Revised: 1 July 2019
Accepted: 2 July 2019
Molecular markers of prognosis in canine cortisol-secreting adrenocortical tumours
Karin Sanders İD Gerjanne J. van Staalduinen Maarten C. M. Uijens®
Jan A. Mol İD Erik Teske Adri Slob Jan Willem Hesselink
Hans S. Kooistra İD
Sara Galac İD
|
Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
Correspondence
Sara Galac, Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 108, 3584 CM, Utrecht, the Netherlands. Email: s.galac@uu.nl
Abstract
Hypercortisolism is caused by a cortisol-secreting adrenocortical tumour (ACT) in approxi- mately 15%-20% of cases in dogs. Little is known about which molecular markers are associ- ated with malignant behaviour of canine ACTs. The objective of this study was to identify molecular markers of prognosis, which could be useful to refine prognostic prediction and to identify potential treatment targets. Cortisol-secreting ACTs were included from 40 dogs, of which follow-up information was available. The ACTs were classified as low risk of recur- rence tumours (LRT; n = 14) or moderate-high risk of recurrence tumours (MHRT; n = 26), based on the novel histopathological Utrecht score. Normal adrenals (NAs) were included from 11 healthy dogs as reference material. The mRNA expression of 14 candidate genes was analysed in the 40 ACTs and in 11 NAs with quantitative RT-PCR. The genes’ expres- sion levels were statistically compared between NAs, LRTs and MHRTs. Univariate and mul- tivariate analyses were performed to determine the association of the genes’ expression levels with survival. Seven genes were differentially expressed between NAs and ACTs, of which pituitary tumour-transforming gene-1 (PTTG1) and topoisomerase II alpha (TOP2A) were also differentially expressed between LRTs and MHRTs. In survival analyses, high expression levels of Steroidogenic factor-1 (SF-1), PTTG1 and TOP2A were significantly asso- ciated with poor survival. In conclusion, we have identified several genes that are part of the molecular signature of malignancy in canine ACTs. These findings can be used to refine prognostic prediction, but also offer insights for future studies on druggable targets.
KEYWORDS
adrenocortical adenoma, adrenocortical carcinoma, cancer, canine, Cushing syndrome, prognostic, treatment targets
1 INTRODUCTION
Spontaneous hypercortisolism is one of the most common endo- crine disorders in dogs, with an estimated prevalence of approximately 1 in 400.1 It is caused by a cortisol-secreting adrenocortical tumour (ACT)
*Deceased November 23, 2016.
@ 2019 The Authors. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
in 15% to 20% of cases. If no metastases are detectable, the treatment of choice for an ACT is adrenalectomy. Other or adjunctive treatment options include the steroidogenesis inhibitor trilostane, which will only reduce the clinical signs of hypercortisolism and has no effect on tumour growth, and the adrenocorticolytic agent mitotane, which can cause con- siderable side-effects.2
Reported recurrence rates after adrenalectomy vary between 12% and 38%,3-5 which can be caused by metastases or regrowth of the ACT. Assessing the risk of recurrence after adrenalectomy is usually based on histopathology. However, the histopathological parameters that are mostly used in the assessment of canine ACTs6 often have high interobserver var- iability in human ACTs,7,8 and some studies did not observe a significant difference in survival times of dogs after adrenalectomy based on their his- topathological diagnosis.4,9 To improve the reliability and prognostic value of histopathology in canine cortisol-secreting ACTs, we recently intro- duced a new histopathological scoring system: the Utrecht score.5 The Utrecht score was based on parameters with low intra- and interobserver variability and their association with the dogs’ survival times. It includes assessment of the Ki67 proliferation index, the presence of necrosis, and the percentage of clear/vacuolated cytoplasm, and increasing Utrecht scores were significantly associated with shorter survival times.5
