Document Detail

Investigating AP-2 and YY1 protein expression as a cause of high HER2 gene transcription in breast cancers with discordant HER2 gene amplification.
Jump to Full Text
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  20025767     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
INTRODUCTION: Candidacy for anti-HER2 adjuvant therapy in breast cancer is assessed using tumour HER2 status but recently it has been proposed that the transcription factors AP-2alpha and YY1 may cause Her2 protein overexpression independently of gene amplification.
METHODS: We characterised AP-2alpha/beta, AP-2alpha and YY1 with HER2 gene and protein expression, other relevant biomarkers, and clinical outcome using tissue microarrays (TMAs) and immunohistochemistry in a large (n = 1,176) clinically annotated series of early stage operable breast cancer. The associations and prognostic independence of AP-2 and YY1 was assessed in all patients and an oestrogen receptor negative subgroup.
RESULTS: Nuclear expression of AP-2alpha/beta, AP-2alpha and YY1 was detected in 23%, 44% and 33% of cases respectively. AP-2alpha/beta significantly correlated with YY1 and both markers were increased in luminal oestrogen receptor (ER) positive tumours of small size and low grade but only AP-2alpha/beta correlated with good prognosis breast cancer specific survival and disease free interval (BCSS and DFI). These characteristics were lost in oestrogen receptor negative patients. AP-2alpha also correlated with luminal-type tumours but not with YY1 expression or good prognosis. AP-2alpha and YY1 showed a significant correlation with Her2 protein expression and in addition, YY1 correlated with HER2 gene expression. Discordant HER2 gene and protein expression was identified in six cases (0.71% of the study group) with four of these showing AP-2alpha but absence of AP-2alpha/beta and YY1 expression.
CONCLUSIONS: AP-2alpha/beta and YY1 are markers of good prognosis principally due to their association with oestrogen receptor but are not independent predictors. Discordant HER2 protein/gene expression is a rare event that is not always explained by the actions of AP-2 and YY1.
Desmond G Powe; Gulfareen Akhtar; Hany Onsy Habashy; Tarek Abdel-Fatah; Emad A Rakha; Andrew R Green; Ian O Ellis
Related Documents :
21459087 - The development of flexible lentiviral vectors for gene transfer in the cns.
15605987 - Galectin-3 as an immunohistochemical tool to distinguish pilocytic astrocytomas from di...
16436637 - Multiple gene expression analyses in paraffin-embedded tissues by taqman low-density ar...
21380667 - Detection of nucleic acids in cells and tissues by in situ polymerase chain reaction.
25302617 - Orthologs of human disease associated genes and rnai analysis of silencing insulin rece...
10766197 - Bcr-abl tyrosine kinase activity regulates the expression of multiple genes implicated ...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't     Date:  2009-12-21
Journal Detail:
Title:  Breast cancer research : BCR     Volume:  11     ISSN:  1465-542X     ISO Abbreviation:  Breast Cancer Res.     Publication Date:  2009  
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2010-02-03     Completed Date:  2010-07-05     Revised Date:  2013-05-31    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  100927353     Medline TA:  Breast Cancer Res     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  R90     Citation Subset:  IM    
Department of Cellular Pathology, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Derby Road, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Breast Neoplasms / genetics*,  metabolism,  pathology
Gene Amplification
Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic
Microarray Analysis
Middle Aged
Protein Isoforms
Receptor, erbB-2 / biosynthesis,  genetics*
Receptors, Estrogen / biosynthesis
Transcription Factor AP-2 / biosynthesis*,  genetics
Transcription, Genetic
Tumor Markers, Biological / metabolism
YY1 Transcription Factor / biosynthesis*,  genetics
Reg. No./Substance:
0/Protein Isoforms; 0/Receptors, Estrogen; 0/Transcription Factor AP-2; 0/Tumor Markers, Biological; 0/YY1 Transcription Factor; 0/YY1 protein, human; EC, erbB-2

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Full Text
Journal Information
Journal ID (nlm-ta): Breast Cancer Res
ISSN: 1465-5411
ISSN: 1465-542X
Publisher: BioMed Central
Article Information
Download PDF
Copyright ?2009 Powe et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Received Day: 7 Month: 7 Year: 2009
Revision Requested Day: 11 Month: 8 Year: 2009
Revision Received Day: 20 Month: 11 Year: 2009
Accepted Day: 21 Month: 12 Year: 2009
Print publication date: Year: 2009
Electronic publication date: Day: 21 Month: 12 Year: 2009
Volume: 11 Issue: 6
First Page: R90 Last Page: R90
ID: 2815554
Publisher Id: bcr2461
PubMed Id: 20025767
DOI: 10.1186/bcr2461

Investigating AP-2 and YY1 protein expression as a cause of high HER2 gene transcription in breast cancers with discordant HER2 gene amplification
Desmond G Powe1 Email:
Gulfareen Akhtar2 Email:
Hany Onsy Habashy23 Email:
Tarek Abdel-Fatah2 Email:
Emad A Rakha1 Email:
Andrew R Green2 Email:
Ian O Ellis2 Email:
1Department of Cellular Pathology, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Derby Road, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK
2Department of Pathology, School of Molecular Medical Sciences, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and University of Nottingham, Derby Road, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK
3Department of Histopathology, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt


HER2 amplification occurs in approximately 20% breast cancer patients and is generally associated with poor prognosis compared to HER2 negative counterparts [1,2]. Over-expression of HER2 is generally seen in high grade breast cancers and is associated with aggressive tumour growth characteristics including increased proliferation [3], enhanced tumorigenicity [4] and metastatic potential [5]. These adverse properties can be ameliorated by blockade of HER2 protein with the humanised monoclonal antibody, trastuzumab, and is targeted at patients that show HER2 amplification [6]. Furthermore, it has been recently shown that HER2 positive node negative patients with low grade breast cancer also benefit from trastuzumab therapy [7] but its increased use has to be balanced by potential toxicity [8].

Over-expression of HER2 protein is usually accounted for by gene amplification. Detection of HER2 protein is routinely performed using immunohistochemistry (IHC) with visual assessment where a score of 3+ assumes HER2 oncogene amplification [9]. In equivocal cases scoring 2+ gene status is assessed using the gold standard fluorescent in situ hybridisation or chromogenic in situ hybridisation techniques [10]. Recent evidence has suggested that increased transcription of HER2 protein can occur due to activation of the HER2 promoter by transcriptional factors, including activating protein-2 (AP-2) and Yin Yang protein-1 (YY1) [11]. The AP-2 family contains five homologous 50 kDa proteins encoded by individual genes, which regulate transcription through interaction with several nuclear factors associated with specific genetic programs [12]. AP-2 proteins have multi-functional roles, including control of normal cell growth and differentiation, and also carcinogenesis including breast cancer [13]. At least four binding sites have been identified for AP-2 in the promoter of the HER2 gene [13,14] and some studies have shown a correlation between the expression of AP-2 with HER2 over-expression in breast cancer cell lines [12-15] suggesting that AP-2 and its neutralisation could be a means of down regulating HER2 [15].

