Journal List > J Breast Cancer > v.19(1) > 1036648

See the article "".
Ieni and Tuccari: Comments on the "Prognostic Impact and Clinicopathological Correlation of CD133 and ALDH1 Expression in Invasive Breast Cancer"
To the Editor,
We read the paper by Kim et al. [1] concerning the potential predictive role of Prominin 1 (CD133) and aldehyde dehydrogenase 1 (ALDH1) expression in invasive breast cancer, which appeared in the latest issue of this Journal, with great interest. CD133 and ALDH1 have been considered as mark-ers of cancer stem cells, with documented activities in liver, colorectal, prostate, brain, pancreatic, gastric, and breast cancers [23456].
The precise biological function of CD133 in breast cancer is still controversial since it has been hypothesized that this marker might be involved in different neoplastic processes, such as initiation, cellular migration, and circulation [17]. In our opinion, the paper by Kim et al. [1] raises some interesting and relevant points that we have already addressed in our previous papers [89]. While some methodological aspects were identical, including the procedure used for antigen retrieval, overnight incubation at 4℃ with the primary antibody, the use of polyclonal rabbit anti-CD133 antibody, and the substrate-chromogen system (3,3'-diaminobenzidine tetrahydrochloride), the immunohistochemical assessment used for obtaining the CD133 score of immunopositivity was different. Kim et al. [1] defined negative staining in all cells with a score of 0; weakly positive or focally positive staining in <10% of the cells with a score of 1+; intermediate positive staining covering 10%–50% of the cells with a score of 2+; and strongly positive staining, including >50% of the cells, with a score of 3+. On the contrary, we used a scoring method [89] that required the quantification of immunostained aggregates (2–5 cells) at three different areas; a score of 1 or 2 was assigned to cases with <3 or ≥3 aggregates respectively, while the intensity of immunostaining was scored as 1 for weak, 2 for moderate, and 3 for strong. Finally, an intensity distribution score was calculated for CD133 immunopositivity by multiplying the score of aggregates with that of the staining intensity. In the study by Kim et al. [1], the immunohistochemical expression of CD133 was documented in the cytoplasm of neoplastic breast cells in 24.7% of the patients; on the other hand, in our series we have found a rate of positivity >33.2% in patients with node-negative breast cancer [89]. Therefore, reported differences in the rate of immunopositivity should be attributed either to different scoring methodo-logies, or to surgical samples of different origin.
In the study of Kim et al. [1], CD133 expression appeared to be significantly associated with some adverse parameters, such as tumor dimension, nodal metastasis, stage, estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor negativity, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positivity, and recurrence. In our series [89], no significant relationships were noted between CD133 immunopositivity and histotype, tumor grade, stage, and hormone receptor expression, while a significant correlation between CD133 and bone metastasis, Ki-67 score, and HER2 status was identified. However, previous studies showed that CD133 expression was associated with worse clinical behavior in colorectal cancer, although not associated with clinicopathological features [101112].
In conclusion, Kim et al. [1] suggested that CD133 expression, alone or in combination with ALDH1, was widely associated with the presence of adverse biomarkers and subtypes of breast cancer, and could be used in identifying biologically aggressive cases, and in predicting survival outcomes. Similarly, we have revealed interesting relationships between CD133 and predictive parameters (Ki-67 and HER2 status) of poor prognosis in breast cancer, allowing the identification of CD133 immunopositive cases in pN0 breast cancer, characterized by worse clinical behavior. Therefore, we fully agree with the suggestion of Kim et al. [1] that the predictive role of CD133 should be emphasized and, consequently, it should be extensively utilized in the management of patients with breast cancer.