In the most recent study on ACTs, the median survival time of 19 dogs with recurrence was 16.9 months (95% CI 10.8-49.3 months).5 If these dogs would have been classified as hav- ing a high risk of recurrence, they could have received adjuvant treat- ment post-operatively which might have improved their survival times. Moreover, if molecular markers that are associated with malig- nancy and thus a high risk of recurrence could be identified, this could give more insight into which molecular pathways are useful to target for future treatment options. However, at present, little is known about which molecular markers are associated with malignancy of canine ACTs. Previous research by our group showed that the mRNA expression of Steroidogenic factor-1 (SF-1; NR5A1), an important reg- ulator of adrenal development and steroidogenesis, was significantly higher in ACTs of dogs that had recurrence of hypercortisolism within 2.5 years after adrenalectomy, than in ACTs of dogs that had no recurrence for at least 2.5 years.10 High expression of SF-1 is also an important negative prognostic indicator in human ACTs.11,12 Other molecular markers that have prognostic value in human ACTs include pituitary tumour-transforming gene-1 (PTTG1),13 topoisomerase II alpha (TOP2A),14 Vav Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Factor 2 (VAV2)15 and (for childhood ACTs) B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL2).16
To identify molecular markers of malignancy in canine ACTs, we used a candidate gene approach. The genes we selected are involved in adrenal-specific pathways, proliferation/apoptosis- related pathways, or both, and were selected based on an estima- tion of their prognostic relevance and whether they or the pathways they are involved in are potential druggable targets. The results of this study could be used to refine prognostic classifica- tion and could provide more insight into which genes or pathways are interesting for future studies on new treatment options. To this end, we evaluated the mRNA expression of 14 candidate genes and assessed whether they were associated with the
histopathological diagnosis of the ACT based on the Utrecht score, and/or with the dogs’ survival times.
2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1 Case selection
Cortisol-secreting ACTs of dogs were collected between 2002 and 2015. All dog owners gave permission to use the ACT tissue for research purposes. Non-suppressible hypercortisolism and the presence of an enlarged adrenal gland was detected as described previously.5 All dogs underwent unilateral adrenalectomy, which was performed by one of in total four experienced veterinary surgeons. Dogs were excluded from the study when they had bilateral adrenal tumours; when no formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue and snap-frozen material was available; when they were euthanized or died before, during, or within 2 weeks after adrenalectomy; and when less than 3 months of follow- up information was available. All dogs with ACTs in this study were also included in the previously published series where we introduced the Utrecht score.5 The adrenal glands of 11 healthy dogs were used as ref- erence material; these dogs were euthanized for reasons unrelated to this study which was approved by the Ethical Committee of Utrecht University conform Dutch legislation.
2.2 Histopathological evaluation
The histopathological evaluation of each ACT was performed as described previously.5 Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues were cut in 4 pm thick sections on Superfrost Plus Adhesion Microscope Slides (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Breda, The Netherlands). The tissue sections were stained with haematoxylin and eosin, and immunohisto- chemical staining for Ki67 (MIB-1 clone, M7240, Dako, Agilent, Amstelveen, The Netherlands) was performed as described previ- ously.5 All ACTs were evaluated by two observers. For each ACT, the Utrecht score was calculated: the Ki67 proliferation index +4 if ≥33% of cells have clear/vacuolated cytoplasm, and + 3 if necrosis was pre- sent. The ACTs were classified according to their Utrecht score as low risk of recurrence tumours (LRTs; < 6 in Utrecht score) or moderate- high risk of recurrence tumours (MHRTs; ≥ 6 in Utrecht score).
2.3 | Quantitative RT-PCR
Tissues were snap-frozen within 10 minutes after adrenalectomy (ACTs) or euthanasia (normal adrenals; NAs). RNA was isolated from tumour tissue or from the adrenal cortex of NAs with the RNeasy Mini Kit (Qiagen, Venlo, The Netherlands) according to the manufac- turer’s instructions. The RNA concentrations were measured with Nanodrop (ND-1000; Isogen Life Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands) and cDNA was subsequently synthesized with the iScript cDNA Syn- thesis Kit (Bio-Rad, Veenendaal, The Netherlands) according to the manufacturer’s instructions, and diluted to 1 ng/AL.
