Aberrant expression of MUC5AC and MUC6 gastric mucins and sialyl Tn antigen in intraepithelial neoplasms of the pancreas

Kim, Grace; Bae, Han Ik; Park, Hee–Ug; Kuan, Shih–Fan; Crawley, Suzanne C.; Ho, Jenny J. L.; Kim, Young S.

doi:10.1053/gast.2002.36018

Cited by 227 publications

(198 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

175

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…14,17,37 The aberrant expression of MUC5AC has also reportedly been seen in the early step of pancreatic carcinoma. 38 Therefore, aberrant expression of MUC5AC may be a common feature suggesting the early step of carcinogenesis in epithelial cells of intrahepatic bile ducts and pancreatic ducts. Although cytoplasmic CDX2 was frequently observed in the same diseases in which MUC5AC expression was evident, there was no significant correlation between the expression of cytoplasmic CDX2 and that of MUC5AC.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aberrant expression of CDX2 is closely related to the intestinal metaplasia and MUC2 expression in intraductal papillary neoplasm of the liver in hepatolithiasis

Ishikawa

Sasaki²,

Ohira

et al. 2004

Laboratory Investigation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aberrant expression of CDX2 is closely related to the intestinal metaplasia and MUC2 expression in intraductal papillary neoplasm of the liver in hepatolithiasis

Ishikawa

Sasaki²,

Ohira

et al. 2004

Laboratory Investigation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As a result, there is substantial ongoing effort to identify additional serological biomarkers that complement CA19-9 for the detection of early-stage PDAC. Markers investigated include proteins (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14), metabolites (15)(16)(17), autoantibodies (18,19), miRNAs (20)(21)(22), markers with aberrant glycosylation (CA19-9 and Tn antigens) (6,23,24), and exosomes (25). In view of the wide array of potential biomarkers, there is a need for systematic evaluation of candidates using CA19-9 as an anchor marker given its established performance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequential Validation of Blood-Based Protein Biomarker Candidates for Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer

Capello

Bantis

Scélo

et al. 2016

JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst

116

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: CA19-9, which is currently in clinical use as a pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) biomarker, has limited performance in detecting early-stage disease. We and others have identified protein biomarker candidates that have the potential to complement CA19-9. We have carried out sequential validations starting with 17 protein biomarker candidates to determine which markers and marker combination would improve detection of early-stage disease compared with CA19-9 alone. Methods: Candidate biomarkers were subjected to enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay based sequential validation using independent multiple sample cohorts consisting of PDAC cases (n ¼ 187), benign pancreatic disease (n ¼ 93), and healthy controls (n ¼ 169). A biomarker panel for early-stage PDAC was developed based on a logistic regression model. All statistical tests for the results presented below were one-sided. Results: Six out of the 17 biomarker candidates and CA19-9 were validated in a sample set consisting of 75 PDAC patients, 27 healthy subjects, and 19 chronic pancreatitis patients. A second independent set of 73 early-stage PDAC patients, 60 healthy subjects, and 74 benign pancreatic disease patients (combined validation set) yielded a model that consisted of TIMP1, LRG1, and CA19-9. Additional blinded testing of the model was done using an independent set of plasma samples from 39 resectable PDAC patients and 82 matched healthy subjects (test set). The model yielded areas under the curve (AUCs) of 0.949 (95% confidence interval [CI] ¼ 0.917 to 0.981) and 0.887 (95% CI ¼ 0.817 to 0.957) with sensitivities of 0.849 and 0.667 at 95% specificity in discriminating early-stage PDAC vs healthy subjects in the combined validation and test sets, respectively. The performance of the biomarker panel was statistically significantly improved compared with CA19-9 alone (P < .001, combined validation set; P ¼ .008, test set).

show abstract

“…MUC6 was positive in 31.3% of dysplasias, and 18.2% in CC. Several authors demonstrated higher expression of these mucins in both CC and dysplastic epithelium, emphasizing that they are important in characterizing biliary and pancreatic pre-neoplastic lesions (7,11,15,20,21,24) . Although these results apparently substantiate the usefulness of mucins 5 and 6 in the characterization of preneoplastic lesions, we observed that both were also expressed in reactive epithelium in 40.3% and 11.9%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mucins and NCAM (CD56) in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinogenesis

Esperança¹,

Camacho²,

Monteiro³

et al. 2014

Jornal Brasileiro De Patologia E Medicina Laboratorial

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Cholangiocarcinoma is the second most common malignant neoplasm of the hepatobiliary system. During cholangiocarcinogenesis phenotypic changes occur in the ductal epithelium, including the expression of mucins (MUC). However, the evaluating studies of the expression of mucins in the different stages of cholangiocarcinogenesis are scarce. CD56 has also contributed in differentiating benign ductal proliferation and cholangiocarcinoma; however, its expression has not been evaluated in dysplastic epithelium of the bile duct yet. Objective: To assess immunohistochemical profile of (MUC) 1, 2, 5, 6, and CD56 in cholangiocarcinoma, pre-neoplastic and reactive lesions in the epithelium of intrahepatic bile ducts. Material and methods: Immunohistochemical expression of MUC 1, 2, 5, 6, and CD56 were studied for 11 cases of cholangiocarcinoma and 83 intrahepatic bile ducts (67 reactive and 16 dysplastic). Variables were considered significant when p < 0.05. Results: The expression of MUC1 occurred in about 90% of the cholangiocarcinomas, contrasting with the low frequency of positive cases in reactive and dysplastic bile ducts (p < 0.001). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the expression of MUC5, MUC6 and CD56 between the reactive or dysplastic lesions and cholangiocarcinoma. The anti-MUC2 antibody was negative in all cases. Conclusions: MUC1 contributed for the differential diagnosis between cholangiocarcinoma and pre-neoplastic and reactive/regenerative lesions of intrahepatic bile ducts, and it should compose the antibodies panel aiming at improvement of these differential diagnoses. In contrast, MUC2, MUC5, MUC6 and CD56 were not promising in differentiating all the phases of cholangiocarcinogenesis.

show abstract

Aberrant expression of MUC5AC and MUC6 gastric mucins and sialyl Tn antigen in intraepithelial neoplasms of the pancreas

Cited by 227 publications

References 35 publications

Aberrant expression of CDX2 is closely related to the intestinal metaplasia and MUC2 expression in intraductal papillary neoplasm of the liver in hepatolithiasis

Aberrant expression of CDX2 is closely related to the intestinal metaplasia and MUC2 expression in intraductal papillary neoplasm of the liver in hepatolithiasis

Sequential Validation of Blood-Based Protein Biomarker Candidates for Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer

Mucins and NCAM (CD56) in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinogenesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About