The Yin Yang protein (YY1) is a conserved zinc-finger DNA-binding phosphoprotein transcriptional factor that regulates initiation, activation and repression of transcription for a number of genes connected with cell growth, development and differentiation [16-18]. YY1 has been reported to regulate the oncogene retinoblastoma protein Rb [19] and CBP [20] and furthermore, binds to the ubiquitous alpha component present in replication-dependent histones. Because of its role in chromatin remodelling, involving interaction with histone-deacetylase (HDAC) [21], YY1 may be associated with global gene expression and has received interest as a potential therapeutic target in human cancer [22-24]. Moreover, YY1 has recently been identified as a new cofactor stimulating AP-2 transcriptional activity [25].

In the current study, we used a large (n = 1,176) and well characterised series of patients with early stage invasive breast cancer to investigate the frequency of discordant HER2 gene and protein levels and to evaluate the role of AP-2?/?, AP-2? and YY1 in these tumours. The implication of amplification-independent HER2 overexpression is that patients with equivocal Her2 protein expression (Her2 score 2+) might be denied clinical anti-HER2 adjuvant therapy (AT). In addition, the clinicopathological value of AP-2 and YY1 in breast cancer was assessed in view of the previous conflicting reports and its proposed role as a possible therapeutic target in breast cancer.

Materials and methods

This study was approved by the Nottingham Research Ethics Committee 2 under the title 'Development of a molecular genetic classification of breast cancer'. Production of the study and analysis of the data was independent of the funding bodies associated with this project.

Patient selection

Tissue microarrays (TMAs) containing 1,176 primary operable breast carcinoma cases derived from the Nottingham Tenovus Primary Breast Carcinoma Series were used as previously reported [26]. The cohort comprised women aged 70 years or less, who presented between 1986 and 1999. This well-characterized resource contains information on patients' clinical and pathological data including histologic tumour type, primary tumour size, lymph node status, histologic grade, and data on other breast cancer relevant biomarkers. Patients within the good prognostic group (Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) ? 3.4) did not receive adjuvant therapy (AT). Hormonal therapy (HT) was prescribed to patients with ER-?+ tumours and NPI scores of >3.4 (moderate and poor prognostic groups). Pre-menopausal patients within the moderate and poor prognostic groups were candidates for CMF (Cyclophosphamide, Methotrexate, and 5-Flourouracil) chemotherapy. Conversely, postmenopausal patients with moderate or poor NPI and ER-?+ were offered HT, while ER-?-patients received CMF if fit. Survival data including survival time, disease-free interval (DFI) and development of loco-regional and distant metastases (DM) were maintained on a prospective basis. Median follow up was 124 months (range 1 to 233). Breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) was defined as the time (in months) from the date of the primary surgical treatment to the time of death from breast cancer. DFI was defined as the interval (in months) from the date of the primary surgical treatment to the first loco-regional or distant metastasis.


Two antibodies were selected for detection of AP-2; a mouse monoclonal antibody was used to recognise the AP-2?/? isoforms (Abcam, Cambs, UK; clone A6/2/2; dilution 1:700), and a polyclonal rabbit antibody recognising only the AP-2? isoform (Active Motif, Carlsbad, USA; dilution 1:100) was also used. Both AP-2 antibodies and the anti-YY1 antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA, USA; clone H-10; dilution 1:100) were optimised for immunohistochemistry (IHC) on full face excisional breast tissue sections to assess homogeneity of staining. Subsequently, a 13-slide series (n = 1,176 cases) comprising 4 ?m thick formalin fixed paraffin embedded breast cancer tissue TMAs were immunostained using microwave antigen retrieval in 0.01 M pH 6.0 citrate buffer (AP2 antibodies) or 0.01 M pH 8.0 EDTA (YY1). An indirect labelled streptavidin avidin biotin technique (LSAB) technique with diaminobenzidine (DAB) chromogen was performed using a DakoCytomation Techmate 500 Plus (DakoCytomation, Cambridge, UK) automatic immunostainer as previously described [27]. Negative controls were performed by omitting the primary antibody and substitution with diluent. Subsequently, immunostained sections were counterstained in haematoxylin. After immunohistochemistry, cases were assessed using the H-score (histochemical score) to measure staining intensity and the percentage of stained tumour cells corresponding to each intensity [28]. The cases were scored without knowledge of the patient outcome by three of the authors (DGP, GA, HOH) and the resulting data were categorised using thresholds set by reference to a frequency distribution histogram plotted for AP-2 and YY1 proteins and by to the median H-scores. The median H-score of 100 or greater was categorised as positive for AP-2 and YY1 staining. In addition, AP-2 and YY1 were characterised in breast cancer by investigating their association with other breast tumour relevant markers using cut-off thresholds as previously described [26,29].

Her2 scoring was performed on replicate 4 ?m thick breast cancer TMAs using a Ventana BenchMark immunostainer (Roche Diagnostics, Surrey, UK) with the Pathway HER2/neu (4B5) rabbit monoclonal antibody according to the manufacturer's instructions. Breast carcinomas were microscopically assessed to determine the level of Her2 protein expression using the manufacturers threshold criteria based on the recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncologists and the College of American Pathologists [2]. Intensity and pattern of membrane staining seen in at least 10% of cells was scored: 1+ = non-amplified, 3+ = gene amplification, and 2+ = equivocal result and warranted further investigation of amplification status using an INFORM HER2/neu DNA probe with a silver in situ hybridisation (SISH) technique according to the manufacturers instructions (Roche Diagnostics). Sections were counterstained in haematoxylin and all reagents were supplied by Roche Diagnostics. The sections were initially screened using a Nikon E600 microscope (Nikon, Surrey, UK) fitted with an ?20 and ?40 objective lens. The number of silver signals corresponding to the gene copy number of HER2 and chromosome 17 (Chr17) was counted in malignant breast epithelial cells only using a quantitative method. For each tumour, a HER2/Chr17 ratio was determined from the average number of signals located in at least 20 cells from replicate sections. Cases that failed to show signal in normal cells adjacent to neoplastic tissue were excluded. Cases with a HER2/Chr17 ratio less than1.8 were deemed non-amplified whereas ratio's greater than 2.2 were designated as amplified.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 15.0 statistical software (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). Association between AP-2 and YY1 protein expression with different clinicopathological parameters was evaluated in the entire patient series and in an ER negative patient cohort only using the Pearson Chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Standard cut-off values for the different biomarkers, needed to determine categorical scores before statistical analysis, were the same as those published in previous studies [26,27,30]. Cumulative survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method with a log rank test to assess significance between different survival rates. Patients that died due to causes other than breast cancer were censored during survival analysis. Multivariate analysis for survival was performed using the Cox proportional hazard regression model. Each variable was assessed in univariate analysis as a continuous and categorical variable and the two models were compared using an appropriate likelihood ratio test. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated for each variable. All tests were two-sided with a 95% CI and significant P value was <0.05.

Characterisation of AP-2 and YY1 positive tumours and their association with tumour-relevant biomarkers in the entire patient series

AP-2 and YY1 immunostaining showed predominant nuclear localisation with variable cytoplasmic staining (Figure 1).