Using SYBR-green Supermix (Bio-Rad) and a CFX384 Touch Real- Time PCR Detection System (Bio-Rad), the mRNA expression levels of
14 genes were analysed with quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) analysis: melanocortin 2 receptor (MC2R), inhibin alpha subunit (INHA), SF-1, VAV2, pre-B-cell leukaemia transcription factor 1 (PBX1), pan- tetheinase (VNN1), and sterol O-acyltransferase (SOAT1) (adrenal- associated genes); and PTTG1, ribonucleoside-diphosphate reductase subunit M2 (RRM2), TOP2A, MKI67, cyclin D1 (CCND1), Ras-related C3 botulinum toxin substrate 1 (RAC1) and BCL2 (proliferation- or apoptosis-related genes). Primers (Table 1) were designed using Perl- primer software,17 checked for secondary structure formation with the Mfold web server,18 and ordered from Eurogentec (Maastricht, The Netherlands). Optimization and primer specificity confirmation were performed as described previously.19
For data normalization, the mRNA expression levels of five reference genes were analysed: signal recognition particle receptor, succinate dehy- drogenase complex subunit A, ribosomal protein S5, hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase and tyrosine 3-monooxygenase/tryptophan 5-monooxygenase activation protein zeta.20-22
Two technical replicates were analysed for each sample. To exclude interference of genomic DNA, for each sample a control sam- ple without reverse transcriptase was analysed. GeNorm software23 was used to analyse the reference genes’ expression levels, which jus- tified their use. The 2-44Ct method24 was used to calculate the nor- malized relative expression of each target gene.
2.4 Statistical analyses
Because the data were not normally distributed, which was observed using the Shapiro-Wilk test, differences in mRNA expression levels between groups (NAs, LRTs, MHRTs) were analysed with the Kruskal- Wallis test. Significant differences were analysed post hoc with the Mann-Whitney U-test with Bonferroni correction. Correlations between the Utrecht score and the gene mRNA expression levels were assessed using the Spearman’s Rank Order Correlation.
| Target gene | Primer sequence (5' -> 3') | Accession number | Position | Annealing Tm (C) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MC2R | Fw: TCA TGT GGT TTT GCC GGA AGA GAT Rv: AAT GGC CAG GCT GCA AAT GAA A | XM_022416941.1 | 296-434 | 58.5 |
| INHA | Fw: AGG AGG ATG TCT CCC AGG C Rv: GTG TGG AAC CAC AGG TGG GC | XM_545660.6 | 331-505 | 67.0 |
| SF-1 | Fw: AGG GCT GCA AGG GGT TTT TCA A Rv: CAT CCC CAC TGT CAG GCA CTT CT | XM_846937.2 | 200-342 | 59.0 |
| VAV2 | Fw: CTG CTT ACT GGA GAT TCA GG Rv: GGG TCA TGT AGT TCT TCT CG | XM_022423933.1 | 578-654 | 58.0 |
| PBX1 | Fw: GCA TCA GTG CTA ATG GAG GT Rv: GCA GGT ATC AGA GTG AAC ACT G | XM_022415304.1 | 1192-1286 | 60.3 |
| VNN1 | Fw: AGT TGA AAC TGC TTC TAC C Rv: ACT TGA CAC CTG AAA TTC TC | NM_001003372.1 | 902-1028 | 61.6 |
| SOAT1 | Fw: CAA CTA TCC TAG GAC TCC CAG Rv: CAT AGG ACC AGA ACG CGA | XM_005622465.3 | 986-1150 | 60.3 |
| PTTG1 | Fw: GCC TCA GAT GAC ACC TAT CCA G Rv: AAG TTC CCT CTC CTC ATC AAG G | XM_536445.5 | 457-606 | 63.5 |
| RRM2 | Fw: GAA GCT ACC TAT GGA GAA CGG Rv: GGT GTT TGA ACA TCA GGC AG | XM_540076.6 | 704-890 | 61.5 |
| TOP2A | Fw: CGG ACA CCT ACA TTG GCT Rv: GCA GCA TTG ACC AGA ATC TC | XM_537646.5 | 277-415 | 64.5 |
| MKI67 | Fw: TCA GTT CCA GCA ATC CGA Rv: GCA GAG ATT CCT GTT TGC G | XM_022411692.1 | 467-643 | 61.5 |
| CCND1 | Fw: ACT ACC TGG ACC GCT Rv: CGG ATG GAG TTG TCA | NM_001005757.1 | 410-560 | 61.0 |
| RAC1 | Fw: TCC CTT ATC CTA TCC GCA AA Rv: ATG ATA GGG GTG TTG GGA CA | NM_001003274.2 | 204-332 | 58.0 |
| BCL2 | Fw: GGA TGA CTG AGT ACC TGA ACC Rv: CGT ACA GTT CCA CAA AGG C | NM_001002949.1 | 959-1039 | 62.0 |
Note: Primer pairs for RT-qPCR analysis.
