Cargando…

Interrelationship between Estradiol and Tamoxifen Responses for Clinical Breast Carcinoma Cells Cultured on Contact‐sensitive Plates

An in vitro assay system for predicting the estradiol (E(2)) sensitivity of clinical cancer cells was applied to 54 patients with breast carcinoma to compare the responses to E(2) and tamoxifen (TAM) with the estrogen receptor (ER) status. We found that 18 of the 35 cases in the ER‐positive group an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Matsuoka, Hideo, Nakamura, Yasuya, Ueo, Hiroaki, Sugimachi, Keizo, Tomoda, Hirotsugu, Saito, Takao, Seo, Yousuke
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1994
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5919520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8063615
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1994.tb02404.x
_version_ 1783317645779533824
author Matsuoka, Hideo
Nakamura, Yasuya
Ueo, Hiroaki
Sugimachi, Keizo
Tomoda, Hirotsugu
Saito, Takao
Seo, Yousuke
author_facet Matsuoka, Hideo
Nakamura, Yasuya
Ueo, Hiroaki
Sugimachi, Keizo
Tomoda, Hirotsugu
Saito, Takao
Seo, Yousuke
author_sort Matsuoka, Hideo
collection PubMed
description An in vitro assay system for predicting the estradiol (E(2)) sensitivity of clinical cancer cells was applied to 54 patients with breast carcinoma to compare the responses to E(2) and tamoxifen (TAM) with the estrogen receptor (ER) status. We found that 18 of the 35 cases in the ER‐positive group and 6 of the 19 cases in the ER‐negative group were stimulated by E(2). It is suggested that ER status alone can not predict the response of cultured cells to E(2) in clinical breast cancer. Cell growth of 11/35 (31%) of the ER‐positive cases and that of 8/19 (42%) of the ER‐negative cases was inhibited by E(2). Since the cases inhibited by E(2) could not be distinguished by ER status alone, an assay system based on a quantitative proliferative response was considered necessary. There were 20 (83%) cases of inhibition by TAM among the 24 stimulated by E(2). Only 18/35 (51%) of the ER‐positive group exhibited growth inhibition by TAM. In our (CSP) assay, 20 (83%) of the 24 cases stimulated by E(2) were inhibited by TAM, 10 (91%) of the 11 E(2)‐insensitive cases were insensitive to TAM and 13 (68%) of the 19 cases inhibited by E(2) were stimulated by TAM. In short, TAM response and E(2) response tended to be inversely related (43/54=80%,P<0.01). Furthermore, the E(2)‐response rate showed a good correlation with the TAM‐response rate (R(2)= 0.825). These results indicate the feasibility of predicting individual tumor responses to either E(2) or TAM by using CSPs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5919520
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 1994
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59195202018-05-11 Interrelationship between Estradiol and Tamoxifen Responses for Clinical Breast Carcinoma Cells Cultured on Contact‐sensitive Plates Matsuoka, Hideo Nakamura, Yasuya Ueo, Hiroaki Sugimachi, Keizo Tomoda, Hirotsugu Saito, Takao Seo, Yousuke Jpn J Cancer Res Article An in vitro assay system for predicting the estradiol (E(2)) sensitivity of clinical cancer cells was applied to 54 patients with breast carcinoma to compare the responses to E(2) and tamoxifen (TAM) with the estrogen receptor (ER) status. We found that 18 of the 35 cases in the ER‐positive group and 6 of the 19 cases in the ER‐negative group were stimulated by E(2). It is suggested that ER status alone can not predict the response of cultured cells to E(2) in clinical breast cancer. Cell growth of 11/35 (31%) of the ER‐positive cases and that of 8/19 (42%) of the ER‐negative cases was inhibited by E(2). Since the cases inhibited by E(2) could not be distinguished by ER status alone, an assay system based on a quantitative proliferative response was considered necessary. There were 20 (83%) cases of inhibition by TAM among the 24 stimulated by E(2). Only 18/35 (51%) of the ER‐positive group exhibited growth inhibition by TAM. In our (CSP) assay, 20 (83%) of the 24 cases stimulated by E(2) were inhibited by TAM, 10 (91%) of the 11 E(2)‐insensitive cases were insensitive to TAM and 13 (68%) of the 19 cases inhibited by E(2) were stimulated by TAM. In short, TAM response and E(2) response tended to be inversely related (43/54=80%,P<0.01). Furthermore, the E(2)‐response rate showed a good correlation with the TAM‐response rate (R(2)= 0.825). These results indicate the feasibility of predicting individual tumor responses to either E(2) or TAM by using CSPs. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1994-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5919520/ /pubmed/8063615 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1994.tb02404.x Text en
spellingShingle Article
Matsuoka, Hideo
Nakamura, Yasuya
Ueo, Hiroaki
Sugimachi, Keizo
Tomoda, Hirotsugu
Saito, Takao
Seo, Yousuke
Interrelationship between Estradiol and Tamoxifen Responses for Clinical Breast Carcinoma Cells Cultured on Contact‐sensitive Plates
title Interrelationship between Estradiol and Tamoxifen Responses for Clinical Breast Carcinoma Cells Cultured on Contact‐sensitive Plates
title_full Interrelationship between Estradiol and Tamoxifen Responses for Clinical Breast Carcinoma Cells Cultured on Contact‐sensitive Plates
title_fullStr Interrelationship between Estradiol and Tamoxifen Responses for Clinical Breast Carcinoma Cells Cultured on Contact‐sensitive Plates
title_full_unstemmed Interrelationship between Estradiol and Tamoxifen Responses for Clinical Breast Carcinoma Cells Cultured on Contact‐sensitive Plates
title_short Interrelationship between Estradiol and Tamoxifen Responses for Clinical Breast Carcinoma Cells Cultured on Contact‐sensitive Plates
title_sort interrelationship between estradiol and tamoxifen responses for clinical breast carcinoma cells cultured on contact‐sensitive plates
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5919520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8063615
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1994.tb02404.x
work_keys_str_mv AT matsuokahideo interrelationshipbetweenestradiolandtamoxifenresponsesforclinicalbreastcarcinomacellsculturedoncontactsensitiveplates
AT nakamurayasuya interrelationshipbetweenestradiolandtamoxifenresponsesforclinicalbreastcarcinomacellsculturedoncontactsensitiveplates
AT ueohiroaki interrelationshipbetweenestradiolandtamoxifenresponsesforclinicalbreastcarcinomacellsculturedoncontactsensitiveplates
AT sugimachikeizo interrelationshipbetweenestradiolandtamoxifenresponsesforclinicalbreastcarcinomacellsculturedoncontactsensitiveplates
AT tomodahirotsugu interrelationshipbetweenestradiolandtamoxifenresponsesforclinicalbreastcarcinomacellsculturedoncontactsensitiveplates
AT saitotakao interrelationshipbetweenestradiolandtamoxifenresponsesforclinicalbreastcarcinomacellsculturedoncontactsensitiveplates
AT seoyousuke interrelationshipbetweenestradiolandtamoxifenresponsesforclinicalbreastcarcinomacellsculturedoncontactsensitiveplates