Thomas E Rohan, Chenxin Zhang, Yihong Wang, Fergus J Couch, Robert T Greenlee, Stacey Honda, Azadeh Stark, Larissa L White, Dhananjay A Chitale, Xiaonan Xue, Mindy Ginsberg, Olivier Loudig
{"title":"p16, COX-2, and Ki67 protein expression in DCIS and risk of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer.","authors":"Thomas E Rohan, Chenxin Zhang, Yihong Wang, Fergus J Couch, Robert T Greenlee, Stacey Honda, Azadeh Stark, Larissa L White, Dhananjay A Chitale, Xiaonan Xue, Mindy Ginsberg, Olivier Loudig","doi":"10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-25-0143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prior research on the associations of p16, COX-2, and Ki67 immunopositivity in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) tissue with risk of subsequent ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (IBC) is limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a case-control study nested in a cohort of women diagnosed with DCIS, immunostaining for p16, COX-2, and Ki67 was performed on DCIS tissue from those who developed subsequent ipsilateral IBC (cases; n=146) and on matched subjects who did not develop IBC (controls; n=273). Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between immunopositivity for p16, COX-2, and Ki67 and risk of subsequent ipsilateral IBC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no association between p16, COX-2, and Ki67 immunopositivity, examined either individually or in combination, with risk of ipsilateral IBC. Compared to all other groups, the multivariable OR (95% CI) for women who were triple positive for the three markers was 1.16 (0.38, 3.54).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>p16, COX-2, and Ki67 immunopositivity were not associated with altered risk of ipsilateral IBC in women with DCIS.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>p16, COX-2, and Ki67 may not be prognostic for ipsilateral IBC in women with DCIS.</p>","PeriodicalId":9458,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-25-0143","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Prior research on the associations of p16, COX-2, and Ki67 immunopositivity in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) tissue with risk of subsequent ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (IBC) is limited.
Methods: In a case-control study nested in a cohort of women diagnosed with DCIS, immunostaining for p16, COX-2, and Ki67 was performed on DCIS tissue from those who developed subsequent ipsilateral IBC (cases; n=146) and on matched subjects who did not develop IBC (controls; n=273). Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between immunopositivity for p16, COX-2, and Ki67 and risk of subsequent ipsilateral IBC.
Results: There was no association between p16, COX-2, and Ki67 immunopositivity, examined either individually or in combination, with risk of ipsilateral IBC. Compared to all other groups, the multivariable OR (95% CI) for women who were triple positive for the three markers was 1.16 (0.38, 3.54).
Conclusions: p16, COX-2, and Ki67 immunopositivity were not associated with altered risk of ipsilateral IBC in women with DCIS.
Impact: p16, COX-2, and Ki67 may not be prognostic for ipsilateral IBC in women with DCIS.
期刊介绍:
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention publishes original peer-reviewed, population-based research on cancer etiology, prevention, surveillance, and survivorship. The following topics are of special interest: descriptive, analytical, and molecular epidemiology; biomarkers including assay development, validation, and application; chemoprevention and other types of prevention research in the context of descriptive and observational studies; the role of behavioral factors in cancer etiology and prevention; survivorship studies; risk factors; implementation science and cancer care delivery; and the science of cancer health disparities. Besides welcoming manuscripts that address individual subjects in any of the relevant disciplines, CEBP editors encourage the submission of manuscripts with a transdisciplinary approach.