Purpose: Visfatin is an adipocytokine involved in cellular metabolism, inflammation, and cancer. This study investigated the roles of extracellular visfatin in breast cancer, and explored underlying mechanisms in clinical and experimental settings.

Experimental Design: Associations of serum visfatin with clinicopathologic characteristics and patient survival were assessed with Cox regression models and Kaplan–Meier analyses. Effects of extracellular visfatin on cultured breast cancer cells were examined, followed by in vivo investigation of tumor growth and metastasis in xenograft animal models. Imatinib and Stattic were used to inhibit c-Abl and STAT3 activation, respectively.

Results: Breast cancer patients with high serum visfatin levels were associated with advanced tumor stage, increased tumor size and lymph node metastasis, and poor survival. Elevated phosphorylation of c-Abl and STAT3 in breast tumor tissues were correlated with high serum visfatin levels in patients. Visfatin-promoted in vitro cell viability and metastatic capability were suppressed by imatinib (c-Abl inhibitor) and Stattic (STAT3 inhibitor). Increased in vivo cell invasiveness was observed in zebrafish xenografted with visfatin-pretreated breast cancer cells. Tumor growth and lung metastasis occurred in visfatin-administered mice xenografted with breast cancer cells. Tail vein–injected mice with visfatin-pretreated breast cancer cells showed increased lung metastasis, which was suppressed by imatinib.

Conclusions: Serum visfatin levels in breast cancer patients reveal potential prognostic values, and our findings that visfatin promoted breast cancer through activation of c-Abl and STAT3 may provide an important molecular basis for future design of targeted therapies that take into account different serum visfatin levels in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 22(17); 4478–90. ©2016 AACR.

Translational Relevance

Visfatin is known to have a number of important biologic activities, including nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) biosynthesis, cellular metabolism, inflammatory response, and cancer progression. Although previous studies have suggested a role for serum visfatin as a biomarker in breast cancer, the molecular mechanisms linking biologic functions of extracellular visfatin to its clinical significance remain unidentified. In this study, we report that activation of c-Abl and STAT3 is involved in extracellular visfatin–promoted breast cancer via clinical and experimental investigations. Moreover, the results of our in vitro and in vivo studies show that imatinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor currently used for clinical treatment of multiple cancers but not for breast cancer yet, inhibits extracellular visfatin-induced malignant behaviors. This further raises a possibility that future design of clinical trials for evaluation of therapeutic interventions, such as that for imatinib, may benefit from stratification of breast cancer patients according to different serum visfatin levels.

Breast cancer is one of the most common malignancies in women worldwide, with multiple risk factors identified, including differential expression of adipocytokines (1, 2). Visfatin, also known as nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase (NAMPT) or pre–B-cell colony-enhancing factor (PBEF), is a 52 kDa adipocytokine discovered both intracellularly and extracellularly (3). Intracellular visfatin functions as a rate-limiting enzyme in the biosynthesis of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD). When released outside of cells, visfatin exhibits dual roles in enzyme-like activity on extracellular NAD formation as well as cytokine-like activity through a putative receptor–mediated pathway (4). Both intracellular and extracellular visfatin have been shown to be involved in the tumor development (5).

We previously reported that high intracellular expression of visfatin in breast tumor tissues was associated with poor patient survival (6). In recent years, the correlation of serum visfatin level with breast cancer behavior has started to emerge from different cohort studies (7–11). However, the mechanisms linking biologic functions of extracellular visfatin to its clinical significance in breast cancer remain unknown. In this study, we investigated the potential clinical value of circulating visfatin in breast cancer. In addition, we evaluated the functional roles of extracellular visfatin in breast tumor growth and metastatic capability using both in vitro and in vivo models. The molecular mechanisms underlying these observations were also explored.

Patient samples

Two hundred and fifty-eight female patients with pathologically confirmed invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast were included in this study. Sera and breast tumor tissues were collected from surgically treated patients at Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital (KMUH), Taiwan, from 2001 to 2011. After surgery, the patients were administered adjuvant radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or hormone therapy based on the clinical practice guidelines of breast cancer (12). Hormone therapy was administered to patients whose tumor sections were estrogen receptor (ER) positive. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of KMUH, and informed consent was obtained from each patient. Histologic type and grading of the primary tumor were assessed according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification (13) and the modified Bloom–Richardson grading scheme (14), respectively, and staging was evaluated according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system (15). The status of ER, progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2 was determined by immunohistochemical analysis.

Enzyme immunoassay

Serum visfatin levels for breast cancer patients (n = 258) and age-matched normal female participants (n = 100) were measured in duplicate by a human visfatin-specific enzyme immunoassay kit (Phoenix Pharmaceuticals) according to the manufacturer's instructions.

Tissue microarray

Tumor tissue samples of the patients were obtained from formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tissue blocks for the construction of tissue microarray by an Alphelys BoostArrayer device (Plaisir) as described previously (6). Five-micrometer sections from the tissue microarray were obtained using a microtome and immunohistochemically stained for determination of protein expression.

Immunohistochemistry

The procedure of immunohistochemical staining was described previously (6). The primary antibodies used for immunohistochemistry in this study included the mouse monoclonal anti-ER, anti-PR, and anti-HER2 antibodies from DAKO (Glostrup), rabbit polyclonal anti–phospho-c-Abl (Y393/412) and anti-vimentin antibodies from GeneTex (Irvine), rabbit monoclonal anti–phospho-STAT3 (Y705) antibody from Cell Signaling Technology, and mouse monoclonal anti-cytokeratin 18 antibody from Leica. Images of immunohistochemically stained sections were captured by a Nikon Eclipse E600 microscope. For the scoring of protein expression in breast tumor tissues, the staining of phospho-c-Abl (Y393/412) and phospho-STAT3 (Y705) was stratified into quartiles (0, undetectable; 1, low; 2, intermediate; 3, high) on the basis of intensity as described previously (16). For the analysis of tissues from mice, the staining of phospho-c-Abl (Y393/412), phospho-STAT3 (Y705), cytokeratin 18, and vimentin was scored by the method of histochemical score (H-score), which was calculated as the product of percentage of stained cells and intensity of staining (17).

Cell culture

Human breast cancer cell lines MDA-MB-231, MCF7, and T-47D were purchased from the Bioresource Collection and Research Center of Taiwan with authentication for genotypes and phenotypes of the cells. All three cell lines were cultured in DMEM (Life Technologies) supplemented with 10% FBS (Biological Industries), 100 U/mL penicillin (Biological Industries), 100 μg/mL streptomycin (Biological Industries), and 2.5 μg/mL amphotericin B (Biological Industries) at 37°C in a humidified 5% CO2 incubator. The MDA-MB-231 cells stably expressing luciferase (MDA-MB-231-Luc) were kindly provided by Prof. Wen-Chun Hung, National Health Research Institutes, Taiwan.

XTT cell viability assay

Viable cells were determined by the tetrazolium-based XTT colorimetric assay (Sigma-Aldrich) according to the manufacturer's instructions. MDA-MB-231, MCF7, and T-47D cells were treated with different concentrations of visfatin (0–100 ng/mL) for 72 hours before the XTT assay. For experiments involving imatinib (c-Abl inhibitor; ref. 18) and Stattic (STAT3 inhibitor; ref. 19), MDA-MB-231 cells were pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) and Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour, followed by visfatin (0–100 ng/mL) treatment for 72 hours.

Immunoblotting

The procedures of protein extraction and immunoblotting were performed as described previously (20). MDA-MB-231 and MCF7 cells were treated with different concentrations of visfatin (0–100 ng/mL) for 2 hours before the immunoblotting analysis. The primary antibodies used for immunoblotting in this study included the rabbit polyclonal anti–phospho-c-Abl (Y393/412), anti–c-Abl, anti-STAT3, anti-JAK2 antibodies and rabbit monoclonal anti–phospho-JAK2 (Y1007/1008) antibody from GeneTex, rabbit monoclonal anti–phospho-STAT3 (Y705) and anti-HER2 antibodies from Cell Signaling Technology, rabbit polyclonal anti–phospho-STAT3 (S727) antibody from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and mouse monoclonal anti–β-actin antibody from Sigma-Aldrich. The chemiluminescent signal was captured by ChemiDoc XRS+ System (Bio-Rad Laboratories) and quantified with Image Laboratory software (Bio-Rad Laboratories).

