Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Status as Prognostic Indicators in Patients with Optimally Cytoreduced Stage IIIc Serous Cystadenocarcinoma of the Ovary

Geisler, John P.; Wiemann, Michael C.; Miller, Greg A.; Geisler, Hans

doi:10.1006/gyno.1996.0067

Cited by 34 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Steroid receptor genes in endometrial cancer have been correlated with lower grade tumor, better response to progestogen treatment and better survival [3][4][5]. Our study showed that half of the tumors were positive for ER· in P, M and R lesions whereas the ERß expression rate was much lower.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Gene Expression in Primary, Metastatic and Recurrent Lesions of Endometrial Cancer

Sakamoto¹,

Kinoshita²,

Nakayama³

et al. 1999

Gynecol Obstet Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seventeen patients with endometrial cancer were studied. Tissues of primary (P) and metastatic (M) lesions were obtained from 8 patients and complete sets of P, M and Recurrent (R) lesions were obtained from 9 patients during a follow-up period of 1–10 years. Expressions of estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors, multidrug resistance protein-1, multidrug resistance-related protein, c-erbB-2, membrane-type metalloproteinase, human telomerase RNA, human telomerase reverse transcriptase RNA, E-cadherin and autocrine motility factor receptor were studied by RT-PCR. Also, telomeric restriction fragment length (TRFL) and microsatellite instability were determined between P, M and R. The results indicate that there are significant differences in the gene expression frequency during tumor progression. The mismatch rate ranged from 0 to 47.1% between P and M and from 14.3% to 66.7% between P and R, respectively. The TRFL analysis showed a marked reduction in P and M (P vs. M: 8.2 ± 0.9 vs. 5.6 ± 0.4 kb, mean ±SEM, n = 9, p = 0.002 by paired Student’s t test). The length further decreased in R (P vs. R: 8.2 ± 0.9 vs. 3.2 ± 0.7, p = 0.01, M vs. R: 5.6 ± 0.4 vs. 3.2 ± 0.7, p = 0.005). The genomic instability/replication error was tested by AluI arbitrary primed polymerase chain reaction (AP-PCR). Five out of 17 patients showed an altered replication error pattern (29.4%). The mean number of abnormal AluI AP-PCR patterns in M and R compared to the P was 1.5 (M) and 4 (R). The difference between the P and R was statistically significant (p < 0.04). The present data indicate that biological behavior of cancer cells in P, M and R may differ significantly.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Gene Expression in Primary, Metastatic and Recurrent Lesions of Endometrial Cancer

Sakamoto¹,

Kinoshita²,

Nakayama³

et al. 1999

Gynecol Obstet Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 In addition to ER␣, a second ER, ER␤ was identified in 1996. 7 The relative levels of ER␣ and ER␤ had been suggested to be important determinants of biologic response to ER agonists and antiestrogens in specific target tissues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estrogen Receptor Subtypes in Ovarian Cancer

Wei

Liu

et al. 2008

Obstetrics & Gynecology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Earlier work was performed using the DCC method (dextran-coated charcoal). 19 DCC detected ER, however, has been found to give falsely positive results if surrounding benign tissue expresses this receptor, 10 or, falsely negative results have been obtained in cases of receptors masked by endogenous estrogen. 20 Today, immunohistochemistry is considered the method of choice because it allows an exact assignment of ER and PR expression to tissue components of interest.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%