Expression of cadherin 17 in well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours.

AIMS: Cadherin 17 (CDH17) is expressed primarily in normal intestinal epithelium and digestive tract tumours, and has limited expression in other neoplasms. The aims of this study were to examine CDH17 expression in well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours (WDNETs) from various primary sites, representing the foregut, midgut, and hindgut, and tumours metastasizing to the liver, and to correlate the differences between the expression of CDH17, CDX2, and thyroid transcription factor 1 (TTF1). METHODS AND RESULTS: We investigated CDH17 immunohistochemical expression in 150 primary WDNETs from eight anatomical sites, including 68 from the foregut, 70 from the midgut, and 12 from the hindgut, and 15 metastases. CDH17 immunoreactivity increased significantly from foregut to hindgut WDNETs (P < 0.0001). Pancreatic WDNETs expressed CDH17 at a significantly higher frequency than other foregut tumours. Within the midgut, appendiceal and small-intestinal WDNETs were more frequently positive for CDH17 than for CDX2. All hindgut WDNETs expressed CDH17, in contrast to CDX2 (positive in one rectal case). CDH17 expression in liver metastases was similar to that of the primary tumours. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to comprehensively examine CDH17 expression in WDNETs from different sites. CDH17 is a sensitive marker for midgut WDNETs, and the CDH17+/CDX2-/TTF1- phenotype was found to be sensitive (92%) and specific (91%) for hindgut WDNETs.

Cadherins, catenins and cell cycle regulators: impact on survival in a Gynecologic Oncology Group phase II endometrial cancer trial.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the clinical relevance of catenins, cadherins and cell cycle regulators in stage IV or recurrent endometrial carcinoma in a multi-center phase II trial (GOG protocol #119). METHODS: Tissue microarrays of metastatic or recurrent (n=42) tumor were developed and immunohistochemistry was performed. Average expression (percent staining x intensity) was assessed in tumor epithelium ((E)) and stroma ((S)) and categorized into tertiles (T1, T2, T3) for E-cadherin(E), N-cadherin(E), alpha-catenin(E), beta-catenin(E), gamma-catenin(E), p120-catenin(E) and Ki-67(E); as negative, below median or above median for p16(E), p27(E) and CD44(S); or as negative or positive for p53(E), Ki-67(S) and APC(S) (adenomatous polyposis coli). End points included response and survival. RESULTS: E-cadherin(E), p16(E), and p53(E) varied by race (p=0.003, p=0.024, p=0.002,) and N-cadherin(E), Ki-67(E), p16(E) and p27(E) by tumor type (p=0.015, p=0.011, p=0.005, p=0.021). Correlations were observed among E-cadherin(E) with p120(E) (r=0.66), p53(E) (r=-0.32), alpha-catenin(E) (r=0.52), beta-catenin(E) (r=0.58), and gamma-catenin(E) (r=0.58). High E-cadherin(E) (T2 or T3) versus low (T1) expression was associated with better survival in unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR]=0.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.06-0.37 or HR=0.17, 95% CI=0.07-0.42) and adjusted models (HR=0.18, 95% CI=0.05-0.59 or HR=0.22, 95% CI=0.07-0.70). High p16(E) versus negative expression was associated with worse survival in unadjusted (HR=3.87, 95% CI=1.74-8.61) and adjusted (HR=4.18, 95% CI=1.28-13.6) models. Positive versus negative expression of p53(E) was associated with worse survival in unadjusted (HR=2.31, 95% CI=1.16-4.60) but not adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: E-cadherin(E) and p16(E) appear to be clinically relevant, independent prognostic factors in stage IV or recurrent endometrial cancers treated with Tamoxifen and Medroxyprogesterone acetate, and merit further study.

Salivary mucoepidermoid carcinoma: a multi-institutional review of 76 patients.

Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) is a relatively common salivary tumor with varying potential for aggressive behavior. Mucoepidermoid carcinoma grading has evolved from descriptive two-tiered schemata to more objective three-tiered systems. In 2001, we published a grading system Brandwein et al. in Am J Surg Pathol 25:835-845, (2001) which modified the prevailing criteria of Auclair et al. in Cancer 69:2021-2030 (1992), and included additional features of aggressive MEC. Here we seek to validate our modified grading system in a new multicenter cohort. The retrospective cohort consisted of 76 patients with confirmed MEC and known outcome data. The resection specimens were reviewed and uniformly graded according to our modified criteria Brandwein et al. in Am J Surg Pathol 25:835-845 (2001), and the Auclair criteria Auclair et al. in Cancer 69:2021-2030, (1992), Goode et al. in Cancer 82:1217-1224, (1998). Case distribution was as follows: Montefiore Medical Center: 41 (1977-2009), University of Alabama at Birmingham: 21 (1999-2010), and Rhode Island Hospital: 14, (1995-2011). Patient age ranged from 7 to 81 years (mean 51 years). The female to male ratio was 3:1. The most commonly involved sites were: parotid: n = 39 (51%), palate: n = 10 (13%), retromolar trigone: n = 6 (8%), buccal: n = 5 (7%), and submandibular gland: n = 5 (7%). The modified criteria upgraded 41% MEC; 20/25 MEC from AFIP Grade 1 to Grade 2 and 5/25 from AFIP grade 1 to grade 3. Eleven patients had positive lymph nodes; the AFIP MEC grade for cases were: grade 1-3/11, Grade 2-1/11, and grade 3-7/11; the modified grading criteria distribution for these cases were Grade 1: 0/11, grade 2: 1/11, and grade 3: 10/11. Nine patients developed disease progression after definitive treatment. High-stage and positive lymph node status were significantly associated with disease progression (p = 0.0003 and p < 0.0001, respectively). For the nine patients with disease progression, the modified grading schema classified eight MEC as grade 3 and one as grade 2. By comparison, the AFIP grading schema classified three of these MEC as grade 1, and the remaining six as grade 3. Despite the fact that this multicenter retrospective study accrued 76 patients with outcome, the predictive performance of the two grading schema could not be compared due to the few patients who experienced disease progression and were also reclassified with respect to grade (n = 3).