In vitro cell migration and invasion assays

In vitro cell migration was determined using Transwell inserts with 8-μm pores (Corning). MDA-MB-231 cells were pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) and Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour, followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) pretreatment for 24 hours. The cells were then trypsinized and resuspended in serum-free DMEM, and added to the Transwell inserts (3 × 104 cells/insert) assembled on a 24-well plate, in which the wells contained DMEM with 10% FBS. After 24 hours of incubation, cells remaining on the upper surface of the membrane inside the inserts were removed with cotton swabs, whereas cells that migrated to the underside of the membrane were stained with 0.5 g/L crystal violet (Sigma-Aldrich). The cells on the underside of the membrane were imaged by an Olympus SZX10 microscope, and quantification of the total area that the cells occupied was processed with the NIS-Elements software (Laboratory Imaging).

In vitro cell invasion was determined using Transwell inserts with 8-μm pores coated with Matrigel (Corning), and the procedure was performed as described previously (21), with the same protocol of cell treatment as described above.

Gelatin zymography

The procedure of gelatin zymography for secreted matrix metalloproteinases-2/9 was described previously (21). MDA-MB-231 cells were pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) and Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour, followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) treatment for 48 hours. The supernatants from each experimental condition were collected for gelatin zymographic analysis.

In vivo cell invasiveness in zebrafish

The experiments using zebrafish in this study were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Kaohsiung Medical University. Embryos of zebrafish (strain fli1:EGFP from the Taiwan Zebrafish Core Facility; http://tzcf-hdmrc.org/) were generated by natural pairwise mating (22), and the procedure of xenograft was based on a previous report (23). In brief, MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) for 24 hours were labeled with fluorescent probe DiI (Life Technologies), and implanted into the perivitelline cavity of 2-day-old zebrafish embryos through microinjection. After confirmation of the localized DiI-labeled cell mass at the injection site, the zebrafish were transferred to fresh water and maintained at 32.5°C for 48 hours, and cell invasion was determined by visualizing dissemination of the DiI-labeled cells from the injection site under a Nikon Eclipse Ti-S microscope.

Soft agar colony formation assay

The procedure of anchorage-independent colony formation in soft agar was described previously (21). MDA-MB-231 and MCF7 cells grown in the soft agar were treated with visfatin (0–100 ng/mL; three times a week) for 3 weeks.

In vivo orthotopic tumor growth and distant metastasis in mice

Six-week-old female immunodeficient Foxn1nu/Foxn1nu mice (nude mice) were obtained from the National Laboratory Animal Center of Taiwan (http://www.nlac.org.tw/). All of the mice experiments in this study were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Kaohsiung Medical University. MDA-MB-231 cells (2.5 × 106 cells) resuspended in 100 μL of normal saline were injected into the fourth mammary fat pads of mice. One week after implantation, the mice were randomly divided into two groups (n = 10/group), followed by intraperitoneal administration of visfatin (0.5 mg/kg) or normal saline three times a week. The tumor size was measured weekly and calculated by the formula of (width2 × length)/2. After 8 weeks, all mice were sacrificed and the orthotopic tumors were collected for tumor weight measurement and immunohistochemical analysis. The lung tissues were examined for distant metastasis, which was determined by immunohistochemical analysis for the expression of cytokeratin 18 and vimentin, two tumor markers expressed in MDA-MB-231 cells (24).

In vivo bioluminescent imaging of metastasis in mice

The luciferase-expressing MDA-MB-231 (MDA-MB-231-Luc) cells were pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) for 1 hour, followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) pretreatment for 24 hours before intravenous injection of the cells (1 × 106 cells in 100 μL of normal saline) into the lateral tail vein of nude mice (n = 3–4/group). The mice injected with the cells pretreated with imatinib alone, or the mice injected with the cells pretreated with imatinib followed by visfatin pretreatment, were intraperitoneally administered imatinib (50 mg/kg daily; ref. 25). On day 7 after tail vein injection of the cells, the mice were analyzed for the presence of bioluminescent signals by Xenogen IVIS Spectrum in vivo imaging system (Caliper Life Sciences). The mice were anesthetized with isofurane (Baxter) using a XGI-8 Gas Anesthesia System (Caliper Life Sciences) followed by intraperitoneal injection of D-luciferin (150 mg/kg; PerkinElmer) for the detection of luciferase expression. The optical images were acquired and analyzed by Xenogen Living Image software (Caliper Life Sciences).

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS 14.0 statistical package (SPSS). The cutoff point for high and low serum visfatin level was determined by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The associations between visfatin levels and clinicopathologic characteristics were analyzed by the χ2 test. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan–Meier estimates and analyzed by the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards regression models for evaluation of the association between survival and clinicopathologic characteristics. The association between visfatin levels and disease recurrence was analyzed by the Fisher's exact test or the χ2 test. The Student t test was used for comparison between two groups. All results were considered statistically significant if P was less than 0.05 calculated with an appropriate two-sided statistical test.

Clinical association of serum visfatin level with breast cancer progression

The levels of serum visfatin in breast cancer patients (n = 258) and normal female participants as controls (n = 100) were assessed by enzyme immunoassay. As shown in Fig. 1A, the serum visfatin levels were significantly increased in breast cancer patients (P < 0.001). In addition, the serum visfatin normalized for individual body mass index (BMI) was significantly higher in breast cancer patients (P < 0.001), despite that the significantly higher BMI was observed in the patients (P < 0.001; Fig. 1A).

Figure 1.

Comparison of serum visfatin levels between breast cancer patients and normal participants, and association of serum visfatin levels with patient survival in breast cancer. A, serum visfatin (left) was measured by enzyme immunoassay. BMI (middle) was measured and used for normalization of serum visfatin (serum visfatin/BMI; right). Averaged serum visfatin in normal female participants and breast cancer patients were 32.20 ± 17.42 and 40.87 ± 13.86 ng/mL, respectively. Averaged BMI in normal female participants and breast cancer patients were 21.97 ± 3.20 and 23.42 ± 3.61 kg/m2, respectively. Averaged serum visfatin/BMI in normal female participants and breast cancer patients were 1.47 ± 0.78 and 1.77 ± 0.65 (ng/mL)/(kg/m2), respectively. The data were presented by box plots, where the lower boundary and top boundary of the box indicated the 25th percentile and 75th percentile, respectively. The line within the box marked the median, and the bars below and above the box indicated the 10th and 90th percentiles. P values were determined by two-sided Student t test. Control indicated normal female participants (n = 100). Breast cancer indicated breast cancer patients (n = 258). B to E, patient survival was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier curves. The HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a Cox regression model. B, disease-free survival was analyzed according to serum visfatin levels in breast cancer patients. C, OS was analyzed according to serum visfatin levels in breast cancer patients. D, disease-free survival was analyzed according to combined serum visfatin levels and ER status in breast cancer patients. E, OS was analyzed according to combined serum visfatin levels and ER status in breast cancer patients. P values were determined by two-sided log-rank test.

Figure 1.

Comparison of serum visfatin levels between breast cancer patients and normal participants, and association of serum visfatin levels with patient survival in breast cancer. A, serum visfatin (left) was measured by enzyme immunoassay. BMI (middle) was measured and used for normalization of serum visfatin (serum visfatin/BMI; right). Averaged serum visfatin in normal female participants and breast cancer patients were 32.20 ± 17.42 and 40.87 ± 13.86 ng/mL, respectively. Averaged BMI in normal female participants and breast cancer patients were 21.97 ± 3.20 and 23.42 ± 3.61 kg/m2, respectively. Averaged serum visfatin/BMI in normal female participants and breast cancer patients were 1.47 ± 0.78 and 1.77 ± 0.65 (ng/mL)/(kg/m2), respectively. The data were presented by box plots, where the lower boundary and top boundary of the box indicated the 25th percentile and 75th percentile, respectively. The line within the box marked the median, and the bars below and above the box indicated the 10th and 90th percentiles. P values were determined by two-sided Student t test. Control indicated normal female participants (n = 100). Breast cancer indicated breast cancer patients (n = 258). B to E, patient survival was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier curves. The HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a Cox regression model. B, disease-free survival was analyzed according to serum visfatin levels in breast cancer patients. C, OS was analyzed according to serum visfatin levels in breast cancer patients. D, disease-free survival was analyzed according to combined serum visfatin levels and ER status in breast cancer patients. E, OS was analyzed according to combined serum visfatin levels and ER status in breast cancer patients. P values were determined by two-sided log-rank test.

