This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
BACKGROUND: The subtype of claudin-low breast cancer can be reliably determined only by gene-expression profiling. Attempts have been made to develop immunohistochemical surrogates, which nearly always focus on membranous claudin expression. METHODS: We assessed the immunohistochemical expression of both membranous and cytoplasmic claudins 3, 4 and 7 in a series of 197 non-metastatic breast cancers, enriched with triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs; 60%). The expression of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition-regulating transcription factors Sip1, Zeb1 and vimentin had previously been determined in the same material. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, strong cytoplasmic claudin 3 expression was associated with poor relapse-free survival (RFS), disease-free survival, distant disease-free survival, breast cancer-specific survival and overall survival among TNBC patients (for RFS, RR 5.202, 95% CI 1.210-22.369, p = 0.027, vs. T-class, RR 0.663, 95% CI 0.168-2.623, p = 0.558, and N-class, RR 3.940, 95% CI 0.933-16.631, p = 0.062). Cytoplasmic claudin 3 expression was also associated with strong nuclear Sip1 expression (p = 0.000053), TNBC phenotype (p = 0.012) and within them, non-basal-like phenotype (p = 0.026). Cytoplasmic claudin 7 was associated with dismal RFS (RR 6.328, 95% CI 1.401-28.593, p = 0.016, vs. T-class, RR 0.692, 95% CI 0.242-1.982, p = 0.493, and N-class, RR 2.981, 95% CI 1.1016-8.749, p = 0.047). Low cytoplasmic expression of claudins 3, 4 and 7 together also predicted poor RFS (RR 6.070, 95% CI 1.347-27.363, p = 0.019, vs. T-class, RR 0.677, 95% CI 0.237-1.934, p = 0.467, and N-class, RR 3.167, 95% CI 1.079-9.290, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Immunohistochemical expression levels of cytoplasmic claudins 3 and 7 appear to be novel prognostic factors in TNBC.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jääskeläinen et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: