4.2 Article

Prognostic Value of Sex-Hormone Receptor Expression in Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer

Journal

YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL
Volume 55, Issue 5, Pages 1214-1221

Publisher

YONSEI UNIV COLL MEDICINE
DOI: 10.3349/ymj.2014.55.5.1214

Keywords

Androgen receptor; estrogen receptor beta; urinary bladder neoplasms

Funding

  1. Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital Research Grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: We investigated sex-hormone receptor expression as predicting factor of recurrence and progression in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated tumor specimens from patients treated for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder at our institution between January 2006 and January 2011. Performing immunohistochemistry using a monoclonal androgen receptor antibody and monoclonal estrogen receptor-beta antibody on paraffin-embedded tissue sections, we assessed the relationship of immunohistochemistry results and prognostic factors such as recurrence and progression. Results: A total of 169 patients with bladder cancer were evaluated in this study. Sixty-threepatients had expressed androgen receptors and 52 patients had estrogen receptor beta. On univariable analysis, androgen receptor expression was significant lower in recurrence rates (p=0.001), and estrogen receptor beta expression was significant higher in progression rates (p=0.004). On multivariable analysis, significant association was found between androgen receptor expression and lower recurrence rates (hazard ratio=0.500; 95% confidence interval, 0.294 to 0.852; p=0.011), but estrogen receptor beta expression was not significantly associated with progression rates. Conclusion: We concluded that the possibility of recurrence was low when the androgen receptor was expressed in the bladder cancer specimen and it could be the predicting factor of the stage, number of tumors, carcinoma in situ lesion and recurrence.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available