AP-2?/? isoforms: Informative data were obtained on 1,176 tissue cores of which 22.8% showed AP-2 expression. AP-2?/? and YY1 expression was positively correlated (? = 167.5, P < 0.001).

High AP-2?/? nuclear expression was significantly increased in small (? 1.5 cm) compared to large tumours (P < 0.001) of low tumour grade (P < 0.001). Positive AP-2?/? expression was more frequent in lobular breast cancer (BC) compared to negative cases (17.1% compared to 8.3%, respectively) showing good NPI (P < 0.001) and reduced vascular invasion (P = 0.036). Patients' characteristics are summarized in Table 1.

AP-2?/? nuclear staining positively correlated with the hormonal receptors [oestrogen receptor-? (ER) (P < 0.001), progesterone receptor (PgR) (P < 0.001), the luminal-associated marker CK19 (P = 0.007), and with Bcl2 (P = 0.042). Significant inverse correlations were observed between AP-2 and HER4 (P = 0.001), Mib1 (P = 0.005), EGFR (P = 0.045), and the basal markers CK5/6 (P = 0.006) and CK14 (P = 0.011). Details of the associations with other biomarkers are shown in Table 2.

AP-2? isoform: An antibody recognising AP-2? isoform was selected to allow comparison with a previous study reported by Allouche et al [11]. The pattern of staining using the AP-2? isoform-specific antibody was similar to that seen using the AP-2?/? antibody but no significant association was seen with YY1 (? = 3.297, P < 0.069). Informative data were obtained on up to 942 cases with 44% showing positive staining. AP-2? expression showed no significant association with patient age, tumour size, grade, lymph node stage, prognosis using NPI, formation of distant metastases, tumour recurrence or vascular invasion. The frequency of positive AP-2? expression was two-fold more prevalent in medullary BC compared to negative cases. Patients' characteristics are summarized in Table 1.

AP-2? nuclear staining positively correlated with the hormonal receptor ER (P = 0.02), and the luminal-associated marker CK19 (P = 0.016). Significant inverse correlations were observed between AP-2? and HER4 (P = 0.003), Mib1 (P < 0.001), and the basal marker CK5/6 (P = 0.006). Details of the association between with other biomarkers are shown in Table 2.

YY1: Informative data were obtained on 1,159 tissue cores with 33.3% being positively categorized for YY1 expression. High YY1 nuclear expression was significantly increased in small (? 1.5 cm) (P = 0.028) low grade (P < 0.001) tumours with good NPI (P < 0.001). Positive YY1 expression was more frequent in lobular and tubular BC compared to negative cases. No significant association was found with respect to patient age, lymph node stage, formation of distant metastases, tumour recurrence or vascular invasion. Patients' characteristics are summarized in Table 3.

Positive YY1 nuclear staining was associated with ER (P < 0.001), PgR (P < 0.001), CK19 (P = 0.037), and Bcl2 (P < 0.001). Significant inverse correlations were found between YY1 and HER4 (P < 0.001), CK5/6 (P = 0.015), CK14 (P = 0.023), p53 (P = 0.002), and MIB1 (P = 0.035). Details of the associations with other biomarkers are shown in Table 4.

Characterisation of AP-2 and YY1 positive tumours and their association with tumour-relevant biomarkers in ER-negative patients

Due to the significant correlation found between AP2 with ER and the predicted good clinical outcome in hormonal-positive patients, these associations were investigated in ER-negative cases to test the dependency on ER status.

AP-2?/? isoforms: AP-2?/? protein expression was studied in 309 ER negative patients and showed no significant association with either tumour size, lymph node stage, histological grade, development of metastasis, vascular invasion, tumour type, menopausal status, PgR, CK19, HER3, HER4, E-cadherin, EGFR, CK5/6, CK14, p53 or Bcl2 (data not shown). However, AP-2?/? protein expression showed significant inverse associations with the proliferation marker Mib1 (?2 = 4.671, P = 0.031) and good prognosis measured using NPI (?2 = 6.428, P = 0.04).

AP-2? isoform: AP-2?/? protein expression was studied in 266 ER negative patients and showed no significant association with tumour size, lymph node stage, histological grade, prognosis (NPI), development of metastasis, vascular invasion, tumour type, menopausal status, PgR, HER3, E-cadherin, EGFR, CK14, p53 or Bcl2 (data not shown). However, AP-2? protein expression showed significant positive association with CK19 (?2 = 4.982, P = 0.026) and HER4 (?2 = 5.885, P = 0.015), and a significant negative association with the basal marker CK5/6 (?2 = 5.569, P = 0.018) and the proliferation marker Mib1 (?2 = 8.521, P = 0.004).

Association of AP-2 and YY1 with clinical outcome

The AP-2 and YY1 antibodies were tested using Kaplan Meier plots to model clinical outcome, and using Cox regression analysis to determine their ability to predict clinical outcome measured against tumour size, grade, and lymph node stage.

AP-2?/? isoforms: AP-2?/? expression was significantly associated with longer breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) (Log rank (LR) = 7.607, P = 0.006; HR = 1.5 (95% CI = 1.1 to 2.01), P = 0.006; Figure 2) and an increased disease free interval (DFI) (LR = 9.201, P = 0.002; HR = 1.565 (95% CI:1.168 to 2.096), P = 0.003; Figure 3) but not for distant metastasis (DM) formation or tumour recurrence. The AP-2?/? specific antibody was not found to be an independent predictor of survival using Cox regression (P = 0.397; HR = 0.880 (95% CI: 0.654 to 1.184)).

AP-2? isoform: AP-2? showed no significant association with improved BCSS (?2 = 0.888, P = 0.346), DFI (?2 = 1.557, P = 0.212), DM (?2 = 1.838, P = 0.175) or tumour recurrence (?2 = 0.207, P = 0.649) using Kaplan-Meier modelling. The AP-2? specific antibody was not found to be an independent predictor of survival using Cox regression (P = 0.866; HR = 0.978 (95% CI: 0.751 to 1.272)).

YY1: YY1 showed a significant association with improved BCSS (?2 = 5.565, P = 0.018; Figure 4) and DFI (?2 = 6.576, P = 0.010; Figure 5) but not for DM (?2 = 2.443, P = 0.118) or tumour recurrence (?2 = 0.438, P = 0.508) using Kaplan Meier modelling. YY1 was not found to be an independent predictor of survival using Cox regression (P = 0.866; HR = 0.978 (95% CI:0.751 to 1.272)).

Correlation between HER2 protein and gene expression and the role of AP-2 and YY1

AP-2?/? isoform: Her2 protein expression data were available for 679 tumour cores expressing AP-2?/? (Figure 6). AP-2?/? staining was seen in 120/555 (21.6%), 13/34 (38.2%), 5/26 (19.2%), and 13/64 (20.3%) cases scoring 0, 1+, 2+ and 3+ for Her2 membranous staining respectively. Eighteen of 90 (20.0%) patients with 2+ or 3+ Her2 membrane expression were AP-2?/? positive. No significant association was seen between AP-2?/? and Her2 protein staining (Table 5).