Notes

CONFLICT OF INTEREST The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

1. Kim SJ, Kim YS, Jang ED, Seo KJ, Kim JS. Prognostic impact and clinicopathological correlation of CD133 and ALDH1 expression in invasive breast cancer. J Breast Cancer. 2015; 18:347–355.
crossref
2. Chuthapisith S, Eremin J, El-Sheemey M, Eremin O. Breast cancer chemoresistance: emerging importance of cancer stem cells. Surg Oncol. 2010; 19:27–32.
crossref
3. Jelski W, Zalewski B, Szmitkowski M. Alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) isoenzymes and aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) activity in the sera of patients with liver cancer. J Clin Lab Anal. 2008; 22:204–209.
crossref
4. Morimoto K, Kim SJ, Tanei T, Shimazu K, Tanji Y, Taguchi T, et al. Stem cell marker aldehyde dehydrogenase 1-positive breast cancers are characterized by negative estrogen receptor, positive human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2, and high Ki67 expression. Cancer Sci. 2009; 100:1062–1068.
crossref
5. Tanei T, Morimoto K, Shimazu K, Kim SJ, Tanji Y, Taguchi T, et al. Association of breast cancer stem cells identified by aldehyde dehydrogenase 1 expression with resistance to sequential paclitaxel and epirubicin-based chemotherapy for breast cancers. Clin Cancer Res. 2009; 15:4234–4241.
crossref
6. Aomatsu N, Yashiro M, Kashiwagi S, Takashima T, Ishikawa T, Ohsawa M, et al. CD133 is a useful surrogate marker for predicting chemosensitivity to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. PLoS One. 2012; 7:e45865.
crossref
7. Nadal R, Ortega FG, Salido M, Lorente JA, Rodríguez-Rivera M, Delgado-Rodríguez M, et al. CD133 expression in circulating tumor cells from breast cancer patients: potential role in resistance to chemotherapy. Int J Cancer. 2013; 133:2398–2407.
crossref
8. Ieni A, Giuffrè G, Adamo V, Tuccari G. Prognostic impact of CD133 immunoexpression in node-negative invasive breast carcinomas. Anticancer Res. 2011; 31:1315–1320.
9. Giuffrè G, Adamo V, Ieni A, Colonese F, Barresi V, Caristi N, et al. Hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) in node-negative invasive breast carcinomas: immunohistochemical analysis and clinico-pathological correlations. Pathol Res Pract. 2011; 207:487–491.
crossref
10. Choi D, Lee HW, Hur KY, Kim JJ, Park GS, Jang SH, et al. Cancer stem cell markers CD133 and CD24 correlate with invasiveness and differentiation in colorectal adenocarcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2009; 15:2258–2264.
crossref
11. Li CY, Li BX, Liang Y, Peng RQ, Ding Y, Xu DZ, et al. Higher percentage of CD133+ cells is associated with poor prognosis in colon carcinoma patients with stage IIIB. J Transl Med. 2009; 7:56.
crossref
12. Wang BB, Li ZJ, Zhang FF, Hou HT, Yu JK, Li F. Clinical significance of stem cell marker CD133 expression in colorectal cancer. Histol Histopathol. 2016; 31:299–306.
We appreciate the comments by Ieni and Tuccari on our paper concerning the potential predictive role of CD133 and ALDH1 [1].
Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are an emerging concept in breast cancer research, and it is considered that they may play an important role in cancer initiation, migration, metastasis, recurrence, and resistance to chemotherapy [2345]. The CSC hypothesis has fundamental implications for cancer biology, in addition to its clinical implications for cancer risk assessment, early detection, prognosis, and prevention.
Identification and characterization of CSCs could lead to the development of more direct and effective treatments for cancer [2]. The functions of CD133 and ALDH1 in breast cancer have been studied; however, the precise mechanism of CD133 function in breast cancer is still debated.
There is no standardized scoring system for CD133. In our study, only the extent of CD133 immunopositivity in the cell membrane and/or cytoplasm was used for scoring CD133 staining [16789]; however, other studies used both the extent and intensity of immunohistochemical staining, supported by the studies of Ieni and Tuccari [10111213].
Different scoring methodologies resulted in CD133 immunopositivity rates in the range 18.1%–53.1%; while Kapucuoğlu et al. [7] and Collina et al. [9] reported the rate of CD133 positivity to be 18.1% and 20.5%, respectively, Mansour and Atwa [8] and Han et al. [13] reported the rate of CD133 positivity to be 53.1% and 48.6%, respectively.
We also reported that CD133 expression was correlated with a number of adverse parameters that are traditionally associated with poor prognosis, and an independent indicator of poor prognosis in invasive breast cancer. This was supported by the study of Zhao et al. [11], in which CD133 expression of 67 triple-negative breast cancer patients was correlated with tumor size, lymph node status, and clinical stage, and it was greatly associated with overall survival and disease-free survival.
We appreciate the good discussion and comments on our study.