Close modal

The association of patient survival with serum visfatin levels and their correlation with ER status were analyzed by Kaplan–Meier survival curves, for a follow-up period up to 120 months (median = 48 months). The patients with high levels of serum visfatin had significantly poorer disease-free survival (P < 0.001; Fig. 1B) and overall survival (OS; P < 0.001; Fig. 1C). We further examined the combined association of serum visfatin levels and ER status with patient survival. The patients with both high serum visfatin and ER-negative (ER) status revealed the worst disease-free survival (P < 0.001; Fig. 1D). Similar results for the combined association of serum visfatin levels and ER status with OS were observed (P = 0.001; Fig. 1E).

We also analyzed the association of serum visfatin levels with clinicopathologic characteristics in breast cancer patients. High serum visfatin levels were significantly associated with certain clinicopathologic variables, including tumor stage (P = 0.001), BMI (P = 0.023), tumor size (P = 0.001), lymph node (LN) metastasis (P = 0.003), and HER2 status (P = 0.013; Table 1). To evaluate the association of clinicopathologic characteristics and serum visfatin levels as independent variables with patient survival, univariate and multivariable Cox regression analyses were employed. In the univariate analysis, tumor size (e.g., P = 0.002 for >5 vs. <2 cm), LN metastasis (P < 0.001), hormone therapy (P = 0.001), and serum visfatin (P = 0.001) were significantly associated with OS (Table 2). In the adjusted multivariable analysis, LN metastasis (P = 0.009), hormone therapy (P = 0.017), and serum visfatin (P = 0.020) were significantly associated with OS (Table 2). Similar results were obtained for disease-free survival on univariate and multivariable analyses (Supplementary Table S1).

Table 1.

Clinicopathologic characteristics of breast cancer patients and the association with serum visfatin

Serum visfatina
LowHigh
VariablePatient, n (%)n (%)n (%)Pd
Total no. 258 (100) 82 (31.8) 176 (68.2) – 
Stageb 
 I 92 (35.7) 34 (41.5) 58 (33.0) <0.001 
 II 118 (45.7) 44 (53.7) 74 (42.0)  
 III and IV 48 (18.6) 4 (4.9) 44 (25.0)  
Gradec 
 1 34 (13.2) 13 (15.9) 21 (11.9) 0.687 
 2 156 (60.5) 48 (58.5) 108 (61.4)  
 3 68 (26.3) 21 (25.6) 47 (26.7)  
Age, y 
 ≤50 138 (53.5) 48 (58.5) 90 (51.1) 0.267 
 >50 120 (46.5) 34 (41.5) 86 (48.9)  
BMI (kg/m2
 <24 153 (59.3) 57 (69.5) 96 (54.5) 0.023 
 ≥24 105 (40.7) 25 (30.5) 80 (45.5)  
Tumor size (cm) 
 <2 103 (39.9) 43 (52.4) 60 (34.1) <0.001 
 2–5 119 (46.1) 36 (43.9) 83 (47.2)  
 >5 36 (14.0) 3 (3.7) 33 (18.8)  
LN metastasis 
 0–1 172 (66.7) 65 (79.3) 107 (60.8) 0.003 
 ≥2 86 (33.3) 17 (20.7) 69 (39.2)  
ER status 
 Negative 89 (34.5) 26 (31.7) 63 (35.8) 0.520 
 Positive 169 (65.5) 56 (68.3) 113 (64.2)  
PR status 
 Negative 118 (45.7) 32 (39.0) 86 (48.9) 0.140 
 Positive 140 (54.3) 50 (61.0) 90 (51.1)  
HER2 status 
 Negative 167 (64.7) 62 (75.6) 105 (59.7) 0.013 
 Positive 91 (35.3) 20 (24.4) 71 (40.3)  
Serum visfatina
LowHigh
VariablePatient, n (%)n (%)n (%)Pd
Total no. 258 (100) 82 (31.8) 176 (68.2) – 
Stageb 
 I 92 (35.7) 34 (41.5) 58 (33.0) <0.001 
 II 118 (45.7) 44 (53.7) 74 (42.0)  
 III and IV 48 (18.6) 4 (4.9) 44 (25.0)  
Gradec 
 1 34 (13.2) 13 (15.9) 21 (11.9) 0.687 
 2 156 (60.5) 48 (58.5) 108 (61.4)  
 3 68 (26.3) 21 (25.6) 47 (26.7)  
Age, y 
 ≤50 138 (53.5) 48 (58.5) 90 (51.1) 0.267 
 >50 120 (46.5) 34 (41.5) 86 (48.9)  
BMI (kg/m2
 <24 153 (59.3) 57 (69.5) 96 (54.5) 0.023 
 ≥24 105 (40.7) 25 (30.5) 80 (45.5)  
Tumor size (cm) 
 <2 103 (39.9) 43 (52.4) 60 (34.1) <0.001 
 2–5 119 (46.1) 36 (43.9) 83 (47.2)  
 >5 36 (14.0) 3 (3.7) 33 (18.8)  
LN metastasis 
 0–1 172 (66.7) 65 (79.3) 107 (60.8) 0.003 
 ≥2 86 (33.3) 17 (20.7) 69 (39.2)  
ER status 
 Negative 89 (34.5) 26 (31.7) 63 (35.8) 0.520 
 Positive 169 (65.5) 56 (68.3) 113 (64.2)  
PR status 
 Negative 118 (45.7) 32 (39.0) 86 (48.9) 0.140 
 Positive 140 (54.3) 50 (61.0) 90 (51.1)  
HER2 status 
 Negative 167 (64.7) 62 (75.6) 105 (59.7) 0.013 
 Positive 91 (35.3) 20 (24.4) 71 (40.3)  

Abbreviations: LN, lymph node; –, not applicable.

aThe cutoff value of low (<33.75 ng/mL) and high (≥33.75 ng/mL) serum visfatin was determined by the ROC curve.

bStaging was based on the AJCC TNM staging system (15).

cGrading was based on the modified Bloom-Richardson grading scheme (14).

dP values were calculated by two-sided χ2 test.

Table 2.

Association between clinicopathologic characteristics of breast cancer patients and OS

UnivariateaMultivariablea
VariableHR (95% CI)PdHR (95% CI)Pe
Gradeb 
 1 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 2 1.56 (0.53–4.55) 0.419   
 3 2.47 (0.81–7.53) 0.112   
Age, y 
 ≤50 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 >50 1.49 (0.81–2.73) 0.197   
BMI (kg/m2
 <24 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 ≥24 1.14 (0.60–2.14) 0.690   
Tumor size (cm) 
 <2 1.00 (referent)  1.00 (referent)  
 2–5 2.47 (1.05–5.81) 0.039 1.68 (0.70–4.05) 0.245 
 >5 4.36 (1.69–11.27) 0.002 2.13 (0.79–5.74) 0.136 
LN metastasis 
 0–1 1.00 (referent)  1.00 (referent)  
 ≥2 3.34 (1.75–6.37) <0.001 2.43 (1.25–4.72) 0.009 
HER2 status 
 Negative 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 Positive 1.14 (0.60–2.17) 0.699   
Radiotherapy 
 No 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 Yes 1.11 (0.60–2.03) 0.744   
Chemotherapy 
 No 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 Yes 0.89 (0.41–1.93) 0.774   
Hormone therapy 
 No 1.00 (referent)  1.00 (referent)  
 Yes 0.36 (0.20–0.66) 0.001 0.46 (0.24–0.87) 0.017 
Serum visfatinc 
 Low 1.00 (referent)  1.00 (referent)  
 High 5.67 (2.01–15.98) 0.001 3.55 (1.22–10.36) 0.020 
UnivariateaMultivariablea
VariableHR (95% CI)PdHR (95% CI)Pe
Gradeb 
 1 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 2 1.56 (0.53–4.55) 0.419   
 3 2.47 (0.81–7.53) 0.112   
Age, y 
 ≤50 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 >50 1.49 (0.81–2.73) 0.197   
BMI (kg/m2
 <24 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 ≥24 1.14 (0.60–2.14) 0.690   
Tumor size (cm) 
 <2 1.00 (referent)  1.00 (referent)  
 2–5 2.47 (1.05–5.81) 0.039 1.68 (0.70–4.05) 0.245 
 >5 4.36 (1.69–11.27) 0.002 2.13 (0.79–5.74) 0.136 
LN metastasis 
 0–1 1.00 (referent)  1.00 (referent)  
 ≥2 3.34 (1.75–6.37) <0.001 2.43 (1.25–4.72) 0.009 
HER2 status 
 Negative 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 Positive 1.14 (0.60–2.17) 0.699   
Radiotherapy 
 No 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 Yes 1.11 (0.60–2.03) 0.744   
Chemotherapy 
 No 1.00 (referent)  – – 
 Yes 0.89 (0.41–1.93) 0.774   
Hormone therapy 
 No 1.00 (referent)  1.00 (referent)  
 Yes 0.36 (0.20–0.66) 0.001 0.46 (0.24–0.87) 0.017 
Serum visfatinc 
 Low 1.00 (referent)  1.00 (referent)  
 High 5.67 (2.01–15.98) 0.001 3.55 (1.22–10.36) 0.020 

Abbreviations: LN, lymph node; –, not applicable.

aUnivariate and multivariable analyses were performed by Cox regression models. Variables with P values larger than 0.10 in the univariate analysis were excluded from multivariable analysis.

bGrading was based on the modified Bloom–Richardson grading scheme (14).

cLow and high serum visfatin were determined as described in Table 1. 

dTwo-sided P values were calculated by a univariate Cox proportional hazards regression model.

eTwo-sided P values were calculated by a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model.

