Insulin-like growth factor II mRNA binding protein 3

• Published in: BMC cancer 2010-06, Vol.10, p.341
• Main Authors: Moch, Holger, Gerhardt, Josefine, Fritzsche, Florian R, Müntener, Michael, Mortezavi, Ashkan, Kristiansen, Glen, Sulser, Tullio, Burger, Maximilian, Provenzano, Maurizio, Ikenberg, Kristian, Behnke, Silvia, Hofstädter, Ferdinand, Zuerrer-Haerdi, Ursina, Hofmann, Irina, Wild, Peter, Hermanns, Thomas, Seifert, Helge
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Care and treatment; Genetic aspects; Insulin-like growth factors; Messenger RNA; Physiological aspects; Prostate cancer; Risk factors
• ISSN: 1471-2407; 1471-2407
• DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-10-341

Background The oncofetal protein insulin-like growth factor II mRNA binding protein 3 (IMP3) is an important factor for cell-migration and adhesion in malignancies. Recent studies have shown a remarkable overexpression of IMP3 in different human malignant neoplasms and also revealed it as an important prognostic marker in some tumor entities. To our knowledge, IMP3 expression has not been investigated in prostate carcinomas so far. Methods Immunohistochemical stainings for IMP3 were performed on tissue microarray (TMA) organized samples from 507 patients: 31 normal prostate tissues, 425 primary carcinomas and 51 prostate cancer metastases or castration-resistant prostate cancers (CRPC). IMP3 immunoreactivity was semiquantitatively scored and correlated with clinical-pathologic parameters including survival. Results IMP3 is significantly stronger expressed in prostate carcinomas compared to normal prostate tissues (p [less than] 0.0001), but did not show significant correlation with the pT-stage, the proliferation index (MIB1), preoperative serum PSA level and the margin status. Only a weak and slightly significant correlation was found with the Gleason score and IMP3 expression failed to show prognostic significance in clinico-pathological correlation-analyses. Conclusions Although IMP3 is overexpressed in a significant proportion of prostate cancer cases, which might be of importance for novel therapeutic approaches, it does not appear to possess any immediate diagnostic or prognostic value, limiting its potential as a tissue biomarker for prostate cancer. These results might be corroborated by the fact, that two independent tumor cohorts were separately reviewed.