CLINICAL RESEARCH
Expression of visfatin, lipocalin-2, adiponectin, and chemerin in breast cancer and their association with clinicopathological parameters
1
Breast Unit, Department of General Surgery, University Hospital of Patras, Rio, Greece
2
Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, Westpfalz-Klinikum, Kaiserslautern, Germany
3
Department of Anatomy-Histology-Embryology, School of Medicine, University of Patras, Rio, Greece
4
Department of Pathology, University Hospital of Patras, Rio, Greece
These authors had equal contribution to this work
Submission date: 2025-08-31
Final revision date: 2025-11-05
Acceptance date: 2025-12-19
Publication date: 2026-01-15
Corresponding author
Vasileios Leivaditis
Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery Westpfalz Klinikum Kaiserslautern, Germany
Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery Westpfalz Klinikum Kaiserslautern, Germany
Arch Med Sci Atheroscler Dis 2026;11(1):1-4
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Breast cancer remains the most common malignancy in women worldwide, with prognosis influenced not only by tumor-intrinsic factors but also by the tumor microenvironment. Adipokines, including visfatin, lipocalin-2, adiponectin, and chemerin, have been increasingly implicated in breast cancer biology, influencing inflammation, metabolism, angiogenesis, and the tumor microenvironment (TME). However, their precise contribution to tumor progression and their association with common prognostic markers remain unclear. The expression patterns of these adipokines were evaluated in invasive ductal carcinoma and explored their relationship with established clinicopathological parameters.
Material and methods:
Breast cancer diagnosed cases were analyzed in 2018 at the University General Hospital of Patras. Immunohistochemistry was performed for visfatin, lipocalin-2, adiponectin, and chemerin. Marker expression was correlated with estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), HER2/c-ERB2, Ki67, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI).
Results:
Visfatin and adiponectin both showed significant associations between high Ki67 and LVI (p = 0.0049 and p = 0.00044, respectively). In addition, ER negativity was linked to LVI for these two adipokines (p = 0.0175 for both). By contrast, lipocalin-2 did not show significant correlations, although borderline values for ER and PR suggested a possible trend.
Conclusions:
These findings point to visfatin and adiponectin as potential indicators of aggressive breast cancer phenotypes, while lipocalin-2 may follow a different biological trajectory. Larger, prospective studies are warranted to confirm these associations and clarify underlying mechanisms.
Breast cancer remains the most common malignancy in women worldwide, with prognosis influenced not only by tumor-intrinsic factors but also by the tumor microenvironment. Adipokines, including visfatin, lipocalin-2, adiponectin, and chemerin, have been increasingly implicated in breast cancer biology, influencing inflammation, metabolism, angiogenesis, and the tumor microenvironment (TME). However, their precise contribution to tumor progression and their association with common prognostic markers remain unclear. The expression patterns of these adipokines were evaluated in invasive ductal carcinoma and explored their relationship with established clinicopathological parameters.
Material and methods:
Breast cancer diagnosed cases were analyzed in 2018 at the University General Hospital of Patras. Immunohistochemistry was performed for visfatin, lipocalin-2, adiponectin, and chemerin. Marker expression was correlated with estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), HER2/c-ERB2, Ki67, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI).
Results:
Visfatin and adiponectin both showed significant associations between high Ki67 and LVI (p = 0.0049 and p = 0.00044, respectively). In addition, ER negativity was linked to LVI for these two adipokines (p = 0.0175 for both). By contrast, lipocalin-2 did not show significant correlations, although borderline values for ER and PR suggested a possible trend.
Conclusions:
These findings point to visfatin and adiponectin as potential indicators of aggressive breast cancer phenotypes, while lipocalin-2 may follow a different biological trajectory. Larger, prospective studies are warranted to confirm these associations and clarify underlying mechanisms.
REFERENCES (24)
1.
Arnold M, Morgan E, Rumgay H, et al. Current and future burden of breast cancer: global statistics for 2020 and 2040. Breast 2022; 66: 15-23.
2.
WHO (World Health Organization). Statistics at a glance. International Agency for Research on Cancer. 2020.
3.
Mohanty SS, Mohanty PK. Obesity as potential breast cancer risk factor for postmenopausal women. Genes Dis 2021; 8: 117-23.
