Research Papers:

Comparative evaluation of three proliferation markers, Ki-67, TOP2A, and RacGAP1, in bronchopulmonary neuroendocrine neoplasms: Issues and prospects

Elisa Neubauer _, Ralph M. Wirtz, Daniel Kaemmerer, Maria Athelogou, Lydia Schmidt, Jörg Sänger and Amelie Lupp

PDF  |  HTML  |  Supplementary Files  |  How to cite  |  Order a Reprint

Oncotarget. 2016; 7:41959-41973. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.9747

Metrics: PDF 1111 views  |   HTML 1259 views  |   ?  


Elisa Neubauer1, Ralph M. Wirtz2, Daniel Kaemmerer3, Maria Athelogou4, Lydia Schmidt1, Jörg Sänger5, Amelie Lupp1

1Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany

2STRATIFYER Molecular Pathology GmbH Köln, Köln, Germany

3Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Zentralklinik Bad Berka, Bad Berka, Germany

4DEFINIENS AG, München, Germany

5Laboratory of Cytology and Pathology, Bad Berka, Germany

Correspondence to:

Elisa Neubauer, email: elisa.specht@med.uni-jena.de

Keywords: Ki-67, topoisomerase 2 alpha, RacGAP1, lung neuroendocrine neoplasms, IHC/RT-qPCR

Received: March 13, 2016     Accepted: May 16, 2016     Published: May 31, 2016


The classification of bronchopulmonary neuroendocrine neoplasms (BP-NEN) into four tumor entities (typical carcinoids (TC), atypical carcinoids (AC), small cell lung cancers (SCLC), large cell neuroendocrine lung carcinomas (LCNEC)) is difficult to perform accurately, but important for prognostic statements and therapeutic management decisions. In this regard, we compared the expression of three proliferation markers, Ki-67, Topoisomerase II alpha (TOP2A), and RacGAP1, in a series of tumor samples from 104 BP-NEN patients (24 TC, 21 AC, 52 SCLC, 7 LCNEC) using different evaluation methods (immunohistochemistry (IHC): Average evaluation, Hotspot evaluation, digital image analysis; RT-qPCR).

The results indicated that all three markers had increased protein and mRNA expression with poorer differentiation and correlated well with each other, as well as with grading, staging, and poor survival. Compared with Ki-67 and TOP2A, RacGAP1 allowed for a clearer prognostic statement. The cut-off limits obtained for Ki-67-Average (IHC) were TC-AC 1.5, AC-SCLC 19, and AC-LCNEC 23.5. The Hotspot evaluation generated equal to higher, the digital image analysis generally lower between-entity cut-off limits.

All three markers enabled a clear-cut differentiation between the BP-NEN entities, and all methods evaluated were suitable for marker assessment. However, to define optimal cut-off limits, the Ki-67 evaluation methods should be standardized. RacGAP1 appeared to be a new marker with great potential.

Creative Commons License All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
PII: 9747