We further studied the association of serum visfatin levels with adjuvant therapies for patient survival by Kaplan–Meier curve analysis, and found that differential association only occurred in the hormone therapy (HT) treatment group (P = 0.027; Supplementary Fig. S1F). Serum visfatin levels had no effect on prognosis of OS in the other treatment groups (Supplementary Fig. S1A–S1E). Similar outcomes of the differential association of serum visfatin levels with HT treatment were observed for disease-free survival (Supplementary Fig. S2) and disease recurrence (Supplementary Table S2).

Effect of visfatin on breast cancer cell viability and signaling

Next, the biologic effects of visfatin on breast cancer cells were explored both in vitro and in vivo. The assessment of cell viability by XTT assay showed a significant increase of viable cells in breast cancer cells treated with recombinant human visfatin (PeproTech), including MDA-MB-231 (e.g., P < 0.001 for visfatin 100 vs. 0 ng/mL), MCF7 (e.g., P = 0.001 for visfatin 100 vs. 0 ng/mL), T-47D (e.g., P < 0.001 for visfatin 100 vs. 0 ng/mL; Fig. 2A), and SKBR-3 cells (e.g., P = 0.002 for visfatin 100 vs. 0 ng/mL; Supplementary Fig. S3A).

Figure 2.

Effect of visfatin on breast cancer cell viability and signaling involving c-Abl and STAT3. A, cell viability of MDA-MB-231, MCF7, and T-47D cells treated with visfatin (0–100 ng/mL) for 72 hours was measured by XTT colorimetric assay; n = 3. B, protein expression of c-Abl and STAT3 signaling in MDA-MB-231 and MCF7 cells treated with visfatin (0–100 ng/mL) for 2 hours was analyzed by immunoblotting. The data were representative of three independent experiments. C and D, protein expression of phospho-c-Abl (C) and phospho-STAT3 (D) in breast cancer tissues was scored according to intensity of immunohistochemical staining (0, 1, 2, and 3). Low protein expression (scores 0 and 1; n = 26 for phospho-c-Abl and n = 47 for phospho-STAT3) or high protein expression (scores 2 and 3; n = 74 for phospho-c-Abl and n = 50 for phospho-STAT3) of phospho-c-Abl (C) and phospho-STAT3 (D) was analyzed for association of serum visfatin levels from the corresponding breast cancer patients; scale bar, 100 μm. E, cell viability of MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) and Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0–100 ng/mL) treatment for 72 hours was measured by XTT colorimetric assay; n = 3. The data were presented as mean ± SD; *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; two-sided Student t test.

Figure 2.

Effect of visfatin on breast cancer cell viability and signaling involving c-Abl and STAT3. A, cell viability of MDA-MB-231, MCF7, and T-47D cells treated with visfatin (0–100 ng/mL) for 72 hours was measured by XTT colorimetric assay; n = 3. B, protein expression of c-Abl and STAT3 signaling in MDA-MB-231 and MCF7 cells treated with visfatin (0–100 ng/mL) for 2 hours was analyzed by immunoblotting. The data were representative of three independent experiments. C and D, protein expression of phospho-c-Abl (C) and phospho-STAT3 (D) in breast cancer tissues was scored according to intensity of immunohistochemical staining (0, 1, 2, and 3). Low protein expression (scores 0 and 1; n = 26 for phospho-c-Abl and n = 47 for phospho-STAT3) or high protein expression (scores 2 and 3; n = 74 for phospho-c-Abl and n = 50 for phospho-STAT3) of phospho-c-Abl (C) and phospho-STAT3 (D) was analyzed for association of serum visfatin levels from the corresponding breast cancer patients; scale bar, 100 μm. E, cell viability of MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) and Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0–100 ng/mL) treatment for 72 hours was measured by XTT colorimetric assay; n = 3. The data were presented as mean ± SD; *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; two-sided Student t test.

Close modal

Activation of the cellular Abelson tyrosine kinase (c-Abl, also known as ABL1) and signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) may act coordinately on tumor growth and metastasis (26, 27). However, the roles of c-Abl and STAT3 in extracellular visfatin-mediated breast cancer have not been reported before. We found that treatment of MDA-MB-231 cells with visfatin resulted in increased levels of phosphorylated c-Abl at tyrosine-393/412 (Y393/412) residues (Fig. 2B). In addition, the levels of phosphorylated STAT3 at tyrosine-705 (Y705) residue and phosphorylated Janus kinase 2 (JAK2), a STAT3 activator (28), at tyrosine-1007/1008 (Y1007/1008) residues were increased in the cells treated with visfatin (Fig. 2B). Similar results were observed in MCF7 (Fig. 2B) and SKBR-3 cells (Supplementary Fig. S3B).

We further investigated the association of phosphorylation levels of c-Abl and STAT3 in breast tumor tissues with serum visfatin levels from patients. The protein expression in tumor tissues was examined by immunohistochemistry and scored into quartiles (0, 1, 2, and 3) as described previously (16). The high expression group (scores 2 and 3; n = 74) compared with the low expression group (scores 0 and 1; n = 26) of phosphorylated c-Abl at Y393/412 in the tumor tissues was significantly associated with increased serum visfatin levels determined from the corresponding patients (P = 0.002; Fig. 2C). Furthermore, the high expression group (scores 2 and 3; n = 50) compared with the low expression group (scores 0 and 1; n = 47) of phosphorylated STAT3 at Y705 in the tumor tissues was significantly associated with increased serum visfatin levels from the corresponding patients (P < 0.001; Fig. 2D).

Although phosphorylation of STAT3 may occur via activation of c-Abl in cells exposed to various cytokines and growth factors (26, 27), it remains unclear whether visfatin-mediated STAT3 activation relies on c-Abl activity. We observed that the visfatin-induced phosphorylation of STAT3 at Y705 was decreased in the presence of imatinib, an inhibitor of c-Abl kinase activity and clinical treatment of multiple cancers (Supplementary Fig. S3C; refs. 18, 29). Knockdown of the c-Abl protein expression in breast cancer cells also resulted in reduced levels of phosphorylated STAT3 at Y705 following visfatin treatment (Supplementary Fig. S3D). To further investigate the roles of c-Abl and STAT3 activation in visfatin-mediated cell viability, MDA-MB-231 cells were treated with visfatin in combination with imatinib and Stattic, an inhibitor of STAT3 (19). The results of XTT assay indicated that the visfatin-increased cell viability was significantly suppressed in cells pretreated with imatinib or Stattic, or a combination of both (Fig. 2E).

Effect of visfatin on breast cancer cell migration and invasion

In the in vitro Transwell migration assay, MDA-MB-231 cells showed a significant enhancement of migration after 24 hours of visfatin pretreatment (P < 0.001), and the visfatin-induced cell migration was significantly attenuated in the presence of imatinib (P = 0.002), Stattic (P = 0.005), or combined imatinib and Stattic (P = 0.006; Fig. 3A). The results of Matrigel-coated Transwell invasion assay indicated that MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with visfatin for 24 hours had a significantly increased capability of invasion compared with the control cells (P < 0.001), which was reduced in the presence of imatinib (P = 0.025), Stattic (P = 0.016), or combined imatinib and Stattic (P = 0.004; Fig. 3B).

Figure 3.