HER2 gene amplification showed a highly significant positive association with Her2 (3+) protein scoring (P < 0.001) and was detected in 78/702 (11.1%). AP-2?/? staining was present in 18/78 (23.1%) gene amplified cases but showed no significant difference compared to the non-amplified tumours (P = 0.249). Details of the association between AP-2?/? and HER2 expression are contained in Table 5.

AP-2? isoform: Her2 protein expression data were available for 631 tumour cores expressing AP-2? and showed a significant positive association with AP-2? staining (P = 0.032). AP-2? staining was seen in 31/93 (33.3%), 191/428 (44.6%), 11/28 (39.3%), and 45/64 (54.8%) cases scoring 0, 1+, 2+ and 3+ for Her2 membranous staining respectively. Fifty-six of 110 (50.9%) patients with 2+ or 3+ Her2 membrane expression were AP-2? positive.

HER2 gene amplification was detected in a total of 63/500 (12.6%) cases with 32 (6.4%) of these expressing AP-2? staining. No significant association was found between AP-2? protein expression and HER2 amplification (P = 0.446). Details of the association between AP-2?/? and HER2 expression are contained in Table 5.

YY1: Her2 protein expression data were available for 666 tumour cores expressing YY1. YY1 staining was seen in 178/544 (32.7%), 20/33 (60.6%), 7/28 (25.0%), 10/61 (16.4%) cases scoring 0, 1+, 2+ and 3+ for Her2 membranous staining respectively, and showed a significant inverse correlation with Her2 protein expression (P < 0.001). Seventeen of 215 (7.9%) patients with positive YY1 staining showed 2+ or 3+ Her2 membrane expression Table 6.

HER2 gene amplification was detected in 84/609 (13.8%) cases and showed an inverse correlation with YY1 protein expression (P = 0.004). 16/84 (19%) YY1-positive cases also showed HER2 gene amplification. Details of the association between AP-2 and YY1 with HER2 expression are contained in Table 6.

Cases showing discordant HER2 protein and gene expression and their association with AP-2 and YY1 expression

HER2 SISH gene data were available for 846 cases with 115/842 (13.7%) showing amplification and 32/842 (3.8%) cases showing gene gain. Over-expression (3+) of Her2 protein was seen in 118 cases but only 2 cases (0.24% total cohort), equivalent to 2/118 (1.7%) cases, showed an absence of HER2 gene amplification was seen in just showing (3+) Her2 over-expression. Both cases were AP-2? and AP-2?/? positive but YY1 negative.

A further 5/842 (0.6%) cases showed (3+) Her2 protein over-expression in the presence of HER2 gene gain. Two of these cases were AP-2? positive but AP-2?/? and YY1 negative, one case was AP-2? and AP-2?/? positive but YY1 negative, and one case was negative for all three markers.

An additional 4/842 (0.5%) cases showed equivocal (2+) Her2 protein over-expression in the absence of HER2 gene amplification. Two of these cases were AP-2? positive but AP-2?/? and YY1 negative and two cases were negative for all three markers.

In summary, a total of 6/141 (4.3%) cases showed equivocal or over-expressed Her2 protein in the absence of HER2 gene amplification or gain, representing 0.71% of the total patient cohort.


A number of studies have proposed conflicting roles for AP-2 in breast cancer including a tumour suppressor gene (TSG) function [31,32], or more recently and controversially, that of an oncogene [11]. In the largest study of patients with primary operable breast cancer to date, we characterised two isoforms of the transcription factor AP-2, namely AP-2?/? and AP-2?, and its cofactor YY1. We found differences between the AP-2 isoforms that could explain the conflicting roles reported for AP-2. Importantly, we showed a strong association between AP-2?/? expression and the luminal (ER positive) tumour phenotype that endows these patients with favourable clinical outcome characterised by prolonged survival and longer disease free interval. In contrast the association between AP-2? and ER is weaker and patients with this profile do not have such good prognosis, supporting a tumour suppressor role for AP-2?.

In contrast to luminal breast cancers, HER2 tumours are characterised by an aggressive phenotype and if untreated have a poor prognosis. However, targeted treatment with the humanised monoclonal anti-HER2 antibody, trastuzumab, can significantly improve a patient's outcome [6,8,9]. It has recently been proposed that the transcription factor AP-2? and its cofactor, YY1, can induce HER2 gene transcription independently of HER2 gene mutation in breast cancer [11]. For this reason we investigated discordant HER2 gene and protein expression and the association between the transcription factors AP-2 and YY1 and their association with HER2 in a large population of well characterised breast cancer patients. Two different AP-2 antibodies were used; one was specific for AP-2?/? isoforms while the other was specific for the AP-2? isoform only. We found 23% and 44% patients showed high AP-2?/? and AP-2? levels, respectively, which is in the general range (17-42%) [11,32] reported by others. Allouche et al used a percentage scoring technique and a threshold of >80% to determine AP-2? and YY1 positivity, but even though we used a different scoring technique (H-score) with the same AP-2? antibody, we showed good agreement with their study in positively categorizing 44% our patients compared to 42% in the study by Allouche et al [11].

Moreover, Allouche et al proposed that AP-2? can induce Her2 protein expression in patients with absence of HER2 gene amplification because of an observed inverse relationship between breast cancers expressing AP-2? protein and a positive association with HER2 gene amplification [11]. Our findings support Allouche in showing a positive correlation between AP-2? and Her-2 membranous expression but we did not find a significant association between AP-2? and HER2 gene amplification, or between AP-2? and YY1. Similarly, no significant association was identified between AP-2?/? expression and HER2 gene and protein expression. Some of these differences appear to be explained by differences in the patient populations analyzed in Allouche's and our study as only 56% of our study cohort scored 2+/3+ by Her2 IHC compared to 83% identified by Allouche et al. Furthermore, Allouche et al observed 15/55 (27.3%) patients with strong (3+) Her3 IHC staining and 2/15 (13.3%) with absence of HER2 amplification but with strong AP-2?/YY1 expression. In our study, we report 16.2% of our patients had (3+) Her2 IHC staining and just 2/82 (2.4%) of these showed absence of gene amplification; both cases expressed AP-2? but not YY1. Our findings suggest that discordant HER2 expression is a rare event in 3+ Her2 cases and while AP-2? may have a role, further studies are needed to validate this and to study the role of YY1. However, discordant HER2 patients face a possible dilemma in their treatment because the moderate to high levels of HER2 protein expression support candidacy for anti-HER2 AT but contradictory (negative) HER2 gene expression suggest AT refusal. Further studies are needed to assess anti-HER2 AT in this patient group.

