The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

BAG-1 immunostaining and survival in early breast cancer

BAG-1 immunostaining and survival in early breast cancer
BAG-1 immunostaining and survival in early breast cancer
To the Editor: We read with interest the article by Turner et al1 in the February 15, 2001, issue describing the association between increased levels of cytosolic, but not nuclear, BAG-1 immunostaining and long-term survival in early breast cancer. There is, however, some difficulty in determining the precise relationship between BAG-1 expression and the biology of breast cancer. A previous report by this group using a monoclonal antibody described a significant positive correlation between high levels of nuclear BAG-1 immunostaining and overall survival, whereas a report from a different group described inferior survival in patients with high levels of nuclear BAG-1 staining using a polyclonal antibody.

From the examples of immunostaining presented in the two articles from Turner and co-workers, it seems that at least some of the same patients were included in the two series with discrepant results. It would be helpful to know the degree of overlap between the two cohorts and whether any potential selection bias may have influenced the results. In particular, the low proportion of estrogen receptor–positive cases (41% as against an expected level of 70%) suggests that the sample described may not be wholly representative of an early-stage breast cancer population. Tumor grade was not included in the table of patient characteristics, and as correlations have been found between tumor differentiation and BAG-1 status by at least one group, it would be instructive to know if BAG-1 was predictive of outcome independent of tumor grade.

It is also possible that the discrepant results relate to differences in methodology, such as antigen retrieval techniques, which were not described in the more recent article. It is clear that further work is required to properly describe the potential role of BAG-1 expression as a biologic variable, and it would be helpful to other investigators to have these critical details.
breast neoplasms, breast cancer, survival, immunohistochemistry, confounding factors (epidemiology), cancer, humans, survival analysis, metabolism, proteins, letter, carrier proteins, mortality, protein, female
1527-7755
3706-3707
Cutress, R.I.
68ae4f86-e8cf-411f-a335-cdba51797406
Townsend, P.A.
89300833-c898-4ae1-a3b2-03214c71da52
Bateman, A.C.
4e97a5ca-662c-451d-bdb3-33f35420ceed
Johnson, P.W.
3f6068ce-171e-4c2c-aca9-dc9b6a37413f
Ryder, K.
88a9c398-291d-4f33-a874-b25d9114cdba
Barnes, D.M.
d9552c52-d61a-4f7c-a89a-1ff82cfb299a
Packham, G.
fdabe56f-2c58-469c-aadf-38878f233394
Cutress, R.I.
68ae4f86-e8cf-411f-a335-cdba51797406
Townsend, P.A.
89300833-c898-4ae1-a3b2-03214c71da52
Bateman, A.C.
4e97a5ca-662c-451d-bdb3-33f35420ceed
Johnson, P.W.
3f6068ce-171e-4c2c-aca9-dc9b6a37413f
Ryder, K.
88a9c398-291d-4f33-a874-b25d9114cdba
Barnes, D.M.
d9552c52-d61a-4f7c-a89a-1ff82cfb299a
Packham, G.
fdabe56f-2c58-469c-aadf-38878f233394

Cutress, R.I., Townsend, P.A., Bateman, A.C., Johnson, P.W., Ryder, K., Barnes, D.M. and Packham, G. (2001) BAG-1 immunostaining and survival in early breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19 (16), 3706-3707. (PMID:11504752)

Record type: Article

Abstract

To the Editor: We read with interest the article by Turner et al1 in the February 15, 2001, issue describing the association between increased levels of cytosolic, but not nuclear, BAG-1 immunostaining and long-term survival in early breast cancer. There is, however, some difficulty in determining the precise relationship between BAG-1 expression and the biology of breast cancer. A previous report by this group using a monoclonal antibody described a significant positive correlation between high levels of nuclear BAG-1 immunostaining and overall survival, whereas a report from a different group described inferior survival in patients with high levels of nuclear BAG-1 staining using a polyclonal antibody.

From the examples of immunostaining presented in the two articles from Turner and co-workers, it seems that at least some of the same patients were included in the two series with discrepant results. It would be helpful to know the degree of overlap between the two cohorts and whether any potential selection bias may have influenced the results. In particular, the low proportion of estrogen receptor–positive cases (41% as against an expected level of 70%) suggests that the sample described may not be wholly representative of an early-stage breast cancer population. Tumor grade was not included in the table of patient characteristics, and as correlations have been found between tumor differentiation and BAG-1 status by at least one group, it would be instructive to know if BAG-1 was predictive of outcome independent of tumor grade.

It is also possible that the discrepant results relate to differences in methodology, such as antigen retrieval techniques, which were not described in the more recent article. It is clear that further work is required to properly describe the potential role of BAG-1 expression as a biologic variable, and it would be helpful to other investigators to have these critical details.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 15 August 2001
Keywords: breast neoplasms, breast cancer, survival, immunohistochemistry, confounding factors (epidemiology), cancer, humans, survival analysis, metabolism, proteins, letter, carrier proteins, mortality, protein, female

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 59638
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/59638
ISSN: 1527-7755
PURE UUID: 897c87c7-21d3-4dba-a1eb-f75093fa9d05
ORCID for P.W. Johnson: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-2306-4974
ORCID for G. Packham: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-9232-5691

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 04 Sep 2008
Last modified: 23 Jul 2022 01:46

Export record

Contributors

Author: R.I. Cutress
Author: P.A. Townsend
Author: A.C. Bateman
Author: P.W. Johnson ORCID iD
Author: K. Ryder
Author: D.M. Barnes
Author: G. Packham ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×