Aims This study was aimed to investigate the clinicopathological significance of immunohistochemical (IHC) Wilm’s tumour 1 (WT1) expression in invasive breast carcinoma with >90% mucinous components.
Methods One hundred specimens of invasive breast carcinoma with >90% mucinous component were collected. All H&E-stained slides were reviewed, and the clinicopathological data, including sex, age, tumour size, nuclear grade, histological grade, growth pattern and lymph node (LN) status, were collected. IHC staining of WT1, oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and Ki-67 was performed. Fluorescence in situ hybridisation was used to verify the amplification of the HER2 gene. The relationship between WT1 expression and clinicopathological features was analysed statistically.
Results WT1 expression was detected in 67% (67/100) of invasive breast carcinoma with >90% mucinous components. WT1 expression was significantly associated with low-to-intermediate nuclear grade/histological grade, ER and PR positivity, HER2 negativity, Ki-67 proliferation index <30% and noLN metastasis (all p<0.001). Micropapillary architecture was observed in 80% of cases. WT1 expression was not significantly correlated with different percentage of micropapillary components (p=0.422). None of the histological grade 3 tumours, tumours with HER2 overexpression/amplification and triple-negative specimens showed WT1 expression.
Conclusions WT1 expression was significantly related with low-intermediate nuclear/histological grade, ER positivity, HER2 negativity, a lower Ki-67 proliferation index and no LN metastasis in invasive breast carcinoma with >90% mucinous component. The micropapillary growth pattern in this type of tumour did not show a specific relationship with WT1 expression.
- breast neoplasms
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Handling editor Cheok Soon Lee.
XX and RB contributed equally.
Contributors Authors’ contributions XX designed the study and interpreted data. XX and RB reviewed slides and wrote the manuscript. WY designed the study and modified the manuscript. RS, BY, YC and XYT diagnosed these cases. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.