Although both AP-2? and AP-2?/? specific antibodies detected tumours with a significant association with ER, the association was stronger when using the AP-2?/? marker as indicated by the strong association with the hormonal receptor PgR and luminal marker CK19. A possible conclusion resulting from this observation is that the AP-2? isoform shows a stronger association with ER. YY1 also showed similar features in associating with luminal type cancers and showed a significant association with AP-2?/?. Consequently, along with others [31-33] we found a significant association between AP-2?/? and good prognosis but this relationship was lost in our ER-negative patient subgroup. ER blockade in ER+ breast cancers reduces AP-2? gene expression but at the same time increases AP-2? expression [34] and in addition, it has been reported that AP-2?/? can increase the activity of the ER? promoter resulting in its increased gene expression [35]. Whereas there is good evidence favouring a TSG function for AP-2?, it has been proposed that AP-2? is an oncogene affecting multiple growth signalling pathways [36] and functions as an independent predictor of poor survival in patients with breast cancer[37].

In the current study, although the association between nuclear AP-2 expression and good clinical outcome might be explained by its association with ER, there is evidence suggesting that AP-2 influences important biological pathways. In one study, patients with AP-2? positive tumours showed prolonged survival and an increased disease free interval possibly explained by the activity of AP-2? in inducing growth arrest by activation of the cell cycle inhibitor p21WAF1 [38]. Our findings are supportive in showing decreased cell proliferation using the marker Mib1. In vivo colonic cell studies suggest AP-2 up-regulates the over-expression of the cell adhesion molecule E-cadherin needed for cell cohesion, while simultaneously decreasing transcription of the matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-9 [39] involved in migration of tumour cells through adjacent stromal tissue. Our findings and those of others [40] support this in showing increased frequency of AP-2 expression in lobular type breast cancers, generally regarded in having good prognosis. However, our data showed that the AP-2?/? marker was not found to have prognostic independence.

Prior to targeting AP-2 for therapeutic benefit further work is needed to better characterise the function of the AP-2 gene family because of conflicting data concerning its association with tumour development. For instance, the anti-inflammatory drug tolfenamic acid has been shown to inhibit AP-2 and YY1 and in turn this has been shown to down-regulate HER2 mRNA expression [15]. In contrast, our data suggest that the neutralisation of AP-2 and YY1 would have negligible impact on the treatment of HER2 over-expressers and at worst, could actually negate the tumour suppressing benefits of AP-2 as reported by ourselves and others [31,32,35,39].


Approximately 2% of breast cancer patients express discordant HER2 protein expression independently of HER2 gene amplification. We found that expression of the transcription factors AP-2 and YY1 associated with this in only 0.32% of the entire study group. Further studies are required to determine the response of patients to anti-HER2 therapy when presenting with discordant HER2 gene and protein expression. In support of previous studies, we found that AP-2 and YY-1 correlate with good clinical outcome in patients with breast cancer.


AP-2: activator protein-2; AR: androgen receptor; AT: adjuvant therapy; Bcl2: B-cell lymphoma-2; BCSS: breast cancer specific survival; BRCA1: breast cancer gene 1; CBP: CREB binding protein; CI: confidence interval; CK: cytokeratin; DFI: Disease free interval; DM: distant metastasis; EGFR: epidermal growth factor receptor; ER: oestrogen receptor; FOXA1: Forkhead box gene A1; HDAC: histone-deacetylase; IHC: immunohistochemistry; Mib1: antibody that recognises the proliferation antigen Ki67; PgR: progesterone receptor; TMA: tissue microarray; YY1: Yin Yang protein-1.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

DGP conceived and designed the project, participated in the practical work, performed the statistics and drafted the manuscript. GA participated in the practical work, contributed to the manuscript. HOH participated in the practical work, contributed to the manuscript. TA-F, EAR, ARG and IOE contributed to the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.


We acknowledge the support of the University of Nottingham and Nottingham University Hospitals Trust in funding DG Powe, G Akhtar, EA Rakha and IOE, We thank the Ministry of Higher Education (Egypt) for funding HO Habashy, TM Abdel-Fatah and E Rakha, and Breast Cancer Campaign for funding AR Green.

