4.4 Article

Metabolism-Related Proteins Are Differentially Expressed according to the Molecular Subtype of Invasive Breast Cancer Defined by Surrogate Immunohistochemistry

期刊

PATHOBIOLOGY
卷 80, 期 1, 页码 41-52

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000339513

关键词

Aerobic glycolysis; Breast cancer; CAIX; Glut-1

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
  2. Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology [2012R1A1A1002886]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2012R1A1A1002886] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the expression of metabolism-related proteins such as Glut-1 and carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX) according to breast cancer molecular subtype. Methods: We generated a tissue microarray of 276 breast cancer patients and performed immunohistochemical staining for known metabolism-related proteins, which were evaluated according to the molecular subtype. Results: The expression of IGF-1, MIF, and HIF-1 alpha was correlated with the HER-2 type (p < 0.05). Glut-1 overexpression and CAIX expression were associated with TNBC type, especially with basal-like type, high histologic grade, estrogen receptor negativity, and progesterone receptor negativity (p < 0.05). The expression of Glut-1 and CAIX was correlated with statistical significance (p < 0.001). Conclusion: We identified different patterns of expression of metabolism-related proteins according to the molecular subtypes of breast cancer defined by surrogate immunohistochemistry. Increased expression of HIF-1 alpha, IGF-1, and MIF was noted in HER-2 type breast cancer and increased expression of Glut-1 and CAIX was noted in TNBC type breast cancer, especially in the basal-like subtype, which exhibited a glycolytic and acid-resistant tumor phenotype. Copyright (C) 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据