Abbreviations: Fw, forward primer; Rv, reverse primer.
For survival analyses, the ACT was considered to be the cause of death when the dog was euthanized due to recurrence of hyper- cortisolism, resulting from metastases or regrowth of the ACT. Sur- vival times were recorded as the time between adrenalectomy and euthanasia due to recurrence (event occurred), or the time between adrenalectomy and the time of censoring (event did not occur). Dogs were censored when they died from an unrelated cause, were still alive at the end of the study, or were lost to follow-up. The Cox pro- portional hazards model was used for univariate survival analyses. All variables with a P-value of <. 15 in univariate analyses were included in multivariate stepwise regression with forward selection.
To calculate optimal cut-off values, receiver operating characteris- tic (ROC) curves were used. To obtain clear results, only dogs with
evidently good or bad prognoses were included for ROC curves: dogs that had recurrence and were euthanized within 30 months after adrenalectomy were included in the positive group (n = 9), and dogs that had no recorded recurrence and lived for at least 30 months after adrenalectomy were included in the negative group (n = 13). The cut- off value with the highest Youden index (sensitivity + specificity - 1) was selected as the optimal cut-off value. Survival times were subse- quently calculated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method, and the log-rank test was used to determine whether a difference in sur- vival times between groups was significant.
P-values <. 05 were considered significant. All statistical analyses were performed with SPSS Statistics for Windows (Version 24.0, IBM Corp, Armonk, New York).
(A)
100.00
**
NA
**
LRT
MHRT
10.00
*
**
.
*
Fold change
T
T
T
1.00
1
T
T
1
1
.
.
·
0.10
0.01
MC2R
INHA
SF-1
VAV2
PBX1
VNN1
SOAT1
(B)
100.00
** *
** *
*
10.00
T
Fold change
T
1.00
0.10
NA
LRT
MHRT
0.01
PTTG1
RRM2
TOP2A
MKI67
CCND1
RAC1
BCL2
3 RESULTS
3.1 | Cases
Clinical data of the dogs included in this study are described in Table S1. Based on histopathological analyses using the Utrecht score, 14 (35%) ACTs were classified as LRTs (Utrecht scores range: 0.4-5.6) and 26 (65%) as MHRTs (Utrecht scores range: 6.1-29.2). The median survival time was not reached for the LRT group (recurrence observed in 1/14 dogs), and was 49.3 months (95% CI 12.9-85.6 months) for the MHRT group (recurrence observed in 14/26 dogs).
3.2 | Differential expression
In comparing the mRNA expression levels of the 14 candidate genes between NAs, LRTs, and MHRTs, 7 genes showed significant differ- ences: INHA, VAV2, PBX1, PTTG1, RRM2, TOP2A and MKI67. Of these genes, the mRNA expression levels (Figure 1) were significantly higher in LRTs compared to NAs for PBX1; in MHRTs compared to NAs for MKI67; in LRTs and in MHRTs compared to NAs for INHA, VAV2 and RRM2; and in LRTs and MHRTs compared to NAs but also in MHRTs compared to LRTs for PTTG1 and TOP2A. The mRNA expression levels of PTTG1 and TOP2A, but not of the other 12 genes, were also significantly correlated with the Utrecht score as a continuous vari- able (Table S2).
3.3 | Survival analyses
In assessing the genes’ association with survival times, the mRNA expression levels of three genes were significant: SF-1, PTTG1 and TOP2A (Table 2). When we classified the ACTs based on the genes’ optimal cut-off values as calculated using ROC curves, the survival times were significantly different between the groups with high and low expression for all three genes (Figure 2). For SF-1, the estimated median survival time of the group with low expression (fold change <1.35; n = 23) was not reached, and of the group with high expression (≥1.35; n = 17) 16.9 months (95% CI, 1.5-32.2 months) (P < . 001). For PTTG1, the estimated median survival time of the group with low expression (<5.35; n = 30) was 56.6 months (95% CI, 52.1- 61.1 months), and of the group with high expression (≥5.35; n = 10) 16.9 months (10.7-23.0 months) (P = . 001). For TOP2A, the estimated median survival time of the group with low expression (<6.31; n = 24) was not reached, and of the group with high expression (≥6.31; n = 15) 49.3 months (95% CI, 47.6-61.7 months) (P = . 006).