Slamon DJ,Clark GM,Wong SG,Levin WJ,Ullrich A,McGuire WL,Human-breast cancer-correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2 Neu oncogeneScienceYear: 198723517718210.1126/science.37981063798106
Wolff AC,Hammond MEH,Schwartz JN,Hagerty KL,Allred DC,Cote RJ,Dowsett M,Fitzgibbons PL,Hanna WM,Langer A,McShane LM,Paik S,Pegram MD,Perez EA,Press MF,Rhodes A,Sturgeon C,Taube SE,Tubbs R,Vance GH,Vijver M van de,Wheeler TM,Hayes DF,American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancerJ Clin OncolYear: 20072511814510.1200/JCO.2006.09.277517159189
Aaltonen K,Amini RM,Heikkila P,Aittomaki K,Tamminen A,Nevanlinna H,Blomqvist C,High cyclin B1 expression is associated with poor survival in breast cancerBr J CancerYear: 20091001055106010.1038/sj.bjc.660487419293801
Arora P,Cuevas BD,Russo A,Johnson GL,Trejo J,Persistent transactivation of EGFR and ErbB2/HER2 by protease-activated receptor-1 promotes breast carcinoma cell invasionOncogeneYear: 2008274434444510.1038/onc.2008.8418372913
Moasser MM,The oncogene HER2: its signaling and transforming functions and its role in human cancer pathogenesisOncogeneYear: 2007266469648710.1038/sj.onc.121047717471238
Slamon DJ,Leyland-Jones B,Shak S,Fuchs H,Paton V,Bajamonde A,Fleming T,Eiermann W,Wolter J,Pegram M,Baselga J,Norton L,Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2N Engl J MedYear: 200134478379210.1056/NEJM20010315344110111248153
Tovey SM,Brown S,Doughty JC,Mallon EA,Cooke TG,Edwards J,Poor survival outcomes in HER2-positive breast cancer patients with low-grade, node-negative tumoursBr J CancerYear: 200910068068310.1038/sj.bjc.660494019223897
Mariani G,Fasolo A,De Benedictis E,Gianni L,Trastuzumab as adjuvant systemic therapy for HER2-positive breast cancerNature Clinical Practice OncologyYear: 200969310410.1038/ncponc129819107109
Bartlett JMS,Going JJ,Mallon EA,Watters AD,Reeves JR,Stanton P,Richmond J,Donald B,Ferrier R,Cooke TG,Evaluating HER2 amplification and overexpression in breast cancerJ PatholYear: 200119542242810.1002/path.97111745673
Tanner M,Gancberg D,Di Leo A,Larsimont D,Rouas G,Piccart MJ,Isola J,Chromogenic in situ hybridization - A practical alternative for fluorescence in situ hybridization to detect HER-2/neu oncogene amplification in archival breast cancer samplesAm J PatholYear: 20001571467147211073807
Allouche A,Nolens G,Tancredi A,Delacroix L,Mardaga J,Fridman V,Winkler R,Boniver J,Delvenne P,Begon DY,The combined immunodetection of AP-2 alpha and YY1 transcription factors is associated with ERBB2 gene overexpression in primary breast tumorsBreast Cancer ResYear: 20081010.1186/bcr185118218085
Orso F,Penna E,Cimino D,Astanina E,Maione F,Valdembri D,Giraudo E,Serini G,Sismondi P,De Bortoli M,Taverna D,AP-2 alpha and AP-2 gamma regulate tumor progression via specific genetic programsFaseb JournalYear: 2008222702271410.1096/fj.08-10649218443366
Bosher JM,Totty NF,Hsuan JJ,Williams T,Hurst HC,A family of AP-2 proteins regulates c-erbB-2 expression in mammary carcinomaOncogeneYear: 199613170117078895516
Vernimmen D,Begon D,Salvador C,Gofflot S,Grooteclaes M,Winkler R,Identification of HTF (HER2 transcription factor) as an AP-2 (activator protein-2) transcription factor and contribution of the HTF binding site to ERBB2 gene overexpressionBiochemical JournalYear: 200337032332910.1042/BJ2002123812418962
Liu X,Abdelrahim M,Abudayyeh A,Lei P,Safe S,The nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug tolfenamic acid inhibits BT474 and SKBR3 breast cancer cell and tumor growth by repressing erbB2 expressionMol Cancer TherYear: 200981207121710.1158/1535-7163.MCT-08-1097
Austen M,Cerni C,Luscher-Firzlaff JM,Luscher B,YY1 can inhibit c-Myc function through a mechanism requiring DNA binding of YY1 but neither its transactivation domain nor direct interaction with c-MycOncogeneYear: 19981751152010.1038/sj.onc.12019689696045
Becker KG,Swergold GD,Ozato K,Thayer RE,Binding of the ubiquitous nuclear transcription factor YY! to a cis regulatory sequence in the human line-1 transposable elementHum Mol GenetYear: 199321697170210.1093/hmg/2.10.16978268924
Yakovleva T,Kolesnikova L,Vukojevic V,Gileva I,Tan-No K,Austen M,Luscher B,Ekstrom TJ,Terenius L,Bakalkin G,YY1 binding to a subset of p53 DNA-target sites regulates p53-dependent transcriptionBiochem Biophys Res CommunYear: 200431861562410.1016/j.bbrc.2004.04.06515120643
Petkova V,Romanowski MJ,Sulijoadikusumo I,Rohne D,Kang P,Shenk T,Usheva A,Interaction between YY1 and the retinoblastoma protein - Regulation of cell cycle progression in differentiated cellsJ Biol ChemYear: 20012767932793610.1074/jbc.M00741120011118439
Yao YL,Yang WM,Seto E,Regulation of transcription factor YY1 by acetylation and deacetylationMol Cell BiolYear: 2001215979599110.1128/MCB.21.17.5979-5991.200111486036
Thomas MJ,Seto E,Unlocking the mechanisms of transcription factor YY1: are chromatin modifying enzymes the key?GeneYear: 199923619720810.1016/S0378-1119(99)00261-910452940
Gordon S,Akopyan G,Garban H,Bonavida B,Transcription factor YY1: structure, function, and therapeutic implications in cancer biologyOncogeneYear: 2006251125114210.1038/sj.onc.120908016314846
Lieberthal JG,Kaminsky M,Parkhurst C,Tanese N,The role of YY1 in reduced HP1 alpha gene expression in invasive human breast cancer cellsBreast Cancer ResYear: 200911R4210.1186/bcr232919566924
Wang CC,Chen JJW,Yang PC,Multifunctional transcription factor YY1: a therapeutic target in human cancer?Expert Opinion on Therapeutic TargetsYear: 20061025326610.1517/14728222.10.2.25316548774
Begon DY,Delacroix L,Vernimmen D,Jackers P,Winkler R,Yin Yang 1 cooperates with activator protein 2 to stimulate ERBB2 gene expression in mammary cancer cellsJ Biol ChemYear: 2005280244282443410.1074/jbc.M50379020015870067
Habashy HO,Powe DG,Rakha EA,Ball G,Paish C,Gee J,Nicholson RI,Ellis IO,Forkhead-box A1 (FOXA1) expression in breast cancer and its prognostic significanceEuropean Journal of CancerYear: 2008441541155110.1016/j.ejca.2008.04.02018538561
El-Rehim DMA,Ball G,Pinder SE,Rakha E,Paish C,Robertson JFR,Macmillan D,I RWB,Ellis IO,High-throughput protein expression analysis using tissue microarray technology of a large well-characterised series identifies biologically distinct classes of breast cancer confirming recent cDNA expression analysesInt J CancerYear: 200511634035010.1002/ijc.2100415818618
McCarty KS,Miller LS,Cox EB,Konrath J,McCarty KS,Estrogen-Receptor Analyses - Correlation of Biochemical and Immunohistochemical Methods Using Monoclonal Antireceptor AntibodiesArchives of Pathology & Laboratory MedicineYear: 19851097167213893381
El-Rehim D,Ball G,Pinder S,Rakha E,Paish C,Robertson J,Macmillan D,Blamey R,Ellis I,High throughput protein expression analysis using tissue microarray technology of a large well -characterised series identifies biologically distinct classes of breast cancer confirming recent cDNA expression analysesInt J CancerYear: 200511634035010.1002/ijc.2100415818618
El-Rehim DMA,Pinder SE,Paish CE,Bell J,Blamey R,Robertson JFR,Nicholson RI,Ellis IO,Expression of luminal and basal cytokeratins in human breast carcinomaJournal of PathologyYear: 200420366167110.1002/path.155915141381
Friedrichs N,Jager R,Paggen E,Rudlowski C,Merkelbach-Bruse S,Schorle H,Buettner R,Distinct spatial expression patterns of AP-2alpha and AP-2 gamma in non-neoplastic human breast and breast cancerMod PatholYear: 20051843143810.1038/modpathol.380029215467710
Gee JMW,Robertson JFR,Ellis IO,Nicholson RI,Hurst HC,Immunohistochemical analysis reveals a tumour suppressor-like role for the transcription factor AP-2 in invasive breast cancerJ PatholYear: 199918951452010.1002/(SICI)1096-9896(199912)189:4<514::AID-PATH463>3.0.CO;2-910629551
Pellikainen J,Kataja V,Ropponen K,Kellokoski J,Pietilainen T,Bohm J,Eskelinen M,Kosma VM,Reduced nuclear expression of transcription factor AP-2 associates with aggressive breast cancerClin Cancer ResYear: 200283487349512429639
Orso F,Cottone E,Hasleton MD,Ibbitt JC,Sismondi P,Hurst HC,De Bortoli M,Activator protein-2 gamma (AP-2 gamma) expression is specifically induced by oestrogens through binding of the oestrogen receptor to a canonical element within the 5 '-untranslated regionBiochemical JournalYear: 200437742943810.1042/BJ2003113314565844
Zhang X,Leung YK,Ho SM,AP-2 regulates the transcription of estrogen receptor (ER)-beta by acting through a methylation hotspot of the 0N promoter in prostate cancer cellsOncogeneYear: 2007267346735410.1038/sj.onc.121053717525739
Turner BC,Zhang J,Gumbs AA,Maher MG,Kaplan L,Carter D,Glazer PM,Hurst HC,Haffty BG,Williams T,Expression of AP-2 transcription factors in human breast cancer correlates with the regulation of multiple growth factor signalling pathwaysCancer ResYear: 199858546654729850080
Gee JMW,Eloranta JJ,Ibbitt JC,Robertson JFR,Ellis IO,Williams T,Nicholson RI,Hurst HC,Overexpression of TFAP2C in invasive breast cancer correlates with a poorer response to anti-hormone therapy and reduced patient survivalJ PatholYear: 2009217324110.1002/path.243018825690
McPherson LA,Loktev AV,Weigel RJ,Tumor suppressor activity of AP2 alpha mediated through a direct interaction with p53J Biol ChemYear: 2002277450284503310.1074/jbc.M20892420012226108
Schwartz B,Melnikova VO,Tellez C,Mourad-Zeidan A,Blehm K,Zhao YJ,McCarty M,Adam L,Bar-Eli M,Loss of AP-2 alpha results in deregulation of E-cadherin and MMP-9 and an increase in tumorigenicity of colon cancer cells in vivoOncogeneYear: 2007264049405810.1038/sj.onc.121019317224907
Korkola JE,DeVries S,Fridlyand J,Hwang ES,Estep AL,Chen YY,Chew KL,Dairkee SH,Jensen RM,Waldman FM,Differentiation of lobular versus ductal breast carcinomas by expression microarray analysisCancer ResYear: 20036371677514612510


