PRESENCE OF BIOMARKERS c-MET and ABCB5 IN PROSTATE ADENOCARCINOMA AND THEIR CORRELATION WITH PROGNOSTIC FACTORS

• Autor(a) principal: Zahdi, João Otavio Ribas
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: Ribas, Carmen Austrália Paredes Marcondes, Zini, Cassio, Gomel, Bernardo May, Lemes, Macleise Gomes, Lobos, Giovana Landal de Almeida, Ribas, Maurício Marcondes, Ribas, Fernanda Marcondes
• Tipo de documento: preprint
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: SciELO Preprints
• Texto Completo: https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/4390
• topic: Biomarcador; c-MET; ABCB5; Câncer de próstata; Imunoistoquímica; Biomarker; c-MET; ABCB5; Prostate cancer; Immunohistochemistry

Background: Prostate adenocarcinoma is one of the most prevalent malignancies worldwide. Despite often having a slow evolution, it still represents an important cause of death in oncology. Since its clinical results are very heterogeneous, there is a need to identify prognostic markers. Biomarkers are tools and technologies that can aid in this understanding. Objectives: To evaluate the presence of c-MET and ABCB5 in prostate adenocarcinoma and to analyze whether their expression correlates with prognostic factors. Method: 170 cases were selected through an active search in electronic medical records and review of physical records and anatomopathological reports. Immunohistochemistry was performed for the biomarkers c-MET and ABCB5 in all samples. Retrospective clinical data were collected and plotted in tables. Through TMA (tissue microarray) the tissues were submitted to immunohistochemistry by the peroxidase technique. Clinical and epidemiological information was cross-referenced with the result obtained by immunostaining and its statistical analysis. Results: Forty-seven men with a mean age of 61.6±6.9 (48-75), with a mean PSA of 11±9.7 (2.4-60.5) were included in this study. 2% had a Gleason score of 5 or 6 and 29, 1%, 7 or 8. Regarding tumor classification, 6 cases had T3a and 2 T3b staging. None had a tumor greater than T3b and there was 1 case of metastasis. With regard to biomarkers, there was positive labeling of c-MET in 32 cases and of ABCB5 in 5. Positive labeling had no statistically significant association with any of the prognostic factors evaluated. Conclusion: There was expression of c-MET and ABCB5 in the prostate cancer, but without association of them with prognostic factors.