Effect of visfatin on breast cancer cell migration and invasion. A, migratory ability of MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) and Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) pretreatment for 24 hours was assessed by Transwell migration assay; n = 3. B, invasive ability of MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) and Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) pretreatment for 24 hours was assessed by Transwell invasion assay; n = 3; Scale bar, 20 μm. C, secretion of MMP-2 and MMP-9 in MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) treatment for 48 hours was assessed by gelatin zymographic analysis; n = 3. D, secretion of MMP-2 and MMP-9 in MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) treatment for 48 hours was assessed by gelatin zymographic analysis; n = 3. The data were presented as mean ± SD; *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; two-sided Student t test. E,in vivo invasive ability of MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) for 24 hours was assessed in xenograft zebrafish model. After 48 hours of microinjection with DiI-labeled MDA-MB-231 cells into the perivitelline cavity of zebrafish, distribution of the MDA-MB-231 cells in whole zebrafish was inspected under fluorescent microscope. Micrographs were representatives for zebrafish with no invasive (top) or with invasive (bottom) MDA-MB-231 cells, and arrowheads in the lower micrograph indicated invasive MDA-MB-231 cells observed at the location other than the original microinjection site in the perivitelline cavity. The inset was enlarged from a local view. A P value was determined by two-sided χ2 test. n = 213 for the group with 0 ng/mL of visfatin and n = 207 for the group with 100 ng/mL of visfatin. Red, DiI-labeled MDA-MB-231 cells. Green, enhanced GFP (EGFP)-expressed vessels of zebrafish; scale bar, 200 μm.

Figure 3.

Effect of visfatin on breast cancer cell migration and invasion. A, migratory ability of MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) and Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) pretreatment for 24 hours was assessed by Transwell migration assay; n = 3. B, invasive ability of MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) and Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) pretreatment for 24 hours was assessed by Transwell invasion assay; n = 3; Scale bar, 20 μm. C, secretion of MMP-2 and MMP-9 in MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) treatment for 48 hours was assessed by gelatin zymographic analysis; n = 3. D, secretion of MMP-2 and MMP-9 in MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with Stattic (0 or 1 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) treatment for 48 hours was assessed by gelatin zymographic analysis; n = 3. The data were presented as mean ± SD; *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; two-sided Student t test. E,in vivo invasive ability of MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) for 24 hours was assessed in xenograft zebrafish model. After 48 hours of microinjection with DiI-labeled MDA-MB-231 cells into the perivitelline cavity of zebrafish, distribution of the MDA-MB-231 cells in whole zebrafish was inspected under fluorescent microscope. Micrographs were representatives for zebrafish with no invasive (top) or with invasive (bottom) MDA-MB-231 cells, and arrowheads in the lower micrograph indicated invasive MDA-MB-231 cells observed at the location other than the original microinjection site in the perivitelline cavity. The inset was enlarged from a local view. A P value was determined by two-sided χ2 test. n = 213 for the group with 0 ng/mL of visfatin and n = 207 for the group with 100 ng/mL of visfatin. Red, DiI-labeled MDA-MB-231 cells. Green, enhanced GFP (EGFP)-expressed vessels of zebrafish; scale bar, 200 μm.

Close modal

An important event in tumor metastasis is the degradation of extracellular matrix (ECM) and basement membranes through secreted matrix metalloproteinases (MMP), in particular MMP-2 and MMP-9 (30). We examined the levels of secreted MMP-2 and MMP-9 by gelatin zymography and found that after 48 hours of visfatin treatment, the two MMPs in the supernatant of MDA-MB-231 cells were significantly increased compared with control cells (P < 0.001 for MMP-2; P = 0.001 for MMP-9), and the visfatin-induced MMPs secretions were significantly decreased in the presence of imatinib (P = 0.018 for MMP-2; P = 0.024 for MMP-9; Fig. 3C). In addition, the visfatin-induced MMPs secretions in the supernatant of MDA-MB-231 cells were significantly reduced in the presence of Stattic (P = 0.002 for visfatin vs. Stattic + visfatin in MMP-2; P = 0.003 for visfatin vs. Stattic + visfatin in MMP-9; Fig. 3D).

We further evaluated whether the in vivo invasiveness of breast cancer cells could be altered by visfatin in a xenograft zebrafish model (23). As shown in Fig. 3E, MDA-MB-231 cells pretreated with visfatin for 24 hours before microinjection of the cells into the perivitelline cavity of zebrafish showed a significantly increased degree of cell invasion compared with the control cells without visfatin pretreatment (P = 0.035).

Effect of visfatin on anchorage-independent growth in vitro

The effect of visfatin on in vitro anchorage-independent growth was examined by soft agar colony formation assay. MDA-MB-231 cells treated with visfatin showed significantly increased colony formation compared with the control cells without visfatin treatment (e.g., P = 0.005 for visfatin 100 vs. 0 ng/mL; Fig. 4A). Although less capable of forming anchorage-independent growth than MDA-MB-231 cells (31), MCF7 cells treated with visfatin also showed significantly increased colony formation compared with the control cells without visfatin treatment (P = 0.002 for visfatin 100 vs. 0 ng/mL; Fig. 4A).

Figure 4.

Effect of visfatin on breast tumor growth and metastasis. A,in vitro anchorage-independent growth of MDA-MB-231 and MCF7 cells treated with visfatin (0, 50, and 100 ng/mL) was determined by soft agar colony formation assay after 3 weeks in culture; n = 3; scale bar, 200 μm. B,in vivo breast tumor growth was assessed by the orthotopic xenograft model in nude mice injected with MDA-MB-231 cells to the 4th mammary fat pads. The mice were intraperitoneally administered visfatin (0.5 mg/kg) or normal saline as control three times a week (n = 10/group). Tumor volumes were measured weekly and calculated with the formula of (width2 × length)/2 for 8 weeks. C, after 8 weeks as described in B, all mice were sacrificed and the orthotopic tumors were collected for tumor weight measurement. The inset showed five representative orthotopic tumors for each group dissected from the mice; scale bar, 10 mm. D to G, after sacrifice of the mice, the orthotopic tumors were collected for protein expression of phospho-c-Abl (D) and phospho-STAT3 (E), and the lung tissues were collected for metastatic assessment for protein expression of cytokeratin 18 (CK18; F) and vimentin (G) by immunohistochemical analysis with H-score; scale bar, 100 μm. H,in vivo metastasis of luciferase-expressing MDA-MB-231 (MDA-MB-231-Luc) cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) combined visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) pretreatment for 24 hours was intravenously injected into nude mice via the lateral tail vein (n = 3–4 per group). The mice containing MDA-MB-231-Luc cells pretreated with imatinib alone, or with imatinib followed by visfatin pretreatment, were intraperitoneally injected with imatinib (50 mg/kg daily). After 7 days of tail vein injection, the mice were anesthetized and intraperitoneally injected with D-luciferin (150 mg/kg) for detection of bioluminescence by IVIS Spectrum in vivo imaging system. The data were presented as mean ± SD; *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; two-sided Student t test.

Figure 4.

Effect of visfatin on breast tumor growth and metastasis. A,in vitro anchorage-independent growth of MDA-MB-231 and MCF7 cells treated with visfatin (0, 50, and 100 ng/mL) was determined by soft agar colony formation assay after 3 weeks in culture; n = 3; scale bar, 200 μm. B,in vivo breast tumor growth was assessed by the orthotopic xenograft model in nude mice injected with MDA-MB-231 cells to the 4th mammary fat pads. The mice were intraperitoneally administered visfatin (0.5 mg/kg) or normal saline as control three times a week (n = 10/group). Tumor volumes were measured weekly and calculated with the formula of (width2 × length)/2 for 8 weeks. C, after 8 weeks as described in B, all mice were sacrificed and the orthotopic tumors were collected for tumor weight measurement. The inset showed five representative orthotopic tumors for each group dissected from the mice; scale bar, 10 mm. D to G, after sacrifice of the mice, the orthotopic tumors were collected for protein expression of phospho-c-Abl (D) and phospho-STAT3 (E), and the lung tissues were collected for metastatic assessment for protein expression of cytokeratin 18 (CK18; F) and vimentin (G) by immunohistochemical analysis with H-score; scale bar, 100 μm. H,in vivo metastasis of luciferase-expressing MDA-MB-231 (MDA-MB-231-Luc) cells pretreated with imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) for 1 hour followed by imatinib (0 or 10 μmol/L) combined visfatin (0 or 100 ng/mL) pretreatment for 24 hours was intravenously injected into nude mice via the lateral tail vein (n = 3–4 per group). The mice containing MDA-MB-231-Luc cells pretreated with imatinib alone, or with imatinib followed by visfatin pretreatment, were intraperitoneally injected with imatinib (50 mg/kg daily). After 7 days of tail vein injection, the mice were anesthetized and intraperitoneally injected with D-luciferin (150 mg/kg) for detection of bioluminescence by IVIS Spectrum in vivo imaging system. The data were presented as mean ± SD; *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; two-sided Student t test.

