We have located links that may give you full text access.
Mammary and Extramammary Paget's Disease Presented Different Expression Pattern of Steroid Hormone Receptors.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Paget's disease (PD) is a rare intraepithelial adenocarcinoma, which is composed of mammary (MPD) and extramammary Paget's disease (EMPD). Currently, the published literature contains scant data on expression pattern of steroid hormone receptors in MPD and EMPD.
METHODS: Expression of estrogen receptor (ER) and androgen receptor (AR) was evaluated in 88 MPD and 72 EMPD by using immunohistochemical staining and H-score method.
RESULTS: Positive expression of AR was significantly higher in EMPD (61.11%, 44/72) than in MPD (32.95%, 29/88) ( P < 0.001), while ER expression was positive 19.44% (14/72) in EMPD and only 9.09% (8/88) in MPD ( P = 0.059). ER-AR expression pattern was significantly different between MPD (3.41%, 3/88) and EMPD (16.67%, 12/72) ( P < 0.001). No difference of AR ( P = 0.301) or ER ( P = 0.239) expression was identified between invasive (48.57%, 51/105 of AR, and 11.43%, 12/105 of ER) and noninvasive PD. In MPD, no difference of AR expression between MPD alone (7/18, 38.89%) and MPD with underling ductal carcinoma of breast (22/70, 31.43%) was identified ( P = 0.548). In EMPD, expression of AR was 63.33% (38/60) in penoscrotal EMPD.
CONCLUSION: Our current results indicate that MPD and EMPD presented different expression pattern of AR and ER and would help to further identify the molecular subtype of MPD and EMPD for adjuvant hormonal therapy, especially for patients with penoscrotal EMPD.
METHODS: Expression of estrogen receptor (ER) and androgen receptor (AR) was evaluated in 88 MPD and 72 EMPD by using immunohistochemical staining and H-score method.
RESULTS: Positive expression of AR was significantly higher in EMPD (61.11%, 44/72) than in MPD (32.95%, 29/88) ( P < 0.001), while ER expression was positive 19.44% (14/72) in EMPD and only 9.09% (8/88) in MPD ( P = 0.059). ER-AR expression pattern was significantly different between MPD (3.41%, 3/88) and EMPD (16.67%, 12/72) ( P < 0.001). No difference of AR ( P = 0.301) or ER ( P = 0.239) expression was identified between invasive (48.57%, 51/105 of AR, and 11.43%, 12/105 of ER) and noninvasive PD. In MPD, no difference of AR expression between MPD alone (7/18, 38.89%) and MPD with underling ductal carcinoma of breast (22/70, 31.43%) was identified ( P = 0.548). In EMPD, expression of AR was 63.33% (38/60) in penoscrotal EMPD.
CONCLUSION: Our current results indicate that MPD and EMPD presented different expression pattern of AR and ER and would help to further identify the molecular subtype of MPD and EMPD for adjuvant hormonal therapy, especially for patients with penoscrotal EMPD.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app