4.
Kaur J, Adya R, Tan BK, Chen J, Randeva HS. Identification of chemerin receptor (ChemR23) in human endothelial cells: chemerin-induced endothelial angiogenesis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2010; 391: 1762-8.
5.
Zabel BA, Allen SJ, Kulig P, et al. Chemerin activation by serine proteases of the coagulation, fibrinolytic, and inflammatory cascades. J Biol Chem 2005; 280: 34661-6.
6.
Pachynski RK, Wang P, Salazar N, et al. Chemerin suppresses breast cancer growth by recruiting immune effector cells into the tumor microenvironment. Front Immunol 2019; 10: 983.
7.
Czerniak AS, Kretschmer K, Weiß T, Beck-Sickinger AG. The chemerin receptor CMKLR1 requires full-length chemerin for high affinity in contrast to GPR1 as demonstrated by a new nanoluciferase-based binding assay. ChemMedChem 2022; 17: e202200413.
8.
Ferland DJ, Watts SW. Chemerin: a comprehensive review elucidating the need for cardiovascular research. Pharmacol Res 2015; 99: 351-61.
9.
Treeck O, Buechler C, Ortmann O. Chemerin and cancer. Int J Mol Sci 2019; 20: 3750.
10.
Wang N, Wang QJ, Feng YY, Shang W, Cai M. Overexpression of chemerin was associated with tumor angiogenesis and poor clinical outcome in squamous cell carcinoma of the oral tongue. Clin Oral Investig 2014; 18: 997-1004.
11.
Parolini S, Santoro A, Marcenaro E, et al. The role of chemerin in the co-localization of NK and dendritic cell subsets into inflamed tissues. Blood 2007; 109: 3625-32.
12.
Verras GI, Tchabashvili L, Chlorogiannis DD, Mulita F, Argentou MI. Updated clinical evidence on the role of adipokines and breast cancer: a review. Cancers 2023; 15: 1532.
13.
El-Sagheer G, Gayyed M, Ahmad A, Abd El-Fattah A, Mohamed M. Expression of chemerin correlates with a poor prognosis in female breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer 2018; 10: 169-76.
14.
Zhao S, Li C, Ye Y, Peng F, Chen Q. Expression of chemerin correlates with a favorable prognosis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Lab Med 2011; 42: 553-7.
15.
Song Y, Zhu X, Lin Z, Luo L, Wen D. The potential value of serum chemerin in patients with breast cancer. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 6564.
16.
Zhang W, Wang J, Liu C, et al. Crosstalk and plasticity between cancer-associated fibroblasts and tumor microenvironment: significance of breast cancer metastasis. J Transl Med 2023; 21: 827.
17.
Cabia B, Andrade S, Carreira MC, Casanueva FF, Crujeiras AB. A role for novel adipose tissue-secreted factors in obesity-related carcinogenesis. Obes Rev 2016; 17: 361-76.
18.
Akin S, Gedik E, Haznedaroglu E, Dogan AL, Altundag MK. Serum chemerin level in breast cancer. UHOD 2017; 27: 127-32.
19.
Fogteloo AJ, Pijl H, Roelfsema F, Frölich M, Meinders AE. Impact of meal timing and frequency on the twenty-four-hour leptin rhythm. Horm Res 2004; 62: 71-8.
20.
Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 1991; 19: 403-10.
21.
Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, et al. Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2015; 26 Suppl 5: v8-30.
22.
de Gooyer JM, Versleijen-Jonkers YMH, Hillebrandt-Roeffen MHS, et al. Immunohistochemical selection of biomarkers for tumor-targeted image-guided surgery of myxofibrosarcoma. Sci Rep 2020; 10: 2915.
23.
Verras GI, Hamady ZZ, Collins A, Tapper W. Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores (PRSs) in predicting pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of common-variant and mixed scores with insights into rare variant analysis. Cancers 2025; 17: 241.
24.
Barreiro RAS, de Almeida TF, Gomes C, et al. Assessing the risk stratification of breast cancer polygenic risk scores in a Brazilian cohort. J Mol Diagn 2024; 26: 825-31.
| eISSN: | 2451-0629 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
