2 research outputs found

    Adenomyoepithelial tumours and myoepithelial carcinomas of the breast – a spectrum of monophasic and biphasic tumours dominated by immature myoepithelial cells

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Adenomyoepithelial tumours and myoepithelial carcinomas of the breast are primarily defined by the presence of neoplastic cells with a myoepithelial immunophenotype. Current classification schemes are based on purely descriptive features and an assessment of individual prognosis is still problematic. METHODS: A series of 27 adenomyoepithelial tumours of the breast was analysed immunohistochemically with antibodies directed against various cytokeratins, p63, smooth muscle alpha-actin (SMA) and vimentin. Additionally, double immunofluorescence and comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) was performed. RESULTS: Immunohistochemically, all the tumours showed a constant expression of high molecular weight cytokeratins (Ck) Ck5 and Ck14, p63, SMA and vimentin. With exception of one case diagnosed as myoepithelial carcinoma, all tested tumours expressed low molecular weight cytokeratin Ck18 in variable proportions of cells. Even in monophasic tumours lacking obvious glandular differentiation in conventional staining, a number of neoplastic cells still expressed those cytokeratins. Double immunofluorescence revealed tumour cells exclusively staining for Ck5/Ck14 in the presence of other cell populations that co-expressed high molecular weight Ck5/Ck14 as well as either low molecular weight Ck8/18 or SMA. Based on morphology, we assigned the series to three categories, benign, borderline and malignant. This classification was supported by a stepwise increase in cytogenetic alterations on CGH. CONCLUSION: Adenomyoepithelial tumours comprise a spectrum of neoplasms consisting of an admixture of glandular and myoepithelial differentiation patterns. As a key component SMA-positive cells co-expressing cytokeratins could be identified. Although categorisation of adenomyoepithelial tumours in benign, borderline and malignant was supported by results of CGH, any assessment of prognosis requires to be firmly based on morphological grounds. At present it is not yet clear, if and to what extent proposed Ck5-positive progenitor cells contribute to the immunohistochemical and morphological heterogeneity of these neoplasms of the breast

    Tiling Path Genomic Profiling of Grade 3 Invasive Ductal Breast Cancers

    No full text
    Purpose: To characterize the molecular genetic profiles of grade 3 invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type using high-resolution microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and to identify recurrent amplicons harboring putative therapeutic targets associated with luminal, HER-2, and basal-like tumor phenotypes. Experimental Design: Ninety-five grade 3 invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type were classified into luminal, HER-2, and basal-like subgroups using a previously validated immunohistochemical panel. Tumor samples were microdissected and subjected to aCGH using a tiling path 32K BAC array platform. Selected regions of recurrent amplification were validated by means of in situ hybridization. Expression of genes pertaining to selected amplicons was investigated using quantitative real-time PCR and gene silencing was done using previously validated short hairpin RNA constructs. Results: We show that basal-like and HER-2 tumors are characterized by "sawtooth" and "firestorm" genetic patterns, respectively, whereas luminal cancers were more heterogeneous. Apart from confirming known amplifications associated with basal-like (1q21, 10p, and 12p), luminal (8p12, 11q13, and 11q14), and HER-2 (17q12) cancers, we identified previously unreported recurrent amplifications associated with each molecular subgroup: 19q12 in basal-like, 1q32.1 in luminal, and 14q12 in HER-2 cancers. PPM1D gene amplification (17q23.2) was found in 20% and 8% of HER-2 and luminal cancers, respectively. Silencing of PPM1D by short hairpin RNA resulted in selective loss of viability in tumor cell lines harboring the 17q23.2 amplification. Conclusions: Our results show the power of aCGH analysis in unraveling the genetic profiles of specific subgroups of cancer and for the identification of novel therapeutic targets
    corecore