Anat Pathol. 2009 Sep;16(5):267-82 - PubMed

Publication Types