No abstract

Abstract. CD34 is commonly used as an endothelial cell marker of tumor vessels. However, this marker detects not only newly formed, but also pre-existing large blood vessels. Nestin, a class VI intermediate filament protein, has recently received attention as a marker for detecting newly formed endothelial cells. In this study, whether nestin is a novel angiogenesis marker in colorectal cancer was examined. HCT-15, a human colon cancer cell line, was subcutaneously implanted into the dorsum of nude mice. After the tumor grew, the mice were perfused with fluorescent beads (Fluospheres). Then, the tumor tissues were used for immunofluorescence staining using nestin and the CD34 antibody. Immunohistochemistry was performed with nestin and CD34 on 101 human colorectal cancer tissue samples. Proliferating endothelial cells were detected immunohistochemically by a proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) antibody. Clinicopathological factors and prognosis were compared between two groups: that with a microvessel density (MVD) higher than the median MVD and that with MVD lower than the median MVD, as detected by nestin and CD34 labellings. Nestin was localized in endothelial cells in small blood vessels (median, 9.06 μm), whereas CD34 was localized in large blood vessels (median, 9.67 μm) in nude mice. The diameter of nestin-positive vessels was smaller than that of CD34-positive vessels in human colorectal cancer. The number ratio of PCNA-positive cells to nestin-positive vascular endothelial cells was higher than that of PCNA-positive to CD34-positive cells (p=0.002). There were no correlations between nestin-positive blood vessels and clinicopathological factors, but the prognosis was worse in the highly nestin-positive MVD group (p=0.071). Nestin is considered a novel angiogenesis marker of proliferating endothelial cells in colorectal cancer tissue.

PURPOSE The International Union Against Cancer highlighted tumor budding as a tumor-related prognostic factor. International assessment criteria for tumor budding were recently defined by the 2016 International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC2016). This study aimed to clarify the prognostic and predictive values of tumor budding in a randomized controlled trial evaluating the superiority of adjuvant chemotherapy with oral tegafur-uracil over surgery alone for stage II colon cancer (SACURA trial; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00392899 ). PATIENTS AND METHODS Between 2006 and 2010, we enrolled 991 patients from 123 institutions with stage II colon cancer. Tumor budding was diagnosed by central review on the basis of the criteria adopted in the ITBCC2016. We prospectively recorded all clinical and pathologic data, including the budding grade, and performed prognostic analyses after 5 years of completing the patients’ registration. RESULTS Of 991 tumors, 376, 331, and 284 were classified as BD1, BD2, and BD3, respectively; the 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate was 90.9%, 85.1%, and 74.4%, respectively ( P < .001), and ranged widely in T4 tumors (86.6% to 53.3%). The budding grade significantly correlated with recurrence in the liver, lungs, lymph nodes, and peritoneum ( P < .001 to .01). Multivariable analysis revealed that budding and T stage exerted an independent impact on RFS, and on the basis of the Harrell concordance index, these two factors substantially contributed to the improvement of the Cox model for predicting RFS. Both the BD2 and BD3 groups demonstrated greater improvement in the 5-year recurrence rate in the adjuvant chemotherapy group than the surgery-alone group by approximately 5%, but the difference was statistically nonsignificant. CONCLUSION Tumor budding grade on the basis of the ITBCC2016 criteria should be routinely evaluated in pathologic practice and could improve the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer.

In this study, we evaluated the clinical utility of detecting KRAS mutations in circulating cell‐free (ccf)DNA of metastatic colorectal cancer patients. We prospectively recruited 94 metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Circulating cell‐free DNA was extracted from plasma samples and analyzed for the presence of seven KRAS point mutations. Using the Invader Plus assay with peptide nucleic acid clamping method and digital PCR,KRAS mutations were detected in the ccfDNA in 35 of 39 patients previously determined to have primary tumors containing KRAS mutations using the Luminex method, and in 5 of 55 patients with tumors containing wild‐type KRAS. Curative resection was undertaken in 7 of 34 patients with primary and ccfDNA KRAS mutations, resulting in the disappearance of the mutation from the cell‐free DNA in five of seven patients. Three of these patients had tumor recurrence and KRAS mutations in their ccfDNA reappeared. Epidermal growth factor receptor blockade was administered to 24 of the KRAS tumor wild‐type patients. Of the 24 patients with wild‐type KRAS in their primary tumors, three patients had KRAS mutations in their ccfDNA and did not respond to treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) blockade. We also detected a new KRAS mutation in five patients during chemotherapy with EGFR blockade, before disease progression was detectable with imaging. The detection of KRAS mutations in ccfDNA is an attractive approach for predicting both treatment response and acquired resistance to EGFR blockade, and for detecting disease recurrence.

Lumican is a member of a small leucine-rich proteoglycan family, and it is reportedly overexpressed in human breast cancer. The expression of lumican in the extracellular matrix in breast cancer is associated with a high tumor grade, low estrogen receptor levels and young age. Lumican expression has been previously reported in colorectal cancer, but the role of lumican in the tumor is not well understood. In this study, we examined the expression and role of lumican in advanced colorectal cancer. Immunohistochemical staining was performed on 158 patients who underwent curative surgery for advanced colorectal cancer with lymph node metastasis. In the normal colorectal tissues, lumican immunoreactivity was observed in the fibroblasts and neural cells, but not in the colorectal epithelial cells. Lumican was localized in the cytoplasm of the cancer cells and its overexpression was detected in 99 of the 158 (62.7%) colorectal cancer patients. Clinicopathologically, there was no association of lumican expression with age, sex, histological typing, or venous and lymphatic invasion. However, lumican expression tended to correlate with the spread of lymph node metastasis and the depth of tumor invasion (p=0.136 and 0.135, respectively). Furthermore, the survival rate was significantly lower in patients with a high lumican expression level than in those with a low lumican expression level (p=0.048). These results indicate that lumican expression is a potential prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer with nodal metastasis.