4.5 Article

Characterization of the 19q12 amplification including CCNE1 and URI in different epithelial ovarian cancer subtypes

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL AND MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY
Volume 98, Issue 1, Pages 47-54

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yexmp.2014.12.004

Keywords

Epithelial ovarian cancer; ISH; 19q12; CCNE1; Cyclin E1; URI

Categories

Funding

  1. Roche/Ventana

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: CCNE1 is frequently amplified in high grade serous ovarian cancer and may serve as a target for ovarian cancer treatment. URI is closely related to CCNE1 at the 19q12 amplicon and may also contribute to the oncogenic effect. Our objective was to investigate the relevance of CCNE1 and URI gene amplification and protein expression in different histological subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Methods: A novel dual-color 19q12 in situ hybridization (ISH), covering CCNE1 and URI, and chromosome 19 as a surrogate using Ventana BenchMark XT platform was developed and applied to 148 EOCs. URI and CCNE1 amplifications were separately assessed by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Immunohistochemistry using a Cyclin El and a novel URI monoclonal antibody was performed. Results: Amplification of 19q12 was found in 36.6%, CCNE1 in 21.7%. URI in 9.9%, and both genes simultaneously in 9% of EOC cases. High Cyclin El and URI protein expression were observed in 52.2% and 26.1%, respectively. Amplification of 19q12 occurred in all EOC subtypes and was associated with amplification and expression of CCNE1/Cyclin E1, URI, TP53 mutation, and advanced stage. Conclusion: The novel 19q12 ISH probe reliably detects both CCNE1 and URI amplifications as confirmed by FISH. The combination of 19q12 amplification with Cyclin E1 and URI protein expression may help to select patients more likely to benefit from CDK2 targeted therapies. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available