Search

// Luana Mota Martins 1 , Carla Solange de Melo Escorcio Dourado 1 , Larysse Maira Campos-Verdes 1 , Fabiane Araujo Sampaio 1 , Camila Maria Simplicio Revoredo 1 , Danylo Rafhael Costa-Silva 1 , Maria da Conceicao Barros-Oliveira 1 , Elmo de Jesus Nery Junior 1 , Lucia Maria do Rego-Medeiros 2 , Luiz Henrique Gebrim 1 , Francisco Adelton Alves-Ribeiro 1 , Gilmara Peres Rodrigues 1 , Diego Cipriano Chagas 1 , Dilina do Nascimento Marreiro 1 and Benedito Borges da Silva 1 , 2 1 Postgraduate Program, Northeast Biotechnology Network (RENORBIO), Biotechnology in Health, Federal University of Piaui, Teresina, Piaui 64000-020, Brazil 2 Facid / Wyden Differential Integral Medicine Faculty, Department of Mastology, Teresina, Piaui 64052-810, Brazill Correspondence to: Benedito Borges da Silva, email: beneditoborges@globo.com Keywords: breast neoplasms; fibroadenoma; matrix metalloproteinase-2; matrix metalloproteinase-9; immunohistochemistry Received: September 17, 2019 Accepted: November 06, 2019 Published: December 03, 2019 ABSTRACT Background Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) 2 and 9 may play an important role in cell proliferation and dissemination of cancer. However, few studies have compared the expression of these proteins between breast cancer and fibroadenoma. Material and methods A randomized, double-blind study was carried out in 66 premenopausal women, aged 20-49 years, who had been diagnosed with fibroadenoma or breast cancer. The patients were divided into two groups: Group A, control (fibroadenoma, n=36) and Group B, study (cancer, n=30). Immunohistochemical analysis was performed using tissue samples of fibroadenoma and breast cancer to assess MMP-2 and MMP-9 antigen expression. Cells were considered positive if exhibiting brown cytoplasmic staining. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare the percentage of cases with cells expressing MMP-2 and MMP-9 in control and study groups (p < 0.05). Results Light microscopy showed a higher concentration of cells with positive cytoplasmic staining for MMP-2 and MMP-9 expression in breast cancer than in fibroadenoma. The percentage of cases with cells expressing MMP-2 in the control and study groups was 41.67% and 86.11%, respectively (p < 0.0009), whereas the percentage of cases with cells expressing MMP-9 in groups A and B was 66.67% and 93.33%, respectively (p

OBJECTIVES: In breast cancer diagnosis, mammography (MMG), ultrasonography (USG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the imaging methods most used. There is a scarcity of comparative studies that evaluate the accuracy of these methods in the diagnosis of breast cancer. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out through the review of electronic medical records of 32 female patients who underwent breast imaging examinations at a imaging diagnostic center in Teresina, State of Piauí, Brazil. Patients who had these three imaging methods at the time of the evaluation of the same nodule were included. The nodule must have been classified as suspect by the BI-RADS® system in at least one of the methods. Data from each method were compared with the histopathological examination. Statistical analysis used the calculation of proportions in Excel 2010. RESULTS: MMG showed 56.2%, 87.5%, 81.8%, 66.7% and 71.8% of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy, respectively. USG had 75%, 18.8%, 48%, 42.8% and 46.9% of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy, respectively. In turn, MRI had 100%, 50%, 66.7%, 100% and 75% of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy, respectively. CONCLUSION: Thus, MRI and MMG were more accurate in evaluating suspicious breast lumps. MRI had a low specificity, mainly to high breast density, while MMG had also sensitivity limited due to high breast density and USG has been proven to be useful in these patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the relationship between rs17576 (MMP-9) polymorphism and increased cancer risk in a Brazilian breast cancer cohort. METHODS: This study included 141 women (71 breast cancer patients and 70 controls without breast cancer) who donated 3 mL of their peripheral blood for genomic DNA extraction. This DNA was then genotyped using a real-time polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: The AG (rs17576) genotype was identified in 26 (18.43%) participants in the case group and in 22 (15.60%) participants in the control group (p=0.274), while the GG genotype was identified in ten (7.09%) participants in the case group and in one (0.70%) participant in the control group (p