In multivariate analysis, the SF-1 mRNA expression (P = . 001) and the Utrecht score (P < . 001) were identified as independent predictors of survival.
4 DISCUSSION
In this study we identified seven genes that were differentially expressed between NAs and ACTs, of which PTTG1 and TOP2A were
| Gene | Hazard ratio (95%CI) | P-value |
|---|---|---|
| MC2R | 1.29 (0.77-2.16) | .328 |
| INHA | 1.00 (0.96-1.03) | .771 |
| SF-1 | 8.23 (2.43-27.89) | .001* |
| VAV2 | 0.74 (0.27-2.08) | .572 |
| PBX1 | 1.14 (0.94-1.38) | .187 |
| VNN1 | 0.73 (0.44-1.23) | .236 |
| SOAT1 | 1.21 (0.85-1.72) | .287 |
| PTTG1 | 1.23 (1.11-1.37) | <. 001* |
| RRM2 | 1.10 (0.92-1.32) | .276 |
| TOP2A | 1.06 (1.02-1.11) | .005* |
| MKI67 | 1.02 (1.00-1.05) | .080 |
| CCND1 | 1.19 (0.82-1.72) | .369 |
| RAC1 | 2.65 (0.62-11.24) | .188 |
| BCL2 | 0.88 (0.47-1.65) | .698 |
Note: Univariate analyses performed with the Cox proportional hazards model. Significant P-values are indicated in italic font with an asterisk.
also differentially expressed between LRTs and MHRTs. Moreover, we identified three genes of which high mRNA expression was signifi- cantly associated with poor survival: SF-1, PTTG1 and TOP2A. The prognostic relevance of these genes indicates that they could be use- ful to refine prognostic classification, but also identifies them as potential treatment targets.
SF-1 is an orphan nuclear receptor that is important in both adre- nal development and steroidogenesis,25 and the importance of SF-1 gene dosage in adrenocortical tumorigenesis has been shown in multi- ple studies.11,26,27 Interestingly, SF-1 expression did not differ between LRTs and MHRTs in the current study, nor between adreno- cortical adenomas (ACAs) and adrenocortical carcinomas (ACCs) in a previous study,10 which might appear to contradict its prognostic rele- vance. However, this is remarkably similar to the SF-1 expression pat- tern in human ACTs.11 This apparent contradiction could be related to the difference in SF-1 function depending on the cellular context: in differentiated adrenocortical cells SF-1 mostly stimulates hormone production, whereas in foetal adrenal development SF-1 stimulates adrenal growth.25,28 Possibly, ACA/LRT cells more closely resemble differentiated cells, and ACC/MHRT cells more closely resemble foe- tal cells, in which high SF-1 expression might provide a specific growth advantage.11 Regardless of the mechanism, these results indi- cate that there could be room for improvement in the Utrecht score to refine prognostic classification. This was confirmed by the multivar- iate survival analysis, which showed that the Utrecht score and the SF-1 mRNA expression are independent predictors of survival. Because the range of SF-1 mRNA expression is relatively small, assessment of the SF-1 mRNA expression would not be feasible to include in routine diagnostic procedures. Other techniques such as immunohistochemistry to evaluate the SF-1 protein expression could be analysed to determine whether this can improve prognostication.
(A) 1.0
Cumulative survival
0.8
P < 0.001
0.6
SF-1 low
0.4
SF-1 high
0.2
0.0
0
20
40
60
Survival (months)
(B) 1.0
Cumulative survival
0.8
0.6
P = 0.001
0.4
PTTG1 low
0.2
PTTG1 high
0.0
0
20
40
60
Survival (months)
(C) 1.0
Cumulative survival
0.8
P = 0.006
0.6
TOP2A low
0.4
TOP2A high
0.2
0.0
0
20
40
60
Survival (months)
The prognostic relevance of SF-1 makes it an interesting thera- peutic target. Compounds that can target SF-1 activity, called SF-1 inverse agonists, have been identified29,30 and inhibited cell prolifera- tion and steroid hormone production in vitro in human ACC cells.31 We showed in a previous study that one SF-1 inverse agonist, com- pound #31, effectively inhibited cortisol production and SF-1 target gene expression in canine adrenocortical cells in vitro.32 If SF-1
inverse agonists will be further developed for clinical use, this may have much potential to improve the prognosis of dogs with an ACC with high SF-1 expression.