Close modal

Anoikis, a specific form of cell death induced by cell detachment from ECM, is one of the mechanisms for avoiding metastatic colonization via prevention of anchorage-independent growth of cancer cells (32). We found that MDA-MB-231 cells treated with visfatin revealed a significant reduction of anoikis cell death (P = 0.006; Supplementary Fig. S4A).

Effect of visfatin on tumor growth and metastasis in mice

To further confirm the association of visfatin with tumor formation and metastasis in vivo, we used an orthotopic xenograft model in nude mice, in which MDA-MB-231 cells were injected into the mammary fat pads of female mice, followed by intraperitoneal administration of visfatin (0.5 mg/kg) or normal saline as vehicle control three times a week. As shown in Fig. 4B, the mice administered with visfatin showed a significant increase in orthotopic tumor growth compared with the control mice (P = 0.042 for tumor volume at week 8). All mice were sacrificed after 8 weeks of treatment, and the weight of orthotopic tumors from the mice administered with visfatin was found to be significantly higher than those from the control mice (P = 0.003; Fig. 4C).

The phosphorylated levels of c-Abl and STAT3 in the orthotopic tumors were examined after the mice were sacrificed. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed that the expression of phosphorylated c-Abl at Y393/412 in the orthotopic tumors from visfatin-treated mice was significantly higher than that from the control mice (P = 0.002; Fig. 4D). There was also a significant increase of phosphorylated STAT3 at Y705 in the orthotopic tumors from the visfatin-treated mice compared with the control mice (P = 0.011; Fig. 4E). We further investigated for the occurrence of distant lung metastasis by immunohistochemical analysis. Two tumor marker proteins expressed in MDA-MB-231 cells, cytokeratin 18 (CK18) and vimentin (24), were significantly increased in the lung tissues of mice treated with visfatin compared with those from the control mice (P < 0.001 for CK18; P = 0.009 for vimentin; Fig. 4F and G, respectively). The body weight of the mice during the course of treatment was not significantly different in each group (Supplementary Fig. S5A), neither were the levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and creatinine for liver and renal functions of the mice (Supplementary Fig. S5B).

The role of c-Abl activation in visfatin-mediated metastasis was further studied by in vivo bioluminescent imaging using the intravenous tail vein injection model in nude mice. The cell viability of luciferase-expressing MDA-MB-231 (MDA-MB-231-Luc) cells was not significantly different in each group before the tail vein injection (Supplementary Fig. S4B). After 7 days post-injection, the mice injected with the visfatin-pretreated MDA-MB-231-Luc cells revealed a significantly higher bioluminescent signal in lung tissues than the mice injected with control MDA-MB-231-Luc cells (P = 0.048), whereas the mice injected with the cells pretreated with imatinib followed by visfatin pretreatment had a significantly reduced bioluminescent signal in lung tissues (P = 0.046; Fig. 4H).

Serum visfatin as a biomarker for clinical evaluation in breast cancer

Serum visfatin has previously been shown to be associated with breast cancer progression (7–11). Yet, its prognostic value remains insufficiently assessed, except for Li and colleagues (10) who reported that high serum visfatin level was associated with poorer survival of breast cancer patients. Although a similarly unfavorable outcome for the survival of the patients with high level of serum visfatin was observed in the present study, our data further analyzed important clinical factors that have not been previously elucidated. For instance, we reported that the patients with both high serum visfatin level and ER-negative status had the worst survival compared with the other groups of patients. Moreover, the ER-negative patients with high serum visfatin level without receiving hormone therapy (HT) had a poorer survival and more recurrent incidence than the ER-positive patients with high serum visfatin level receiving hormone therapy (HT+), whereas there was no significant difference between HT and HT+ treatment groups of the patients with low serum visfatin. Together, the data suggest that different serum visfatin levels may have clinical relevance as a prognostic tool in breast cancer. Although the mechanisms underlying the relationship between serum visfatin levels and the patient response to hormone therapy are not clear at now, we propose that it may be linked through an indirect regulation in adipocytes, whose ER activation can lead to upregulation of visfatin expression (33, 34). As adipocytes have been known the major source to release visfatin (35, 36), the patients with anti-ER treatment may cause the reduction of visfatin release from adipocytes into circulation, which in turn alleviates accumulation of serum visfatin that may promote breast cancer progression. However, more experiments will be required to examine this hypothesis.

In this study, the level of serum visfatin in breast cancer patients (40.87 ± 13.86 ng/mL) was observed to be higher than normal female participants (32.20 ± 17.42 ng/mL). Analysis of clinicopathologic parameters in our study revealed that high level of serum visfatin (cutoff at 33.75 ng/mL) was associated with tumor stage, BMI, tumor size, LN metastasis, and HER2 status (Table 1). Among these clinicopathologic parameters, tumor stage, and LN metastasis were commonly found to be associated with higher serum visfatin level in this study and others (7, 9, 11), suggesting a potentially unfavorable role of serum visfatin in breast cancer. It was noted that in our clinicopathologic analyses, status of HER2 protein expression in breast tumor tissues was positively correlated with serum visfatin level in patients. We further analyzed the clinical data with classification of molecular subtypes in breast cancer (i.e., luminal A, luminal B, HER2, and triple-negative; ref. 37), and the results consistently suggested that HER2 expression might be associated with high serum visfatin (P = 0.018 for luminal A vs. luminal B; Supplementary Fig. S6A). We also examined the effect of visfatin on HER2 expression in cultured breast cancer cells, and found that visfatin treatment resulted in an increased level of HER2 protein expression by immunoblotting (Supplementary Fig. S6B). Database searching through the use of Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA; QIAGEN) revealed that JAK2, STAT3, NF-κB, IL6, and TGFβ formed a potential regulatory network between visfatin and HER2 in several cell types (Supplementary Fig. S6C). As none of these molecules were identified in breast cancer cells, it will be worthwhile to evaluate the cellular signaling, including that if any of these molecules may have a role, in visfatin-mediated HER2 expression in breast cancer cells.

Characterization of the biologic effect of visfatin on breast cancer cells

Our in vitro data showed that extracellular visfatin promoted breast cancer cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and MMP2/9 secretion. In addition, our in vivo data using zebrafish and nude mice as xenograft models further confirmed the promoting effect of extracellular visfatin on breast tumor growth and metastasis. Notably, we provided the first evidence for the involvement of c-Abl and STAT3, two important oncoproteins (38–40), in extracellular visfatin-promoted breast cancer. Although the intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) was reportedly to be upregulated by visfatin stimulation in some cell types (41–43), it was not detectable in our current treatment with visfatin in breast cancer cells (Supplementary Fig. S3E and S3F). Other mechanisms reported in extracellular visfatin–mediated breast cancer growth and metastatic potential included cyclin D1 and cdk2 (44), NF-κB and Notch1 (45), or PI3K/Akt and TGFβ (46). As the identity of “visfatin receptor” is not known to date, it limits our understanding for the molecular mechanisms of extracellular visfatin. Nevertheless, our current results raised a possibility that the putative receptor for visfatin could belong to the receptor family that transduces signals via c-Abl and STAT3, such as EGF, platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), insulin receptor, or insulin-like growth factor (IGF) receptors (Supplementary Fig. S6D; refs. 26, 38, 39, 47). Whether there is a direct interaction between c-Abl and the putative receptor activated by visfatin, or a direct interaction between c-Abl and STAT3 after visfatin stimulation, remains to be determined.

Stratifying patients according to serum visfatin levels for potential targeted adjuvant therapy

Previous clinical trials have shown no clinical benefit from imatinib in breast cancer patients (48, 49). However, this may be due to a selection issue, as patients have been comprehensively included without stratifying those that may benefit most from imatinib treatment. Until now, there has been no clinical marker that may allow such stratification. Our animal studies showed that the lung metastasis of breast cancer cells pretreated with visfatin via tail vein xenograft in nude mice was largely suppressed by imatinib. Equally as important, there was no significant effect on metastasis with imatinib treatment in the group without exposure to visfatin, further providing a strong argument for stratification of treatment with imatinib according to extracellular levels of visfatin. The potential clinical importance of a targeted anti-metastatic agent in breast cancer patients, using an already widely available but unused drug in breast cancer, cannot be underestimated. We would suggest that future clinical trials on the efficacy of imatinib may stratify patients according to visfatin levels and select those with pre-metastatic, high serum visfatin breast cancer. In addition, this may advantageously offer alternative therapeutic options in the triple-negative breast cancer patients.

