4.7 Article

Cadherin-5: a biomarker for metastatic breast cancer with optimum efficacy in oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancers with vascular invasion

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 114, Issue 9, Pages 1019-1026

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.66

Keywords

breast cancer; metastasis; biomarker; glycosylation; cadherin-5; ER positive; vascular invasion

Categories

Funding

  1. Against Breast Cancer [1121258]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: A glycoproteomic study has previously shown cadherin-5 (CDH5) to be a serological marker of metastatic breast cancer when both protein levels and glycosylation status were assessed. In this study we aimed to further validate the utility of CDH5 as a biomarker for breast cancer progression. Methods: A nested case-control study of serum samples from breast cancer patients, of which n = 52 had developed a distant metastatic recurrence within 5 years post-diagnosis and n = 60 had remained recurrence-free. ELISAs were used to quantify patient serum CDH5 levels and assess glycosylation by Helix pomatia agglutinin (HPA) binding. Clinicopathological, treatment and lifestyle factors associated with metastasis and elevated biomarker levels were identified. Results: Elevated CDH5 levels (P = 0.028) and ratios of CDH5: HPA binding (P = 0.007) distinguished patients with metastatic disease from those that remained metastasis-free. Multivariate analysis showed that the association between CDH5: HPA ratio and the formation of distant metastases was driven by patients with oestrogen receptor (ER+) positive cancer with vascular invasion (VI+). Conclusions: CDH5 levels and the CDH5 glycosylation represent biomarker tests that distinguish patients with metastatic breast cancer from those that remain metastasis-free. The test reached optimal sensitivity and specificity in ER-positive cancers with vascular invasion.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available