PURPOSE: An accurate system for predicting survival for patients with solid tumors will allow for better patient selection for both established and novel therapies. We propose a staging system for clear cell variants of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) that includes molecular predictors and standard clinical predictors such as tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage, histological grade, and performance status (PS). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A custom tissue array was constructed using clear cell RCC from 318 patients, representing all stages of localized and metastatic RCC, and immunohistochemically stained for molecular markers Ki67, p53, gelsolin, CA9, CA12, PTEN, EpCAM, and vimentin. We present a strategy for evaluating individual candidate markers for prognostic information and integrating informative markers into a multivariate prognostic system. RESULTS: The overall median follow-up and the median follow-up for surviving patients were 28 and 55 months, respectively. A prognostic model based primarily on molecular markers included metastasis status, p53, CA9, gelsolin, and vimentin as predictors and had high discriminatory power: its statistically validated concordance index (C-index) was found to be 0.75. A prognostic model based on a combination of clinical and molecular predictors included metastasis status, T stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS, p53, CA9, and vimentin as predictors and had a C-index of 0.79, which was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than that of prognostic models based on grade alone (C = 0.65), TNM stage alone (C = 0.73), or the University of California Los Angeles integrated staging system (C = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Protein expressions obtained using widely available technology can complement standard clinical predictors such as TNM stage, histological grade, and PS.
PURPOSE: An accurate system for predicting survival for patients with solid tumors will allow for better patient selection for both established and novel therapies. We propose a staging system for clear cell variants of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) that includes molecular predictors and standard clinical predictors such as tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage, histological grade, and performance status (PS). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A custom tissue array was constructed using clear cell RCC from 318 patients, representing all stages of localized and metastatic RCC, and immunohistochemically stained for molecular markers Ki67, p53, gelsolin, CA9, CA12, PTEN, EpCAM, and vimentin. We present a strategy for evaluating individual candidate markers for prognostic information and integrating informative markers into a multivariate prognostic system. RESULTS: The overall median follow-up and the median follow-up for surviving patients were 28 and 55 months, respectively. A prognostic model based primarily on molecular markers included metastasis status, p53, CA9, gelsolin, and vimentin as predictors and had high discriminatory power: its statistically validated concordance index (C-index) was found to be 0.75. A prognostic model based on a combination of clinical and molecular predictors included metastasis status, T stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS, p53, CA9, and vimentin as predictors and had a C-index of 0.79, which was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than that of prognostic models based on grade alone (C = 0.65), TNM stage alone (C = 0.73), or the University of California Los Angeles integrated staging system (C = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Protein expressions obtained using widely available technology can complement standard clinical predictors such as TNM stage, histological grade, and PS.
Authors: Barbara Seliger; Sven P Dressler; Ena Wang; Roland Kellner; Christian V Recktenwald; Friedrich Lottspeich; Francesco M Marincola; Maja Baumgärtner; Derek Atkins; Rudolf Lichtenfels Journal: Proteomics Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 3.984
Authors: Aidan P Noon; Nikolina Vlatković; Radosław Polański; Maria Maguire; Howida Shawki; Keith Parsons; Mark T Boyd Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: S P K Jagdev; W Gregory; N S Vasudev; P Harnden; S Sim; D Thompson; J Cartledge; P J Selby; R E Banks Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-11-09 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Nina Wagener; Stephan Macher-Goeppinger; Maria Pritsch; Johannes Hüsing; Karin Hoppe-Seyler; Peter Schirmacher; Jesco Pfitzenmaier; Axel Haferkamp; Felix Hoppe-Seyler; Markus Hohenfellner Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2010-10-04 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Jane Yanagawa; Tonya C Walser; Li X Zhu; Longsheng Hong; Michael C Fishbein; Vei Mah; David Chia; Lee Goodglick; David A Elashoff; Jie Luo; Clara E Magyar; Mariam Dohadwala; Jay M Lee; Maie A St John; Robert M Strieter; Sherven Sharma; Steven M Dubinett Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-11-03 Impact factor: 12.531