Study limitations

There are a few limitations to this study, including the lack of a standard definition of high or low serum visfatin level and size and geographic localization of study population. Therefore, care must be taken in interpreting clinical analyses from this study and others. In addition, although we showed the effects of extracellular visfatin on breast cancer cells in both in vitro and in vivo experiments that mainly used MDA-MB-231 cells for metastasis and animal studies, it may not fully represent heterogeneous human breast cancer behaviors in clinical settings. It should also be noted that imatinib is known to be a tyrosine kinase inhibitor for c-Abl, c-Kit, PDGFR, and DDR (50).

In conclusion, our clinical data suggested that high level of serum visfatin was associated with malignant breast cancer behavior, and the level of serum visfatin could offer a means for prognosis in breast cancer. Moreover, the results of our in vitro and in vivo experiments revealed that extracellular visfatin promoted breast cancer cell growth and metastatic ability via activation of c-Abl and STAT3. There are several key implications resulting from this study. First, stratification of breast cancer patients by serum visfatin levels may help identify patients that would benefit from inhibition of downstream effectors of visfatin signaling. Second, categorization of the patients according to the ER status may provide information for risk assessment of the survival of patients with different levels of serum visfatin. Third, our study is the first to suggest that the use of imatinib may have therapeutic potential in the treatment of breast cancer for the group of patients with higher levels of serum visfatin.

Further studies, including discovery of the receptor for visfatin, development of specific inhibitors for extracellular visfatin, and clinical trials stratifying patients for treatment according to different serum visfatin levels, will be potentially important to the future design of targeted therapies in consideration of different serum visfatin levels in breast cancer.

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Conception and design: A.C. Hung, C.-H. Tsai, Y.-M. Wang, S.-S.F. Yuan

Development of methodology: A.C. Hung, S. Lo, C.-H. Tsai, W. Liu, Y.-H. Lo, S.-S.F. Yuan

Acquisition of data (provided animals, acquired and managed patients, provided facilities, etc.): A.C. Hung, M.-F. Hou, Y.-C. Lee, C.-H. Tsai, Y.-Y. Chen, W. Liu, Y.-H. Su

Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics, computational analysis): A.C. Hung, S. Lo, Y.-C. Lee, C.-H. Tsai, Y.-H. Lo, S.-C. Wu, S.C.-S. Hu, S.-S.F. Yuan

Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript: A.C. Hung, S. Lo, Y.-C. Hsieh, S.C.-S. Hu, M.-H. Tai, Y.-M. Wang, S.-S.F. Yuan

Administrative, technical, or material support (i.e., reporting or organizing data, constructing databases): A.C. Hung, C.-H. Tsai, W. Liu, Y.-H. Lo, C.-H. Wang, S.-S.F. Yuan

