Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author: S A Khan x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All Modify Search
S A Khan
Search for other papers by S A Khan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
D Bhandare
Search for other papers by D Bhandare in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
R T Chatterton Jr
Search for other papers by R T Chatterton Jr in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

Recent developments in breast epithelial sampling techniques (nipple fluid aspiration, ductal lavage, and random fine needle aspiration) provide new opportunities for the acquisition of hormonal and cellular biomarker data in asymptomatic women, and thereby the possibility of developing a unified vision of how the hormonal environment of the breast may interact with the cellular expression of proteins, and with other evolving candidate markers of breast cancer risk. The purpose of this review is to integrate available information regarding cellular and breast fluid biomarkers of hormone action on the breast, to identify candidate biomarkers for studies of breast cancer risk and prevention. These include the estrogen receptors α andβ, markers of proliferative and apoptotic response, and protein markers of estrogen action in breast cells and nipple fluid. Studies of breast hormone levels in nipple aspiration fluid (NAF) show that estrone sulphate is present in large quantities in the normal breast, while the differences in serum ovarian steroids that are seen in pre- and postmenopausal women are blunted in NAF. The variability of several estradiol precursors in NAF over time is relatively small, a useful attribute of potential biomarkers of breast cancer risk, particularly if they are reversible with intervention in Phase 2 prevention trials. These studies are already providing new insights into the hormonal etiology of breast cancer, and should lead to the identification of robust, reversible biomarkers for use in breast cancer prevention studies.

Free access
C J Fabian
Search for other papers by C J Fabian in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
B F Kimler
Search for other papers by B F Kimler in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
M S Mayo
Search for other papers by M S Mayo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
S A Khan
Search for other papers by S A Khan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

Breast tissue and duct fluid provide a rich source of biomarkers to both aid in the assessment of short-term risk of developing breast cancer and predict and assess responses to prevention interventions. There are three methods currently being utilized to sample breast tissue in asymptomatic women for risk assessment: nipple-aspirate fluid (NAF), random periareolar fine-needle aspiration (RPFNA) and ductal lavage. Prospective single-institution trials have shown that the presence of atypical cells in NAF fluid or RPFNA specimens is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Furthermore, RPFNA-detected atypia has been observed to further stratify risk based on the commonly used Gail risk-assessment model. A prospective trial evaluating risk prediction on the basis of atypical cells in ductal-lavage fluid is ongoing. The ability of other established non-genetic biomarkers (mammographic breast density; serum levels of bioavailable estradiol, testosterone, insulin-like growth factor-1 and its insulin like growth factor binding protein-3) to stratify risk based on the Gail model is as yet incompletely defined. Modulation of breast intra-epithelial neoplasia (i.e. hyperplasia with or without atypia) with or without associated breast-tissue molecular markers, such as proliferation, is currently being used to evaluate response in Phase II chemoprevention trials. RPFNA has been the method most frequently used for Phase II studies of 6–12 months duration. However, ductal lavage, RPFNA and random and directed core needle biopsies are all being utilized in ongoing multi-institutional Phase II studies. The strengths and weaknesses of each method are reviewed.

Free access
D S Saloman Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by D S Saloman in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
C Bianco Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by C Bianco in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
A D Ebert Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by A D Ebert in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
N I Khan Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by N I Khan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
M De Santis Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by M De Santis in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
N Normanno Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by N Normanno in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
C Wechselberger Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by C Wechselberger in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
M Seno Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by M Seno in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
K Williams Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by K Williams in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
M Sanicola Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by M Sanicola in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
S Foley Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by S Foley in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
W J Gullick Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by W J Gullick in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
G Persico Tumor Growth Factor Section, Laboratory of Tumor Immunology and Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.

Search for other papers by G Persico in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

The EGF-CFC gene family encodes a group of structurally related proteins that serve as important competence factors during early embryogenesis in Xenopus, zebrafish, mice and humans. This multigene family consists of Xenopus FRL-1, zebrafish one-eyed-pinhead (oep), mouse cripto (Cr-1) and cryptic, and human cripto (CR-1) and criptin. FRL-1, oep and mouse cripto are essential for the formation of mesoderm and endoderm and for correct establishment of the anterior/posterior axis. In addition, oep and cryptic are important for the establishment of left-right (L/R) asymmetry. In zebrafish, there is strong genetic evidence that oep functions as an obligatory co-factor for the correct signaling of a transforming growth factor-beta (TGFbeta)-related gene, nodal, during gastrulation and during L/R asymmetry development. Expression of Cr-1 and cryptic is extinguished in the embryo after day 8 of gestation except for the developing heart where Cr-1 expression is necessary for myocardial development. In the mouse, cryptic is not expressed in adult tissues whereas Cr-1 is expressed at a low level in several different tissues including the mammary gland. In the mammary gland, expression of Cr-1 in the ductal epithelial cells increases during pregnancy and lactation and immunoreactive and biologically active Cr-1 protein can be detected in human milk. Overexpression of Cr-1 in mouse mammary epithelial cells can facilitate their in vitro transformation and in vivo these Cr-1-transduced cells produce ductal hyperplasias in the mammary gland. Recombinant mouse or human cripto can enhance cell motility and branching morphogenesis in mammary epithelial cells and in some human tumor cells. These effects are accompanied by an epithelial-mesenchymal transition which is associated with a decrease in beta-catenin function and an increase in vimentin expression. Expression of cripto is increased several-fold in human colon, gastric, pancreatic and lung carcinomas and in a variety of different types of mouse and human breast carcinomas. More importantly, this increase can first be detected in premalignant lesions in some of these tissues. Although a specific receptor for the EGF-CFC proteins has not yet been identified, oep depends upon an activin-type RIIB and RIB receptor system that functions through Smad-2. Mouse and human cripto have been shown to activate a ras/raf/MAP kinase signaling pathway in mammary epithelial cells. Activation of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and Akt are also important for the ability of CR-1 to stimulate cell migration and to block lactogenic hormone-induced expression of beta-casein and whey acidic protein. In mammary epithelial cells, part of these responses may depend on the ability of CR-1 to transactivate erb B-4 and/or fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 through an src-like tyrosine kinase.

Free access