Analysis of indoleamine 2-3 dioxygenase (IDO1) expression in breast cancer tissue by immunohistochemistry.

INTRODUCTION: The immunosuppressive enzyme, indoleamine 2,3 dioxygenase (IDO), is overexpressed in many different tumor types including breast cancer. IDO inhibitors synergize with chemotherapy in breast cancer murine models. Characterizing IDO expression in breast cancer could define which patients receive IDO inhibitors. This study analyzed IDO protein expression in 203 breast cancer cases. The relationship between IDO, overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), clinicopathologic, molecular, and immune tumor infiltrate factors was evaluated. METHODS: Expression of IDO, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epithelial receptor 2, cytokeratin 5/6, epithelial growth factor receptor, phosphorylated AKT, neoangiogenesis, nitrogen oxide synthetase 2 (NOS2), cyclooxygenase 2 (COX2), FoxP3, CD8, and CD11b on archival breast cancer tissue sections was evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Associations between IDO and these markers were explored by a univariate and multivariate analysis. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier (OS) and Wilcoxon two-sample (DSS) tests. RESULTS: IDO expression was higher in ER+ tumors compared to ER- tumors. IDO was lower in those with higher neoangiogenesis. OS was better in ER+ patients with high IDO expression. DSS was better in node-positive patients with high IDO expression. IDO activity positively correlates with NOS2. COX2 as positively correlated with IDO on univariate but not multivariate analysis. There was a trend toward greater numbers of CD11b+ cells in IDO-low tumors. CONCLUSIONS: IDO protein expression is lower in ER- breast tumors with greater neoangiogenesis. Future clinical trials evaluating the synergy between IDO inhibitors and chemotherapy should take this finding into account and stratify for ER status in the trial design.

Effect of Metformin Use on Survival in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Single-Institution Experience and Review of the Literature.

Observational studies have demonstrated that metformin use in diabetic patients is associated with reduced cancer incidence and mortality. Here, we aimed to determine whether metformin use was associated with improved survival in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. All patients with diabetes who underwent resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 12/1/1986 and 4/30/2013 at our institution were categorized by metformin use. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier method, with log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards multivariable regression models. For analyses of our data and the only other published study, we used Meta-Analysis version 2.2. We identified 44 pancreatic cancer patients with diabetes who underwent resection of the primary tumor (19 with ongoing metformin use, 25 never used metformin). There were no significant differences in major clinical and demographic characteristics between metformin and non-metformin users. Metformin users had a better median survival than nonusers, but the difference was not statistically significant (35.3 versus 20.2 months; P = 0.3875). The estimated 2-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates for non-metformin users were 42%, 28%, and 14%, respectively. Metformin users fared better with corresponding rates of 68%, 34%, and 34%, respectively. In our literature review, which included 111 patients from the two studies (46 metformin users and 65 non-users), overall hazard ratio was 0.668 (95% CI 0.397-1.125), with P = 0.129. Metformin use was associated with improved survival outcomes in patients with resected pancreatic cancer, but the difference was not statistically significant. The potential benefit of metformin should be investigated in adequately powered prospective studies.

Uncertainty in the utility of immunohistochemistry in mismatch repair protein expression in epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Utility of immunohistochemistry (IHC) for mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression has been demonstrated in colorectal cancer but remains incompletely defined in ovarian cancer. We evaluated MMR protein expression in three population-based samples of epithelial ovarian cancers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: IHC staining was performed on full-section (FS) or tissue microarray (TMA) slides for MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 expression. RESULTS: Out of 487 cases, 147 and 340 were performed through FS and TMA, respectively. Overall, Loss of Expression (LoE) of at least one MMR protein was observed in 12.7% based on an expression score of ≤3 (on a scale of 9). Notably, LoE was significantly higher in TMAs (17.9%) compared to FS cases (0.7%) (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of epithelial ovarian cancers have a loss of MMR protein expression. Protein expression results vary significantly by the tissue sampling methodology utilized, raising concerns about the clinical utility of this test for ovarian tumors.