Prolactin receptor is a negative prognostic factor in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: The influence of human prolactin (hPRL) on the development of breast and other types of cancer is well established. Little information, however, exists on the effects of hPRL on squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (SCCHNs). METHODS: In this study, we evaluated prolactin receptor (PRLR) expression in SCCHN cell lines and assessed by immunohistochemistry the expression in 89 patients with SCCHNs. The PRLR expression was correlated with clinicopathological characteristics as well as clinical outcome. The effect of hPRL treatment on tumour cell growth was evaluated in vitro. RESULTS: Immunoreactivity for PRLR was observed in 85 out of 89 (95%) tumours. Multivariate COX regression analysis confirmed high levels of PRLR expression (>25% of tumour cells) to be an independent prognostic factor with respect to overall survival (HR=3.70, 95% CI: 1.14-12.01; P=0.029) and disease-free survival (P=0.017). Growth of PRLR-positive cancer cells increased in response to hPRL treatment. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that hPRL is an important growth factor for SCCHN. Because of PRLR expression in a vast majority of tumour specimens and its negative impact on overall survival, the receptor represents a novel prognosticator and a promising drug target for patients with SCCHNs.

Uptake of (18)F-FLT and (18)F-FDG in primary head and neck cancer correlates with survival.

UNLABELLED: The aim of the study was to determine the practicability of (18)F-FLT in tumours of the head and neck area in terms of visualization, a possible correlation between FLT uptake and proliferation fraction as determined by Ki-67 immunostaining, and if tumoural FLT-uptake has a prognostic meaning, as determined by a correlation to patient survival time. Results were compared to (18)F-FDG. PATIENTS, METHODS: 20 patients with previously untreated lesions of the head and neck area, which were clinically highly suspicious to be malignant, underwent PET scans with (18)F-FLT and (18)F-FDG, a CT of the head and neck area, and a biopsy. Tumour tracer uptake was determined by standardized uptake value (SUV) normalized to body weight and /non-tumor ratios (T/N). (18)F-FDG and (18)F-FLT uptake were compared with histopathologic and immunohistochemical results. RESULTS: 19 patients had malignant tumours; one patient had a benign cystadenoma (so called Warthin's tumour) of the parotid gland. One negative lesion turned out to be a malignant T1 stage squamous cell carcinoma in both PET scans, the Warthin's tumour was false positive with (18)F-FDG but showed only faint uptake with (18)F-FLT, resulting in a sensitivity of 95 % for both tracers. Of all lesions, maximum SUVs of (18)F-FLT ranged from 1.53 to 11.70 (mean +/- SD 5.81 +/- 2.28) those of FDG from 2.63 to 16.50 (mean +/- SD 8.91 +/- 3.58), p < 0.001. (18)F-FLT-T/N ranged from 0.94 to 5.85 (mean +/- SD, 3.18 +/- 1.21), (18)F-FDG-T/N was from 0.92 to 7.50 (mean +/- SD, 3.6 +/- 1.74), n.s. The mean survival time was 18 months in a maximum follow up time of 36 months. A significant correlation between both PET tracers and survival was detected, but no correlation between the amount of Ki-67 positive cells and FLT. CONCLUSION: In head and neck cancer in the primary setting (18)F-FLT does not provide additional visual information in comparison to (18)F-FDG.(18)F-FLT uptake is inversely correlated with patient survival, as well as (18)F-FDG.