Notes

CONFLICT OF INTEREST The author declares that he has no competing interests.

References

1. Kim SJ, Kim YS, Jang ED, Seo KJ, Kim JS. Prognostic impact and clinicopathological correlation of CD133 and ALDH1 expression in invasive breast cancer. J Breast Cancer. 2015; 18:347–355.
crossref
2. Tsang JY, Huang YH, Luo MH, Ni YB, Chan SK, Lui PC, et al. Cancer stem cell markers are associated with adverse biomarker profiles and molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012; 136:407–417.
crossref
3. Ginestier C, Hur MH, Charafe-Jauffret E, Monville F, Dutcher J, Brown M, et al. ALDH1 is a marker of normal and malignant human mammary stem cells and a predictor of poor clinical outcome. Cell Stem Cell. 2007; 1:555–567.
crossref
4. Croker AK, Allan AL. Cancer stem cells: implications for the progression and treatment of metastatic disease. J Cell Mol Med. 2008; 12:374–390.
crossref
5. Chuthapisith S, Eremin J, El-Sheemey M, Eremin O. Breast cancer chemoresistance: emerging importance of cancer stem cells. Surg Oncol. 2010; 19:27–32.
crossref
6. Zhang M, Song T, Yang L, Chen R, Wu L, Yang Z, et al. Nestin and CD133: valuable stem cell-specific markers for determining clinical outcome of glioma patients. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2008; 27:85.
crossref
7. Kapucuoğlu N, Bozkurt KK, Başpınar Ş, Koçer M, Eroğlu HE, Akdeniz R, et al. The clinicopathological and prognostic significance of CD24, CD44, CD133, ALDH1 expressions in invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: CD44/CD24 expression in breast cancer. Pathol Res Pract. 2015; 211:740–747.
crossref
8. Mansour SF, Atwa MM. Clinicopathological significance of CD133 and ALDH1 cancer stem cell marker expression in invasive ductal breast carcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015; 16:7491–7496.
crossref
9. Collina F, Di Bonito M, Li Bergolis V, De Laurentiis M, Vitagliano C, Cerrone M, et al. Prognostic value of cancer stem cells markers in triple-negative breast cancer. Biomed Res Int. 2015; 2015:158682.
crossref
10. Aomatsu N, Yashiro M, Kashiwagi S, Takashima T, Ishikawa T, Ohsawa M, et al. CD133 is a useful surrogate marker for predicting chemosensitivity to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. PLoS One. 2012; 7:e45865.
crossref
11. Zhao P, Lu Y, Jiang X, Li X. Clinicopathological significance and prognostic value of CD133 expression in triple-negative breast carcinoma. Cancer Sci. 2011; 102:1107–1111.
crossref
12. Ieni A, Giuffrè G, Adamo V, Tuccari G. Prognostic impact of CD133 immunoexpression in node-negative invasive breast carcinomas. Anticancer Res. 2011; 31:1315–1320.
13. Han Z, Chen Z, Zheng R, Cheng Z, Gong X, Wang D. Clinicopathological significance of CD133 and CD44 expression in infiltrating ductal carcinoma and their relationship to angiogenesis. World J Surg Oncol. 2015; 13:56.
crossref
TOOLS
Similar articles