PTTG1 is a securin that regulates sister chromatin separation dur- ing mitosis, and it plays a role in DNA repair, metabolism, senescence, apoptosis and gene transcription.33,34 PTTG1 is also a prognostic marker in human ACCs,13,35 as well as in other tumour types in humans and dogs.36-38 Several drugs have been shown to inhibit PTTG1 expression, including BRAF, HDAC, Hsp90 and STAT3 inhibitors,39-41 which could be interesting options to target PTTG1 in canine ACTs.
TOP2A is a nuclear enzyme that facilitates DNA unlinking, which is required for DNA replication and chromosome segragation.42,43 TOP2A is predominantly associated with proliferating cells, which makes it an interesting therapeutic target in cancer. TOP2A is also a prognostic marker in human ACCs and other tumour types.14,37 Sev- eral TOP2A inhibitors are therefore successfully used in the clinic as anticancer drugs.42,43 The chemotherapy protocol that is most effec- tive in human ACCs is the combination of etoposide, doxorubicin and cisplatin with mitotane (EDP-M).44 Of these, etoposide and doxorubi- cin are topoisomerase II inhibitors,45 and a recent study showed that the level of TOP2A expression in human ACCs is predictive of the response to the EDP-M chemotherapy protocol.14 In view of the prognostic relevance of TOP2A in canine ACTs, topoisomerase II inhibitors could be an interesting treatment to improve the prognosis of dogs with high intra-tumoural TOP2A expression.
The prognostic relevance of genes such as VAV2, PBX1 and RRM2 could have been underestimated in this study due to the relatively low number of cases, and it might be interesting to reanalyse the expression of these genes in a larger dataset. Moreover, this study was based on a candidate gene approach. Making use of for example RNA sequencing would be an interesting approach to identify prognostically relevant genes in an unbiased fashion.
In conclusion, in this study we have identified several genes that are part of the molecular signature of malignancy in canine ACTs. Most apparent molecular markers of prognosis were SF-1, PTTG1 and TOP2A. These findings can be used to refine prognostic prediction, but also offer substrate for future studies, where important prognostic markers could be targeted for new treatment options. If in the future drugs for multiple targets are available, treatment of dogs with high risk of recurrence could be based on their ACT’s molecular malignancy profile, thereby moving towards personalized treatment.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare no potential conflict of interest.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank Guy C.M. Grinwis and Koen Cirkel for histopatho- logical evaluation of all adrenocortical tumours, and Sebastiaan A. van Nimwegen, Jolle Kirpensteijn, Elaine Naan and Bart Sjollema for per- forming the adrenalectomies.
ORCID
Karin Sanders (D https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9634-9853 Jan A. Mol DD https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0843-8088
Hans S. Kooistra ID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8058-0492 Sara Galac DD https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4831-4995
REFERENCES
1. O’Neill DG, Scudder C, Faire JM, et al. Epidemiology of hyper- adrenocorticism among 210,824 dogs attending primary-care veteri- nary practices in the UK from 2009 to 2014. J Small Anim Pract. 2016;57(7):365-373.
2. Sanders K, Kooistra HS, Galac S. Treating canine Cushing’s syndrome: current options and future prospects. Vet J. 2018;241:42-51.
3. van Sluijs FJ, Sjollema BE, Voorhout G, van den Ingh TS, Rijnberk A. Results of adrenalectomy in 36 dogs with hyperadrenocorticism cau- sed by adreno-cortical tumour. Vet Q. 1995;17(3):113-116.
4. Anderson CR, Birchard SJ, Powers BE, G a B, C a K, Withrow SJ. Sur- gical treatment of adrenocortical tumors: 21 cases (1990-1996). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2001;37:93-97.
5. Sanders K, Cirkel K, Grinwis GCM, et al. The Utrecht score: a novel histopathological scoring system to assess the prognosis of dogs with cortisol-secreting adrenocortical tumours. Vet Comp Oncol. 2019;1-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/vco.12474
6. Labelle P, Kyles AE, Farver TB, de Cock HEV. Indicators of malignancy of canine adrenocortical tumors: histopathology and proliferation index. Vet Pathol. 2004;41(5):490-497.
