Comparison of tissue biomarkers between non-schistosoma and schistosoma-associated urothelial carcinoma.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: High-grade urothelial carcinoma either non-Schistosoma (NS-UBC) or Schistosoma (S-UBC)-associated is the tenth cause of death worldwide and represents a serious therapeutic problem. AIM: Evaluation of the immmunohistochemical expression of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), programmed cell death protein-1 (PDL1), estrogen receptor-alpha (ERα) and UroplakinIII, in the high-grade in NS-UBC and S-UBC as potential prognostic and therapeutic targets analyzed through estimation of area percentage, optical density and international pathological scoring system for each marker. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty high grade urothelial carcinoma cases were enrolled in the study (30 cases of NS-UBC and 30 cases of S-UBC). The cases were immunohistochemically-assessed for TNFα, EGFR, PDL1, ERα and Uroplakin III expression. In S-UBC, parasite load was also evaluated for correlation with the immunohistochemical markers' expression in S-UBC. RESULTS: The area percentage of immune-expression of TNFα and EGFR was higher in S-UBC compared to NS-UBC. On the other hand, the NS-UBC displayed statistically-higher expression of PDL1 and uroplakinIII (p-value <0.001). ERα revealed higher, yet, non-significant expressions in S-UBC compared to NS-UBC (p-value =0.459). PDL1 expression showed the most superior record regarding area percentage (64.6± 34.5). Regarding optical density, TNF-α showed the highest transmittance expression (2.4 ± 0.9). EGFR positively correlated with PDL1 in S-UBC (r= 0.578, p-value =0.001) whereas in NS-UBC, TNFα and PDL1 (r=0.382, p-value=0.037) had positive correlation. Schistosoma eggs in tissues oppose uroplakin III expression and trigger immunomodulation via PDL1. CONCLUSION: Due to lower UroplakinIII expression, S-UBC is supposed to have a poorer prognosis. Hormonal therapy is not hypothesized due to a very minimal ERα expression in both NS-UBC and S-UBC. Regarding immunotherapy, anti-TNF-α is suggested for S-UBC whilst in NS-UBC, blockading PDL1 might be useful. Targeted EGFR therapy seems to carry emphasized outcomes in S-UBC. Correlations encourage combined immune therapy in NS-UBC; nevertheless, in S-UBC, combined anti-EGFR and PDL1 seem to be of benefit.