4.4 Article

Her-2/neu oncogene amplification in clinically localised prostate cancer

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY
卷 55, 期 2, 页码 118-120

出版社

BRITISH MED JOURNAL PUBL GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jcp.55.2.118

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: To examine the incidence of Her-2/neu oncogene amplification in clinically localised prostate cancer using in situ hybridisation. Methods: One hundred and seventeen patients, who had undergone radical prostatectomy, were identified and in situ hybridisation was performed on formalin fixed, paraffin wax embedded tissue using the Quantum Appligene probe for Her-2/neu. The enzyme peroxidase was used to detect the probe because this enabled a permanent record to be kept. Tumours in which there were five or more signals in each nucleus in > 20% of the tumour cells were considered to have a significantly increased copy number. A serial section from these tumours was then hybridised with the chromosome 17alpha satellite probe. The ratio of the percentage of cells showing an increase in Her-2/neu copy number to the number showing polysomy for chromosome 17 was calculated. A ratio above 2 was considered amplified. Results: Biochemical recurrence occurred in 50 (43%) patients and 24 (21%) had clinical recurrence. In situ hybridisation for Her-2/neu was accessible in 114 (97%) patients. A significant increase in copy number was present in two patients (1.75%), but chromosome 17 hybridisation showed that the increase was the result of polysomy rather than true amplification. Both these patients had a Gleason score of 7 and stage T3; they also had recurrent clinical disease with distal metastasis within two and 19 months. Conclusions: Increased Her-2/neu oncogene copy number appears to be rare in clinically localised prostatic adenocarcinoma and is related to chromosome 17 polysomy rather than true amplification. As a result, it would not be a useful biomarker for identifying those patients who will have recurrences after radical prostatectomy.

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