Clinicopathological Factors and Biomarker Immunoprofile Affecting Prognosis of Salivary Ductal Carcinoma.

doi:10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2024.11.013

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To explore the clinicopathological factors and biomarker immunoprofile affecting the prognosis of salivary ductal carcinoma. Methods: Retrospective analysis was applied on 23 cases of salivary ductal carcinoma including follow-up record and other clinical data collected. HE staining, immunohistochemical MaxVision two-step staining, and HER2 (HER2/Neu) gene amplification investigated by SISH were performed. Overall survival (OS) were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression. Results: Twenty-one were males and 2 were females, with an average age of 63.91 years old (39-86 years old). Tumors occurred in the parotid gland (15 cases) and submandibular gland (8 cases). Follow-up revealed 4 cases of mortality and 4 cases of relapse, while the remaining patients were survival without recurrence after surgery. The mean follow-up time was 42 months. The tumor tissue appears as heterogeneous patterns including intraductal cribriform, nest, solid, glandular tubular, and cord like structure. Acne-like necrosis was observed at the central area of the cribriform-like and solid structure. Tumor cells displayed large size, eosinophilic and granular cytoplasm, prominent and polymorphic nuclei, obvious nucleoli, dense chromatin, and visible mitotic figures. Immunophenotype was CK7 (23/23), AR (21/23), giant cystic disease liquid protein (GCDFP-15) (17/23), p53 (16/23), CK5/6 (11/23), HER2 (10/23), GATA3 (10/23), CK14 (3/23), and p63 (2/23). S-100 was not expressed. Ki-67 proliferation index ranged from 5% to 80%. CK5/6-positive cases were more often diagnosed at tumor stage Ⅲ/Ⅳ (P=0.009), while AR, HER2, GATA3, and Ki-67 proliferation indices were not related to the clinicopathological characteristics of patients (P>0.05). Univariate and multivariate survival analyses showed that clinical staging was a risk factor for OS in patients (P=0.042). Conclusion: Salivary ductal carcinoma is highly invasive, prone to recurrence and metastasis. CK5/6-positive is a potential biomarker of poor outcome in SDC.

Key words: ductal carcinoma, salivary gland tumor, clinicopathology, immunoprofile, prognosis

BAO Luri, SHI Lin. Clinicopathological Factors and Biomarker Immunoprofile Affecting Prognosis of Salivary Ductal Carcinoma.[J]. Journal of Oral Science Research, 2024, 40(11): 1013-1018.

References

[1] Jayaprakash V, Merzianu M, Warren GW, et al. Survival rates and prognostic factors for the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database [J]. Head Neck , 2014, 36(5):694-701.
[2] Jaehne M, Roeser K, Jaekel T, et al. Clinical and immunohistologic typing of salivary duct carcinoma: a report of 50 cases [J]. Cancer, 2005, 103(12):2526-2533.
[3] 《乳腺癌HER2检测指南(2019版)》编写组. 乳腺癌HER2检测指南(2019版). 中华病理学杂志,2019,48(3): 169-175.
[4] Boon E, Bel M, van Boxtel W, et al. A clinicopathological study and prognostic factor analysis of 177 salivary duct carcinoma patients from The Netherlands [J]. Int J Cancer, 2018, 143(4):758-766.
[5] Gilbert MR, Sharma A, Schmitt NC, et al. A 20-year review of 75 cases of salivary duct carcinoma [J]. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2016, 142(5):489-495.
[6] Stodulski D, Mikaszewski B, Majewska H, et al. Parotid salivary duct carcinoma: a single institution's 20-year experience [J]. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 2019, 276(7):2031-2038.
[7] Santana T, Pavel A, Martinek P, et al. Biomarker immunoprofile and molecular characteristics in salivary duct carcinoma: clinicopathological and prognostic implications [J]. Hum Pathol, 2019, 93:37-47.
[8] Laughlin BS, Ebrahimi S, Voss MM, et al. Clinicopathologic factors and their association with outcomes of salivary duct carcinoma: A multicenter experience [J]. Adv Radiat Oncol, 2023, 8(4):101204.
[9] Takase S, Kano S, Tada Y, et al. Biomarker immunoprofile in salivary duct carcinomas: clinicopathological and prognostic implications with evaluation of the revised classification [J]. Oncotarget, 2017, 8(35):59023-59035.
[10] Mueller SA, Gauthier MA, Blackburn J, et al. Molecular patterns in salivary duct carcinoma identify prognostic subgroups [J]. Mod Pathol, 2020, 33(10):1896-1909.
[11] Yamamoto N, Minami S, Fujii M. Clinicopathologic study of salivary duct carcinoma and the efficacy of androgen deprivation therapy [J]. Am J Otolaryngol, 2014,35(6):731-735.
[12] Cornolti G, Ungari M, Morassi ML, et al. Amplification and overexpression of HER2/neu gene and HER2/neu protein in salivary duct carcinoma of the parotid gland [J]. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2007, 133(10):1031-1036.
[13] Williams CYK, Townson AT, Terry N, et al. Role of HER2 in prognosis of salivary duct carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Laryngoscope, 2023, 133(3):476-484.
[14] Schwartz LE, Begum S, Westra WH, et al. GATA3 immunohistochemical expression in salivary gland neoplasms [J]. Head Neck Pathol, 2013, 7(4):311-315.
[15] Yoon NK, Maresh EL, Shen D, et al. Higher levels of GATA3 predict better survival in women with breast cancer [J]. Hum Pathol, 2011, 41(12):1794-1801.
[16] Hafez NH, Shaaban HM. Can GATA3 Immunocytochemistry be utilized as a reliable diagnostic marker for metastatic breast carcinoma in cytological materials? A comparative study with mammaglobin and GCDFP-15 expression [J]. Turk Patoloji Derg, 2018, 34(2):143-149.
[17] Shimura T, Tada Y, Hirai H, et al. Prognostic and histogenetic roles of gene alteration and the expression of key potentially actionable targets in salivary duct carcinomas [J]. Oncotarget, 2018, 9(2):1852-1867.