EXPRESSION CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MARKERS WT1, P53, P16 AND THE RELATIONSHIP WITH GRADE IN PATIENTS WITH OVARIAN SEROUS CARCINOMA AT THE NATIONAL HOSPITAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY IN THE PERIOD OF 2020-2024

Thị Hải Yến Trần, Khánh Dương Nguyễn, Tiến Dũng Đỗ, Văn Thu Lê, Thị Thanh Yên Phạm, Thị Thúy Hằng Đào

Main Article Content

Abstract

Study of 74 cases of primary ovarian cancer undergoing oophorectomy with a histopathological diagnosis of serous carcinoma at the National Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology during the period from January 2020 to March 2024 . Regular HE staining and histopathological classification according to the WHO 2020 classification. Immunohistochemical staining evaluates the expression of markers WT1, p53, p16 on ovarian serous carcinoma using the ABC method. Results and conclusions: Regarding the characteristics of the markers WT1, p53, p16: high-grade serous carcinoma has a relatively high positive rate for WT1 (96.5%), positive (3+) accounts for a high rate highest (52.8%), positive (2+) accounts for a lower rate of 24.3%. Positive (4+) and (+) account for 12.9% and 10%, respectively. Low-grade serous carcinomas had a lower WT1 positivity rate (88.2%). The positive rate for p53 is 100%. Of these, 97.3% were positive for the wild type and 2.7% were positive for no phenotype (null phenotype). Positive (4+) for p53 accounts for the highest rate (41.7%). Positive (+) accounts for a lower rate of 26.4%. Positive (2+) and (3+) accounted for 18.1% and 13.8%, respectively. The positive rate for p16 is 100%. Positive (4+) for p16 was highest (41.3%). Positive (3+) accounts for a lower rate of 31.1%. Positive (2+) is 12.2% and the lowest rate is positive (+) is 5.4%. Regarding the relationship between the expression level of markers WT1, p53, p16 and the histological grade of ovarian serous carcinoma: high-grade serous carcinoma is positive (3+) for WT1 (54, 1%), positive (4+) for p53 (53.3%), and most positive (4+) for p16 (60.5%). The expression level of WT1, p53, and p16 in low-grade serous carcinomas is lower than that of other types. However, this difference is not statistically significant with p > 0.05. The research results were compared and discussed.

Article Details

References

Chen M, Yao S, Cao Q, Xia M, Liu J, He M. The prognostic value of Ki67 in ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma: an 11-year cohort study of Chinese patients. Oncotarget. 2016 Dec 23; 8 (64): 107877-107885. doi: 10.18632/ oncotarget.14112. PMID: 29296209; PMCID: PMC5746111
2. Köbel M, Kalloger SE, Boyd N, McKinney S, Mehl E, Palmer C, Leung S, Bowen NJ, Ionescu DN, Rajput A, Prentice LM, Miller D, Santos J, Swenerton K, Gilks CB, Huntsman D. Ovarian carcinoma subtypes are different diseases: implications for biomarker studies. PLoS Med. 2008 Dec 2;5(12):e232. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pmed.0050232. PMID: 19053170; PMCID: PMC2592352
3. Mayr D, Diebold J. Grading of ovarian carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2000 Oct;19(4): 348-53. doi: 10.1097/00004347-200010000-00009. PMID: 11109164
4. Rambau PF, Vierkant RA, Intermaggio MP, Kelemen LE et al. Association of p16 expression with prognosis varies across ovarian carcinoma histotypes: an Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium study. J Pathol Clin Res. 2018 Oct; 4(4):250-261. doi: 10.1002/cjp2.109. Epub 2018 Sep 21. PMID: 30062862; PMCID: PMC6174617
5. Sallum LF, Andrade L, Ramalho S, Ferracini AC, de Andrade Natal R, Brito ABC, et al. WT1, p53 and p16 expression in the diagnosis of low- and high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas and their relation to prognosis. Oncotarget. 2018;9(22):15818-27
6. Sato Y, Shimamoto T, Amada S, Asada Y, Hayashi T. Prognostic value of histologic grading of ovarian carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2003 Jan;22(1):52-6. doi: 10.1097/00004347-200301000-00011. PMID: 12496698
7. Silverberg SG. Histopathologic grading of ovarian carcinoma: a review and proposal. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2000 Jan;19(1):7-15. doi: 10.1097/00004347-200001000-00003. PMID: 10638449