Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jun 20;14(6):e0218030.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218030. eCollection 2019.

Elevated levels of eEF1A2 protein expression in triple negative breast cancer relate with poor prognosis

Affiliations

Elevated levels of eEF1A2 protein expression in triple negative breast cancer relate with poor prognosis

Fabiola Giudici et al. PLoS One. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Eukaryotic elongation factor 1 alpha 2 (eEF1A2) is a translation factor selectively expressed by heart, skeletal muscle, nervous system and some specialized cells. Its ectopic expression relates with tumorigenesis in several types of human cancer. No data are available about the role of eEF1A2 in Triple Negative Breast Cancers (TNBC). This study investigated the relation between eEF1A2 protein levels and the prognosis of TNBC. A total of 84 TNBC diagnosed in the period 2002-2011 were included in the study. eEF1A2 protein level was measured in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues by immunohistochemistry in a semi-quantitative manner (sum of the percentage of positive cells x staining intensity) on a scale from 0 to 300. Cox regression assessed the association between eEF1A2 levels and disease-free survival (DFS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). Elevated values of eEF1A2 were associated with older age at diagnosis (p = 0.003), and androgen receptors positivity (p = 0.002). At univariate Cox analysis, eEF1A2 levels were not significantly associated with DFS and BCSS (p = 0.11 and p = 0.08, respectively) whereas adjusting for stage of disease, elevated levels of eEF1A2 protein resulted associated with poor prognosis (HR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.01-1.11, p = 0.04 and HR = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.01-1.14, p = 0.03 for DFS and BCSS, respectively). This trend was confirmed analyzing negative versus positive samples by using categorized scores. Our data showed a negative prognostic role of eEF1A2 protein in TNBC, sustaining further investigations to confirm this result by wider and independent cohorts of patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Immunohistochemical expression of eEF1A2 in breast cancer.
a: absence of expression (0); b: weak expression (1+); c: moderate expression (2+); d: strong expression (3+). 20x magnification.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Expression of eEF1A2 in normal breast parenchyma.
a: expression in acinar cells; b: expression in ductal cells; c: weak (1+) expression in normal ductal cells used to calibrate staining intensity in cancer cells (2+). 20x magnification.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Flow-chart of the patient cohort included in this study.
Fig 4
Fig 4
Box plots of eEF1A2 values according to presence (in the left) or exclusion (in the right) of 0 values.
Fig 5
Fig 5
Estimated disease-free survival (A-C) and breast cancer specific survival (B-D) according to eEF1A2 dichotomizations. In panels A and B, a patient is considered eEF1A2 negative if the sum of the percentage of cells staining absent [0] and of the percentage of cells staining weakly [1+] is greater than the sum of the percentage of cells staining moderately [2+] and strongly [3+]; in panels C and D, a patient was considered eEF1A2 negative if it had no expression of eEF1A2 (100% expression at 0 or 1+), and positive otherwise.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Torre LA, Siegel RL, Ward EM, Jemal A (2016) Global Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates and Trends—An Update. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 25: 16–27. 1055-9965.EPI-15-0578 [pii]; 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0578 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A (2014) Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 64: 9–29. 10.3322/caac.21208 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kim M, Shin KH, Jung SY, Lee S, Kang HS, Lee ES, et al. (2016) Identification of Prognostic Risk Factors for Transient and Persistent Lymphedema after Multimodal Treatment for Breast Cancer. Cancer Res Treat 48: 1330–1337. crt.2015.463 [pii]; 10.4143/crt.2015.463 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pan B, Yao R, Shi J, Xu QQ, Zhou YD Mao F, et al. (2016) Prognosis of subtypes of the mucinous breast carcinoma in Chinese women: a population-based study of 32-year experience (1983–2014). Oncotarget 7: 38864–38875. 8778 [pii]; 10.18632/oncotarget.8778 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lee MY, Chang WJ, Kim HS, Lee JY, Lim SH, Lee JE, et al. (2016) Clinicopathological Features and Prognostic Factors Affecting Survival Outcomes in Isolated Locoregional Recurrence of Breast Cancer: Single-Institutional Series. PLoS One 11: e0163254 10.1371/journal.pone.0163254 PONE-D-16-08945 [pii]. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types