7. Pennanen M, Heiskanen I, Sane T, et al. Helsinki score-a novel model for prediction of metastases in adrenocortical carcinomas. Hum Pat- hol. 2015;46(3):404-410.
8. Aubert S, Wacrenier A, Leroy X, et al. Weiss system revisited: a clini- copathologic and immunohistochemical study of 49 adrenocortical tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26(12):1612-1619.
9. Schwartz P, Kovak JR, Koprowski A, Ludwig LL, Monette S, Bergman PJ. Evaluation of prognostic factors in the surgical treatment of adrenal gland tumors in dogs: 41 cases (1999-2005). J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2008;232(1):77-84.
10. Galac S, Kool MMJ, van den Berg MF, Mol JA, Kooistra HS. Expres- sion of steroidogenic factor 1 in canine cortisol-secreting adrenocorti- cal tumors and normal adrenals. Domest Anim Endocrinol. 2014;49: 1-5.
11. Sbiera S, Schmull S, Assie G, et al. High diagnostic and prognostic value of steroidogenic factor-1 expression in adrenal tumors. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95(10):161-171.
12. Duregon E, Volante M, Giorcelli J, Terzolo M, Lalli E, Papotti M. Diag- nostic and prognostic role of steroidogenic factor 1 in adrenocortical carcinoma: a validation study focusing on clinical and pathologic cor- relates. Hum Pathol. 2013;44(5):822-828.
13. Demeure MJ, Coan KE, Grant CS, et al. PTTG1 overexpression in adrenocortical cancer is associated with poor survival and represents a potential therapeutic target. Surgery. 2013;154(6):1405-1416.
14. Roca E, Berruti A, Sbiera S, et al. Topoisomerase 2x and thymidylate synthase expression in adrenocortical cancer. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2017;24(7):299-307.
15. Sbiera S, Sbiera I, Ruggiero C, et al. Assessment of VAV2 expression refines prognostic prediction in adrenocortical carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102(9):3491-3498.
16. Lorea CF, Moreno DA, Borges KS, et al. Expression profile of apoptosis-related genes in childhood adrenocortical tumors: low level of expression of BCL2 and TNF genes suggests a poor prognosis. Eur J Endocrinol. 2012;167(2):199-208.
17. Marshall OJ. PerlPrimer: cross-platform, graphical primer design for standard, bisulphite and real-time PCR. Bioinformatics. 2004;20(15): 2471-2472.
18. Zuker M. Mfold web server for nucleic acid folding and hybridization prediction. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003;31(13):3406-3415.
19. Galac S, Kool MMJ, Naan EC, Daminet S, Mol JA, Kooistra HS. Expression of the ACTH receptor, steroidogenic acute regulatory protein, and steroidogenic enzymes in canine cortisol-secreting adrenocortical tumors. Domest Anim Endocrinol. 2010;39(4): 259-267.
20. Brinkhof B, Spee B, Rothuizen J, Penning LC. Development and eval- uation of canine reference genes for accurate quantification of gene expression. Anal Biochem. 2006;356(1):36-43.
21. Schlotter YM, Veenhof EZ, Brinkhof B, et al. A GeNorm algorithm-based selection of reference genes for quantitative real-time PCR in skin biopsies of healthy dogs and dogs with atopic dermatitis. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2009;129(1-2): 115-118.
22. Stassen QEM, Riemers FM, Reijmerink H, Leegwater PAJ, Penning LC. Reference genes for reverse transcription quantitative PCR in canine brain tissue. BMC Res Notes. 2015;8(1):761.
23. Vandesompele J, De Preter K, Pattyn I, et al. Accurate normalization of real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by geometric averaging of mul- tiple internal control genes. Genome Biol. 2002;3(711):34-31.
24. Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2-AACT method. Methods. 2001;25(4):402-408.
25. Val P, Lefrançois-Martinez AM, Veyssière G, Martinez A. SF-1 a key player in the development and differentiation of steroidogenic tis- sues. Nucl Recept. 2003;1(1):8.
26. Doghman M, Karpova T, Rodrigues GA, et al. Increased steroidogenic factor-1 dosage triggers adrenocortical cell proliferation and cancer. Mol Endocrinol. 2007;21(12):2968-2987.