[Figure ID: F1]
Figure 1 

AP-2 ?/? (a, c, e) and YY1 (b, d, f) immunostaining. Tumour nuclear staining varied from homogeneously strong (a, b) to a mixed (c, d) pattern but was intense in normal glandular tissue (e, f) (arrow) (?20 magnification).

[Figure ID: F2]
Figure 2 

Kaplan-Meier model comparing breast cancer specific survival in breast cancer patients with AP-2 ?/? protein expression.

[Figure ID: F3]
Figure 3 

Kaplan-Meier model comparing disease free interval in breast cancer patients showing AP-2?/? protein expression.

[Figure ID: F4]
Figure 4 

Kaplan-Meier model comparing breast cancer specific survival in breast cancer patients showing YY1 protein expression.

[Figure ID: F5]
Figure 5 

Kaplan-Meier model comparing disease free interval in breast cancer patients showing YY1 protein expression.

[Figure ID: F6]
Figure 6 

AP-2?/?, YY1 and Her-2 immunostaining. Weak AP-2?/? (a) and YY1 (b) expression but strong (3+) Her-2 staining (c) is seen in this tumour. (?20 magnification)

[TableWrap ID: T1] Table 1 

Patients' characteristics showing AP-2 protein expression

AP-2 (? and ? isoforms) AP-2 (? isoform)
Variable Positive (%) Negative (%) ? 2
Positive (%) Negative (%) ? 2
Patients age
?<40 16
2.381 (0.497) 45
0.225 (0.973)
?40-50 69 (25.7) 244 (26.9) 160 (30.8) 134 (31.7)
?51-60 79 (29.5) 285 (31.4) 169 (32.6) 133 (31.4)
?>60 104 (38.8) 310 (34.1) 145 (27.9) 121 (28.6)
Primary tumour size
?? 1.5 cm 112 (41.6) 274 (30.3) 12.125 (<0.001) 252
215 (51.6) 0.943
?>1.5 cm 157 (58.4) 631 (69.7) 269 (51.6) 202 (48.4)
Lymph node Stage
?1 177 (65.8) 554 (61.3) 5.382 (0.068) 331 (63.5) 249 (59.6) 1.949 (0.377)
?2 78
263 (29.1) 143 (27.4) 132 (31.6)
?3 14
?1 60
137 (15.2) 43.672 (<0.001) 66 (12.7) 73
4.476 (0.107)
?2 124 (46.1) 274 (30.3) 160 (30.7) 126 (30.2)
?3 85
493 (54.5) 295 (56.6) 218 (52.3)
?Poor 25
224 (24.8) 35.333 (<0.001) 85
?Moderate 130 (48.3) 517 (57.1) 303 (58.2) 219 (52.4)
?Good 114 (42.4) 164 (18.1) 133 (25.5) 115 (27.5)
Development of Distant Metastasis
?No 193 (73.1) 611 (68.0) 2.528 (0.112) 341 (66.1) 302 (71.7) 3.436 (0.064)
?Positive 71
288 (32.0) 175 (33.9) 119 (28.3)
Development of Recurrence
?No 165 (62.5) 504 (56.4) 3.069 (0.08) 294 (57.8) 248 (60.6) 1.969 (0.374)
?Positive 99
389 (43.6) 215 (42.2) 161 (39.4)
Vascular invasion
?No 168 (63.2) 495 (55.0) 6.674 (0.036) 286 (55.5) 220 (52.4) 0.949 (0.622)
?Probable 21
109 (12.1) 61
?Definite 77
296 (32.9) 168 (32.6) 148 (35.2)
Tumour type
?Ductal/NST 129 (49.0) 551 (61.5) 29.22 (<0.001) 326 (63.9) 252 (60.3) 15.31 (0.032)
?Lobular 45
?Tubular and Tubular mixed 61
178 (19.9) 81
?Medullary 4
?Other special types* 8
?Mixed** 16
Menopausal status
?Premenopausal 103 (38.4) 355 (39.1) 0.038 (0.845) 212 (40.8) 171 (40.4) 0.017 (0.896)
?Postmenopausal 165 (61.6) 553 (60.9) 307 (59.2) 252 (59.6)

Two different AP-2 antibodies were used; one recognised AP-2? and ? isoforms while the other recognised only the AP-2? isoform. *Includes Mucoid, invasive cribriform and invasive papillary carcinoma. **Includes ductal/No special type (NST) mixed with lobular or special types. NPI = Nottingham Prognostic Index.

[TableWrap ID: T2] Table 2 

Association of two AP-2 isoforms with cancer relevant biomarkers

AP-2 (? and ? isoforms) AP-2 (? isoform)
Biomarker Negative
?2 P-value Negative Positive ?2 P-value
Negative 293 (34.6) 45 (18.5) 22.70 <0.001 248 (34.4) 102 (26.0) 5.287 0.02
Positive 555 (65.4) 198 (81.5) 472 (65.6) 291 (74.0)
Negative 410 (48.3) 72 (30.0) 25.524 <0.001 358 (49.9) 173 (44.0) 0.514 0.473
Positive 438 (51.7) 168 (70.0) 359 (50.1) 220 (56.0)
Negative 87
7.349 0.007 63
5.811 0.016
Positive 785 (90.0) 236 (95.5) 436 (87.4) 372 (92.3)
Negative 77
24 (11.9) 0.222 0.638 40
3.730 0.053
Positive 642 (89.3) 178 (88.1) 387 (90.6) 333 (94.3)
Negative 131 (18.3) 60 (29.1) 11.491 0.001 82
39 (11.3) 8.776 0.003
Positive 586 (81.7) 146 (70.9) 349 (81.0) 307 (88.7)
Negative 345 (40.5) 85 (34.6) 2.871 0.09 179 (36.3) 142 (35.7) 0.038 0.846
Positive 506 (59.5) 161 (65.4) 314 (63.7) 256 (64.3)
Negative 582 (78.9) 182 (85.0) 4.004 0.045 361 (80.6) 286 (78.4) 0.612 0.434
Positive 156 (21.1) 32
79 (21.6)
Negative 713 (81.5) 224 (88.9) 7.65 0.006 399 (79.3) 346 (86.3) 7.457 0.006
Positive 162 (18.5) 28 (11.1) 104 (20.7) 55 (13.7)
Negative 736 (85.5) 233 (94.0) 6.456 0.011 426 (86.8) 361 (90.9) 3.787 0.052
Positive 125 (14.5) 15
Negative 620 (72.6) 189 (77.8) 2.62 <0.106 328 (66.8) 294 (74.1) 5.504 0.019
Positive 234 (27.4) 54 (22.2) 163 (33.2) 103 (25.9)
Negative 189 (43.0) 76 (56.7) 7.827 0.005 95
100 (50.5) 12.755 <0.001
Positive 251 (57.0) 58 (43.3) 183 (65.8) 98 (49.5)
Negative 43
4.139 0.042 18
24 (13.2) 1.044 0.307
Positive 292
110 (94.0) 166 (90.2) 158 (86.8)