Study supervision: M.-F. Hou, Y.-M. Wang

This work was supported by grants from Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital (KMUH102-2T07 and KMUHI102-2R25), Kaohsiung Medical University (aim for the top journals grant, KMU-DT103010 and KMU-TP103D18), National Health Research Institutes (NHRI-EX100-9829BI and NHRI-EX104-10212BI), and Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW103-TD-B-111-05) of Taiwan.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1.
Vona-Davis
L
,
Rose
DP
. 
Adipokines as endocrine, paracrine, and autocrine factors in breast cancer risk and progression
.
Endocr Relat Cancer
2007
;
14
:
189
206
.
2.
Vansaun
MN
. 
Molecular pathways: adiponectin and leptin signaling in cancer
.
Clin Cancer Res
2013
;
19
:
1926
32
.
3.
Samal
B
,
Sun
Y
,
Stearns
G
,
Xie
C
,
Suggs
S
,
McNiece
I
. 
Cloning and characterization of the cDNA encoding a novel human pre–B-cell colony-enhancing factor
.
Mol Cell Biol
1994
;
14
:
1431
7
.
4.
Dahl
TB
,
Holm
S
,
Aukrust
P
,
Halvorsen
B
. 
Visfatin/NAMPT: a multifaceted molecule with diverse roles in physiology and pathophysiology
.
Annu Rev Nutr
2012
;
32
:
229
43
.
5.
Shackelford
RE
,
Mayhall
K
,
Maxwell
NM
,
Kandil
E
,
Coppola
D
. 
Nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase in malignancy: a review
.
Genes Cancer
2013
;
4
:
447
56
.
6.
Lee
YC
,
Yang
YH
,
Su
JH
,
Chang
HL
,
Hou
MF
,
Yuan
SS
. 
High visfatin expression in breast cancer tissue is associated with poor survival
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2011
;
20
:
1892
901
.
7.
Dalamaga
M
,
Archondakis
S
,
Sotiropoulos
G
,
Karmaniolas
K
,
Pelekanos
N
,
Papadavid
E
, et al
Could serum visfatin be a potential biomarker for postmenopausal breast cancer?
Maturitas
2012
;
71
:
301
8
.
8.
Dalamaga
M
,
Karmaniolas
K
,
Papadavid
E
,
Pelekanos
N
,
Sotiropoulos
G
,
Lekka
A
. 
Elevated serum visfatin/nicotinamide phosphoribosyl-transferase levels are associated with risk of postmenopausal breast cancer independently from adiponectin, leptin, and anthropometric and metabolic parameters
.
Menopause
2011
;
18
:
1198
204
.
9.
Assiri
AM
,
Kamel
HF
,
Hassanien
MF
. 
Resistin, visfatin, adiponectin, and leptin: risk of breast cancer in pre- and postmenopausal saudi females and their possible diagnostic and predictive implications as novel biomarkers
.
Dis Markers
2015
;
2015
:
253519
.
10.
Li
XY
,
Tang
SH
,
Zhou
XC
,
Ye
YH
,
Xu
XQ
,
Li
RZ
. 
Preoperative serum visfatin levels and prognosis of breast cancer among Chinese women
.
Peptides
2014
;
51
:
86
90
.
11.
Assiri
AM
,
Kamel
HF
. 
Evaluation of diagnostic and predictive value of serum adipokines: leptin, resistin and visfatin in postmenopausal breast cancer
.
Obes Res Clin Pract
2015
;
S1871–403X:00131–3
.
12.
Carlson
RW
,
Anderson
BO
,
Bensinger
W
,
Cox
CE
,
Davidson
NE
,
Edge
SB
, et al
NCCN practice guidelines for breast cancer
.
Oncology
2000
;
14
:
33
49
.
13.
The World Health Organization
. 
Histological typing of breast tumors
.
Neoplasma
1983
;
30
:
113
23
.
14.
Frierson
HF
 Jr
,
Wolber
RA
,
Berean
KW
,
Franquemont
DW
,
Gaffey
MJ
,
Boyd
JC
, et al
Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histologic grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma
.
Am J Clin Pathol
1995
;
103
:
195
8
.
15.
Singletary
SE
,
Allred
C
,
Ashley
P
,
Bassett
LW
,
Berry
D
,
Bland
KI
, et al
Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for breast cancer
.
J Clin Oncol
2002
;
20
:
3628
36
.
16.
Sato
T
,
Neilson
LM
,
Peck
AR
,
Liu
C
,
Tran
TH
,
Witkiewicz
A
, et al
Signal transducer and activator of transcription-3 and breast cancer prognosis
.
Am J Cancer Res
2011
;
1
:
347
55
.
17.
Stoyianni
A
,
Goussia
A
,
Pentheroudakis
G
,
Siozopoulou
V
,
Ioachim
E
,
Krikelis
D
, et al
Immunohistochemical study of the epithelial–mesenchymal transition phenotype in cancer of unknown primary: incidence, correlations and prognostic utility
.
Anticancer Res
2012
;
32
:
1273
81
.
18.
Baker
SJ
,
Reddy
EP
. 
Targeted inhibition of kinases in cancer therapy
.
Mt Sinai J Med
2010
;
77
:
573
86
.
19.
Schust
J
,
Sperl
B
,
Hollis
A
,
Mayer
TU
,
Berg
T
. 
Stattic: a small-molecule inhibitor of STAT3 activation and dimerization
.
Chem Biol
2006
;
13
:
1235
42
.
20.
Chen
YJ
,
Hung
CM
,
Kay
N
,
Chen
CC
,
Kao
YH
,
Yuan
SS
. 
Progesterone receptor is involved in 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin-stimulated breast cancer cells proliferation
.
Cancer Lett
2012
;
319
:
223
31
.
21.
Yuan
SS
,
Hou
MF
,
Hsieh
YC
,
Huang
CY
,
Lee
YC
,
Chen
YJ
, et al
Role of MRE11 in cell proliferation, tumor invasion, and DNA repair in breast cancer
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2012
;
104
:
1485
502
.
22.
Westerfield
M
. 
The zebrafish book: a guide for the laboratory use of zebrafish (Brachydanio rerio)
.
University of Oregon Press
,
Eugene
;
1993
, 2nd edition. p.
300
.
23.
Lee
SL
,
Rouhi
P
,
Dahl Jensen
L
,
Zhang
D
,
Ji
H
,
Hauptmann
G
, et al
Hypoxia-induced pathological angiogenesis mediates tumor cell dissemination, invasion, and metastasis in a zebrafish tumor model
.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
2009
;
106
:
19485
90
.
24.
Tiang
JM
,
Butcher
NJ
,
Minchin
RF
. 
Effects of human arylamine N-acetyltransferase I knockdown in triple-negative breast cancer cell lines
.
Cancer Med
2015
;
4
:
565
74
.
25.
Schito
L
,
Rey
S
,
Tafani
M
,
Zhang
H
,
Wong
CC
,
Russo
A
, et al
Hypoxia-inducible factor 1-dependent expression of platelet-derived growth factor B promotes lymphatic metastasis of hypoxic breast cancer cells
.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
2012
;
109
:
E2707
16
.
26.
Greuber
EK
,
Smith-Pearson
P
,
Wang
J
,
Pendergast
AM
. 
Role of ABL family kinases in cancer: from leukaemia to solid tumours
.
Nat Rev Cancer
2013
;
13
:
559
71
.
27.
Buettner
R
,
Mora
LB
,
Jove
R
. 
Activated STAT signaling in human tumors provides novel molecular targets for therapeutic intervention
.
Clin Cancer Res
2002
;
8
:
945
54
.
28.
Quintas-Cardama
A
,
Verstovsek
S
. 
Molecular pathways: Jak/STAT pathway: mutations, inhibitors, and resistance
.
Clin Cancer Res
2013
;
19
:
1933
40
.
29.
Gold
JS
,
van der Zwan
SM
,
Gonen
M
,
Maki
RG
,
Singer
S
,
Brennan
MF
, et al
Outcome of metastatic GIST in the era before tyrosine kinase inhibitors
.
Ann Surg Oncol
2007
;
14
:
134
42
.
30.
John
A
,
Tuszynski
G
. 
The role of matrix metalloproteinases in tumor angiogenesis and tumor metastasis
.
Pathol Oncol Res
2001
;
7
:
14
23
.
31.
Uehara
N
,
Matsuoka
Y
,
Tsubura
A
. 
Mesothelin promotes anchorage-independent growth and prevents anoikis via extracellular signal-regulated kinase signaling pathway in human breast cancer cells
.
Mol Cancer Res
2008
;
6
:
186
93
.
32.
Paoli
P
,
Giannoni
E
,
Chiarugi
P
. 
Anoikis molecular pathways and its role in cancer progression
.
Biochim Biophys Acta
2013
;
1833
:
3481
98
.
33.
MacLaren
R
,
Cui
W
,
Cianflone
K
. 
Visfatin expression is hormonally regulated by metabolic and sex hormones in 3T3-L1 pre-adipocytes and adipocytes
.
Diabetes Obes Metab
2007
;
9
:
490
7
.
34.
Zhou
J
,
Seidel
ER
. 
Estrogens induce visfatin expression in 3T3-L1 cells
.
Peptides
2010
;
31
:
271
4
.
35.
Fain
JN
,
Tagele
BM
,
Cheema
P
,
Madan
AK
,
Tichansky
DS
. 
Release of 12 adipokines by adipose tissue, nonfat cells, and fat cells from obese women
.
Obesity
2010
;
18
:
890
6
.
36.
Tanaka
M
,
Nozaki
M
,
Fukuhara
A
,
Segawa
K
,
Aoki
N
,
Matsuda
M
, et al
Visfatin is released from 3T3-L1 adipocytes via a non-classical pathway
.
Biochem Biophys Res Commun
2007
;
359
:
194
201
.
37.
Holliday
DL
,
Speirs
V
. 
Choosing the right cell line for breast cancer research
.
Breast Cancer Res
2011
;
13
:
215
.
38.
Ganguly
SS
,
Plattner
R
. 
Activation of abl family kinases in solid tumors
.
Genes Cancer
2012
;
3
:
414
25
.
39.
Srinivasan
D
,
Sims
JT
,
Plattner
R
. 
Aggressive breast cancer cells are dependent on activated Abl kinases for proliferation, anchorage-independent growth and survival
.
Oncogene
2008
;
27
:
1095
105
.
40.
Yu
H
,
Kortylewski
M
,
Pardoll
D
. 
Crosstalk between cancer and immune cells: role of STAT3 in the tumour microenvironment
.
Nat Rev Immunol
2007
;
7
:
41
51
.
41.
Kim
SR
,
Bae
YH
,
Bae
SK
,
Choi
KS
,
Yoon
KH
,
Koo
TH
, et al
Visfatin enhances ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 expression through ROS-dependent NF-kappaB activation in endothelial cells
.
Biochim Biophys Acta
2008
;
1783
:
886
95
.
42.
Oita
RC
,
Ferdinando
D
,
Wilson
S
,
Bunce
C
,
Mazzatti
DJ
. 
Visfatin induces oxidative stress in differentiated C2C12 myotubes in an Akt- and MAPK-independent, NFkB-dependent manner
.
Pflugers Arch
2010
;
459
:
619
30
.
43.
Song
SY
,
Jung
EC
,
Bae
CH
,
Choi
YS
,
Kim
YD
. 
Visfatin induces MUC8 and MUC5B expression via p38 MAPK/ROS/NF-kappaB in human airway epithelial cells
.
J Biomed Sci
2014
;
21
:
49
.
44.
Kim
JG
,
Kim
EO
,
Jeong
BR
,
Min
YJ
,
Park
JW
,
Kim
ES
, et al
Visfatin stimulates proliferation of MCF-7 human breast cancer cells
.
Mol Cells
2010
;
30
:
341
5
.
45.
Park
HJ
,
Kim
SR
,
Kim
SS
,
Wee
HJ
,
Bae
MK
,
Ryu
MH
, et al
Visfatin promotes cell and tumor growth by upregulating Notch1 in breast cancer
.
Oncotarget
2014
;
5
:
5087
99
.
46.
Soncini
D
,
Caffa
I
,
Zoppoli
G
,
Cea
M
,
Cagnetta
A
,
Passalacqua
M
, et al
Nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase promotes epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition as a soluble factor independent of its enzymatic activity
.
J Biol Chem
2014
;
289
:
34189
204
.
47.
Peng
Q
,
Jia
SH
,
Parodo
J
,
Ai
Y
,
Marshall
JC
. 
Pre-B cell colony enhancing factor induces Nampt-dependent translocation of the insulin receptor out of lipid microdomains in A549 lung epithelial cells
.
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab
2015
;
308
:
E324
33
.
48.
Cristofanilli
M
,
Morandi
P
,
Krishnamurthy
S
,
Reuben
JM
,
Lee
BN
,
Francis
D
, et al
Imatinib mesylate (Gleevec) in advanced breast cancer-expressing C-Kit or PDGFR-beta: clinical activity and biological correlations
.
Ann Oncol
2008
;
19
:
1713
9
.
49.
Modi
S
,
Seidman
AD
,
Dickler
M
,
Moasser
M
,
D'Andrea
G
,
Moynahan
ME
, et al
A phase II trial of imatinib mesylate monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer
.
Breast Cancer Res Treat
2005
;
90
:
157
63
.
50.
Bantscheff
M
,
Eberhard
D
,
Abraham
Y
,
Bastuck
S
,
Boesche
M
,
Hobson
S
, et al
Quantitative chemical proteomics reveals mechanisms of action of clinical ABL kinase inhibitors
.
Nat Biotechnol
2007
;
25
:
1035
44
.