27. Figueiredo BC, Cavalli LR, Pianovski MAD, et al. Amplification of the steriodogenic factor 1 gene in childhood adrenocortical tumors. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005;90(2):615-619.
28. Parker KL, D a R, Lala DS, et al. Steroidogenic factor 1: an essential mediator of endocrine development. Recent Prog Horm Res. 2002;57: 19-36.
29. Madoux F, Li X, Chase P, Zastrow G. Potent, selective and cell pene- trant inhibitors of SF-1 by functional ultra-high-throughput screening. Mol Ther. 2008;73(6):1776-1784.
30. Roth J, Madoux F, Hodder P, Roush WR. Synthesis of small molecule inhibitors of the orphan nuclear receptor steroidogenic factor-1 (NR5A1) based on isoquinolinone scaffolds. Bioorgan Med Chem Lett. 2008;18(8):2628-2632.
31. Doghman M, Cazareth J, Douguet D, Madoux F, Hodder P, Lalli E. Inhibition of adrenocortical carcinoma cell proliferation by steroido- genic factor-1 inverse agonists. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94(6): 2178-2183.
32. Sanders K, Mol JA, Slob A, Kooistra HS, Galac S. Steroidogenic factor-1 inverse agonists as a treatment option for canine hyper- cortisolism: in vitro study. Domest Anim Endocrinol. 2018;63: 23-30.
33. Zou H, McGarry TJ, Bernal T, Kirschner MW. Identification of a verte- brate sister-chromatid separation inhibitor involved in transformation and tumorigenesis. Science. 1999;285(5426):418-421.
34. Tong Y, Eigler T. Transcriptional targets for pituitary tumor- transforming gene-1. J Mol Endocrinol. 2009;43(5):179-185.
35. Romero Arenas MA, Whitsett TG, Aronova A, et al. Protein expres- sion of PTTG1 as a diagnostic biomarker in adrenocortical carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(3):801-807.
36. Salehi F, Kovacs K, Scheithauer BW, Lloyd RV, Cusimano M. Pituitary tumor-transforming gene in endocrine and other neoplasms: a review and update. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2008;15(3):721-743.
37. Dawany NB, Dampier WN, Tozeren A. Large-scale integration of microarray data reveals genes and pathways common to multiple can- cer types. Int J Cancer. 2011;128(12):2881-2891.
38. Vastenhout N, van Rijn SJ, Riemers FM, Tryfonidou MA, Meij BP, Penning LC. The mRNA expression of PTTG1 is a strong prognostic indicator for recurrence after hypophysectomy in dogs with cor- ticotroph pituitary adenomas. Vet J. 2018;240:19-21.
39. Wei N, Li J, Fang C, et al. Targeting colon cancer with the novel STAT3 inhibitor bruceantinol. Oncogene. 2019;38(10):1676-1687.
40. Hernández A, López-Lluch G, Navas P, Pintor-Toro JA. HDAC and Hsp90 inhibitors down-regulate PTTG1/securin but do not induce aneuploidy. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2009;48(2):194-201.
41. Caporali S, Alvino E, Lacal PM, et al. Targeting the PTTG1 oncogene impairs proliferation and invasiveness of melanoma cells sensitive or with acquired resistance to the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib. Oncotarget. 2017;8(69):113472-113493.
42. Ali Y, Abd Hamid S. Human topoisomerase II alpha as a prognostic biomarker in cancer chemotherapy. Tumor Biol. 2016;37(1):47-55.
43. Delgado JL, Hsieh C-M, Chan N-L, Hiasa H. Topoisomerases as anti- cancer targets. Biochem J. 2018;475(2):373-398.
44. Fassnacht M, Terzolo M, Allolio B, et al. Combination chemotherapy in advanced adrenocortical carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(23): 2189-2197.
45. Nitiss JL. Targeting DNA topoisomerase II in cancer chemotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2009;9(5):338-350.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section at the end of this article.
How to cite this article: Sanders K, van Staalduinen GJ, Uijens MCM, et al. Molecular markers of prognosis in canine cortisol-secreting adrenocortical tumours. Vet Comp Oncol. 2019;17:545-552. https://doi.org/10.1111/vco.12521