ER: oestrogen receptor; PgR: Progesterone receptor; CK-: Cytokeratin; EGFR: epidermal growth factor receptor.

[TableWrap ID: T3] Table 3 

Patients' characteristics showing YY1 protein expression

Variable Positive (%) Negative (%) ?2
Patients age
26 (6.7) 53 (6.9) 1.454
110 (28.5) 196 (25.4)
119 (30.8) 242 (31.3)
131 (33.9) 282 (36.5)
Primary tumour size
?? 1.5 cm 144 (37.6) 241 (31.1) 4.817
?>1.5 cm 239 (62.4) 533 (68.9)
Lymph node Stage
?1 234 (61.1) 492 (63.6) 1.982
?2 118 (30.8) 209 (27.0)
?3 31 (8.1) 72 (9.3)
?1 85 (22.2) 113 (14.6) 46.984 (<0.001)
?2 162 (42.3) 220 (28.5)
?3 136 (35.5) 440 (56.9)
?Poor 49 (12.8) 193 (24.9) 17.284 (<0.001)
?Moderate 195 (50.9) 444 (57.4)
?Good 139 (36.3) 137 (17.7)
Development of Distant Metastasis
?No 274 (71.5) 521 (68.2) 1.343
?Positive 109 (28.5) 243 (31.8)
Development of Recurrence
?No 226 (59.2) 435 (57.4) 0.328
?Positive 156 (40.8) 323 (42.6)
Vascular invasion
?No 232 (60.7) 417 (54.4) 4.45
?Probable 37 (9.7) 94 (12.3)
?Definite 113 (29.6) 256 (33.4)
Tumour type
?Ductal/NST 195 (51.2) 474 (62.3) 29.509
?Lobular 53 (13.9) 59 (7.8)
?Tubular and Tubular mixed 99 (26.0) 140 (18.4)
?Medullary 5 (1.3) 29 (3.8)
?Other special types* 8 (2.1) 11 (1.4)
?Mixed** 19 (5) 45 (5.9)
Menopausal status
?Premenopausal 160 (41.5) 284 (36.7) 2.417 (0.12)
?Postmenopausal 226 (58.5) 489 (63.3)

*Includes Mucoid, invasive cribriform and invasive papillary carcinoma. **Includes ductal/No special type (NST) mixed with lobular or special types. NPI = Nottingham Prognostic Index.

[TableWrap ID: T4] Table 4 

The association of YY1 protein levels were compared with cancer relevant biomarkers in breast tumours

Biomarker Negative Positive ?2 P-value
Negative 248 (34.4) 64 (17.9) 31.912 <0.001
Positive 472 (65.6) 294 (82.1)
Negative 358 (49.9) 120 (33.7) 25.343 <0.001
Positive 359 (50.1) 236 (66.3)
Negative 77 (10.4) 24 (6.6) 4.370 0.037
Positive 661 (89.6) 341 (93.4)
Negative 68 (11.1) 37 (12.5) 0.388 0.534
Positive 543 (88.9) 258 (87.5)
Negative 104 (16.9) 85 (28.7) 16.938 <0.001
Positive 511 (83.1) 211 (71.3)
Negative 294 (40.8) 127 (35.2) 3.170 0.075
Positive 427 (59.2) 234 (64.8)
Negative 503 (79.7) 251 (81.0) 0.205 0.651
Positive 128 (20.3) 59 (19.0)
Negative 599 (80.6) 315 (86.5) 5.947 0.015
Positive 144 (19.4) 49 (13.5)
Negative 623 (85.3) 325 (90.3) 5.183 0.023
Positive 107 (14.7) 35 (9.7)
Negative 508 (70.2) 281 (78.9) 9.318 0.002
Positive 216 (29.8) 75 (21.1)
Negative 168 (41.7) 91 (51.1) 4.450 0.035
Positive 235 (58.3) 87 (48.9)
Negative 230 (38.9) 72 (24.3) 18.556 <0.001
Positive 362 (61.1) 224 (75.7)

ER = oestrogen receptor; PgR = Progesterone receptor; CK- = Cytokeratin; EGFR = epidermal growth factor receptor.

[TableWrap ID: T5] Table 5 

Association between AP-2 protein expression and HER-2 status

AP-2 (? and ? isoforms) AP-2 (? isoform)

Negative Positive ?2 P-value Negative Positive ?2 P-value
Normal 459 (76.4%) 142 (23.6%) 2.782 0.249 217
188 (46.4%) 2.664 0.446
Amplified 60 (76.9%) 18 (23.1%) 31 (49.2%) 32 (50.8%)
Gain 21 (91.3%) 2 (8.7%) 15 (46.9%) 17
0 435 (78.4%) 120 (21.6%) 5.427 0.143 237
8.550 0.032
1+ 21 (61.8%) 13 (38.2%) 62
2+ 21
5 (19.2%) 17
3+ 51 (79.7%) 13 (20.3%) 37

Two different AP-2 antibodies were used; one recognised AP-2? and ? isoforms while the other recognised only the AP-2? isoform. Significance level P = 0.05.

[TableWrap ID: T6] Table 6 

Association between YY1 nuclear protein expression with HER-2 gene and protein expression levels

Negative Positive ?2 P-value
HER-2 Gene Expression Normal 315 (40.6%) 190 (49.4%) 13.115 0.004
Amplified 68 (8.8%) 16 (4.2%)
Gain 13 (1.7%) 7 (1.8%)
HER-2 Protein Expression 0 366 (67.3%) 178 (32.7%) 19.882 <0.001
1+ 13 (39.4%) 20 (60.6%)
2+ 21 (4.7%) 7 (3.3%)
3+ 51 (11.3%) 10 (4.7%)

Significance level P = 0.05.

Article Categories:
  • Research article

Previous Document:  Spectrum of abdominal organ injury in a primary blast type.
Next Document:  PreDisorder: ab initio sequence-based prediction of protein disordered regions.