4.7 Article

Influence of endocrine therapy on the ratio of androgen receptor (AR) to estrogen receptor (ER) positive circulating epithelial tumor cells (CETCs) in breast cancer

Journal

JOURNAL OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE
Volume 16, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12967-018-1724-z

Keywords

Breast cancer; Circulating epithelial tumor cells; Androgen receptor; Androgen to estrogen ratio

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundThe androgen receptor (AR) is expressed in the majority of breast cancers and across the main breast cancer subtypes. Despite the high frequency of AR expression in breast cancer its appraisal remains controversial because its role is complex, dependent on the hormonal milieu. The aim of the current study was to investigate the frequency of AR and ER positive CETCs in breast cancer patients.MethodsThe number of vital CETCs was determined from blood of 66 patients suffering from breast cancer and the expression of AR and ER on these cells was investigated using the maintrac method.ResultsNumbers of CETCs/mL blood were significantly higher in patients with advanced disease as compared to patients with early stage disease. The fraction of AR positive CETCs was significantly higher than the fraction of ER positive CETCs (90% vs. 50%; P<0.001). Patients with positive lymph nodes had less AR positive CETCs as compared to patients with negative lymph node status. The AR:ER ratio was higher in patients receiving tamoxifen therapy as compared to patients without tamoxifen therapy whereas treatment with aromatase inhibitor had no influence on AR:ER ratio.ConclusionsThe ratio of AR to ER positive CETCs, obviously, is influenced by endocrine therapy, more specifically therapy with tamoxifen. Since AR expression seems to be one of the possible mechanism of resistance to endocrine therapy this may provide a new biomarker to select patients who might benefit from combination treatment of ER and AR inhibitors.

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