Sir,
We read with great interest the published article by Kallio et al (2003) in the British Journal of Cancer on the association between the location of EGFR immunostaining and overall survival in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients. In this paper, the authors have reported that overall survival was significantly longer (P=0.004) in patients with prominent membranous EGFR expression compared to patients with either EGFR-negative tumours or tumours with predominantly cytoplasmic EGFR staining (Kallio et al, 2003). This is an important finding, as the expression of membranous EGFR has often been associated with a poor prognosis in cancer patients (Lager et al, 1994; Moch et al, 1997), while other studies have found either no association between EGFR expression and prognosis (Hofmockel et al, 1997) or more recently an association between the expression of cytoplasmic EGFR and poor prognosis in RCC patients (Langner et al, 2004).
To our knowledge, the paper by Kallio et al is the first paper to describe an association between prominent membranous EGFR immunostaining and longer overall survival in RCC patients. However, there is a conflicting statement in the Materials and Methods section of the paper by Kallio et al that prevents us from accepting their conclusion and the authors need to clarify/rectify accordingly. In the immunohistochemical staining section of the Materials and Methods, Kallio et al stated the use of a polyclonal rabbit anti-EGFR variant III antibody (EGFRvIII) for EGFR immunostaining. The EGFRvIII is a ligand-independent, constitutively active and mutated form of EGFR (Pederson et al, 2001). Did the author use the rabbit anti-EGFRvIII antibody in their study and if so does it crossreact with the EGFR? Could Kallio et al clarify/rectify whether the prominent membranous EGFRvIII immunostaining in that study was associated with a good prognosis in patients with RCC? While no clear association has been found between the expression of the EGFR and response to the EGFR inhibitors in cancer patients, including patients with RCC, the expression of membranous EGFR and/or EGFRvIII in RCC patients would, however, make them an ideal target for therapy with the anti-EGFR antibodies (Modjtahedi et al, 2003; Dawson et al, 2004; Rowinsky et al, 2004; Dancey, 2004). We would appreciate clarification from Kallio et al.
Change history
16 November 2011
This paper was modified 12 months after initial publication to switch to Creative Commons licence terms, as noted at publication
References
Dancey JE (2004) Epidermal growth factor receptor and epidermal growth factor receptor therapies in renal cell carcinoma: do we need a better mouse trap? J Clin Oncol 22: 2975–2977
Dawson NA, Guo C, Zak R, Dorsey B, Smoot J, Wong J, Hussain A (2004) A phase II trial of gefitinib (Iressa, ZD1839) in stage IV and recurrent renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 10: 7812–7819
Hofmockel G, Riess S, Bassukas ID, Dammrich J (1997) Epidermal growth factor family and renal cell carcinoma: expression and prognostic impact. Eur Urol 31: 478–484
Kallio JP, Hirvikoski P, Helin H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen P, Luukkaala T, Tammela TL, Martikainen PM (2003) Membranous location of EGFR immunostaining is associated with good prognosis in renal cell carcinoma. Br J Cancer 89: 1266–1269
Lager DJ, Slagel DD, Palechek PL (1994) The expression of epidermal growth factor receptor and transforming growth factor alpha in renal cell carcinoma. Mod Pathol 7: 544–548
Langner C, Ratschek M, Rehak P, Schips L, Zigeuner R (2004) Are heterogenous results of EGFR immunoreactivity in renal cell carcinoma related to non-standardised criteria for staining evaluation? J Clin Pathol 57: 773–775
Moch H, Sauter G, Buchholz N, Gasser TC, Bubendorf L, Waldman FM, Mihatsch MJ (1997) Epidermal growth factor receptor expression is associated with rapid tumor cell proliferation in renal cell carcinoma. Hum Pathol 28: 1255–1259
Modjtahedi H, Moscatello DK, Box G, Green M, Shotton C, Lamb DJ, Reynolds LJ, Wong AL, Dean C, Thomas H, Eccles S (2003) Targeting of cells expressing wild type EGFR and type-III mutant EGFR (EGFRvIII) by anti-EGFR mAbs ICR62: a two pronged attack for tumour therapy. Int J cancer 105 (2): 273–280
Pederson MW, Meltorn M, Damstrup L, Polsen HS (2001) The type III epidermal growth factor receptor mutation. Biological significance and potential target for anti-cancer therapy. Ann Oncol 12: 745–760
Rowinsky EK, Schwartz GH, Gollob JA, Thompson JA, Vogelzang NJ, Figlin R, Bukowski R, Haas N, Lockbaum P, Li YP, Arends R, Foon KA, Schwab G, Dutcher J (2004) Safety, pharmacokinetics, and activity of ABX-EGF, a fully human ant-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer. J Clin Oncol 22: 3003–3015
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
From twelve months after its original publication, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
About this article
Cite this article
Modjtahedi, H., Cunningham, M. Is membranous location of EGFR or EGFRvIII immunostaining associated with good prognosis in renal cell carcinoma?. Br J Cancer 93, 1316 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602843
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602843