PURPOSE: To examine the prognostic value of nuclear and cytoplasmic survivin expression in men with locally advanced prostate cancer who were enrolled in Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) protocol 8610. METHODS AND MATERIALS: RTOG 8610 was a Phase III randomized study comparing the effect of radiotherapy plus short-term androgen deprivation with radiotherapy alone. Of the 456 eligible patients, 68 patients had suitably stained tumor material for nuclear survivin analysis and 65 patients for cytoplasmic survivin. RESULTS: Compared with patients with nuclear survivin intensity scores of <or=191.2, those with intensity scores >191.2 had significantly improved prostate cancer survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-1.00, p = 0.0452). On multivariate analysis, nuclear survivin intensity scores >191.2 were significantly associated with improved overall survival (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.25-0.86; p = 0.0156) and prostate cancer survival (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.84; p = 0.0173). On univariate analysis, compared with patients with cytoplasmic survivin integrated optical density <or=82.7, those with an integrated optical density >82.7 showed a significantly increased risk of local progression (HR, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.03-6.01; p = 0.0421). CONCLUSION:Nuclear overexpression of survivin was associated with improved overall and prostate cancer survival on multivariate analysis, and cytoplasmic overexpression of survivin was associated with increased rate of local progression on univariate analysis in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer treated on RTOG 8610. Our results might reflect the different functions of survivin and its splice variants, which are known to exist in distinct subcellular compartments.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To examine the prognostic value of nuclear and cytoplasmic survivin expression in men with locally advanced prostate cancer who were enrolled in Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) protocol 8610. METHODS AND MATERIALS: RTOG 8610 was a Phase III randomized study comparing the effect of radiotherapy plus short-term androgen deprivation with radiotherapy alone. Of the 456 eligible patients, 68 patients had suitably stained tumor material for nuclear survivin analysis and 65 patients for cytoplasmic survivin. RESULTS: Compared with patients with nuclear survivin intensity scores of <or=191.2, those with intensity scores >191.2 had significantly improved prostate cancer survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-1.00, p = 0.0452). On multivariate analysis, nuclear survivin intensity scores >191.2 were significantly associated with improved overall survival (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.25-0.86; p = 0.0156) and prostate cancer survival (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.84; p = 0.0173). On univariate analysis, compared with patients with cytoplasmic survivin integrated optical density <or=82.7, those with an integrated optical density >82.7 showed a significantly increased risk of local progression (HR, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.03-6.01; p = 0.0421). CONCLUSION: Nuclear overexpression of survivin was associated with improved overall and prostate cancer survival on multivariate analysis, and cytoplasmic overexpression of survivin was associated with increased rate of local progression on univariate analysis in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer treated on RTOG 8610. Our results might reflect the different functions of survivin and its splice variants, which are known to exist in distinct subcellular compartments.
Authors: Arnab Chakravarti; Elizabeth Noll; Peter McL Black; Daniel F Finkelstein; Dianne M Finkelstein; Nicholas J Dyson; Jay S Loeffler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-02-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: T Ito; K Shiraki; K Sugimoto; T Yamanaka; K Fujikawa; M Ito; K Takase; M Moriyama; H Kawano; M Hayashida; T Nakano; A Suzuki Journal: Hepatology Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: M V Pilepich; K Winter; M J John; J B Mesic; W Sause; P Rubin; C Lawton; M Machtay; D Grignon Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2001-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: M Monzó; R Rosell; E Felip; J Astudillo; J J Sánchez; J Maestre; C Martín; A Font; A Barnadas; A Abad Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: G Ferrandina; F Legge; E Martinelli; F O Ranelletti; G F Zannoni; L Lauriola; M Gessi; V Gallotta; G Scambia Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2005-01-31 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: A Krieg; C Mahotka; T Krieg; H Grabsch; W Müller; S Takeno; C V Suschek; M Heydthausen; H E Gabbert; C D Gerharz Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2002-03-04 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Min Zhang; John J Coen; Yoshiyuki Suzuki; Michael R Siedow; Andrzej Niemierko; Li-Yan Khor; Alan Pollack; Yifen Zhang; Anthony L Zietman; William U Shipley; Arnab Chakravarti Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-03-16 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: P T Tran; R K Hales; J Zeng; K Aziz; T Salih; R P Gajula; S Chettiar; N Gandhi; A T Wild; R Kumar; J M Herman; D Y Song; T L DeWeese Journal: Curr Mol Med Date: 2012-07-01 Impact factor: 2.222
Authors: Tao Wang; Lucia R Languino; Jane Lian; Gary Stein; Michael Blute; Thomas J Fitzgerald Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2011-07-13 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Salma Khan; Heather Ferguson Bennit; Malyn May Asuncion Valenzuela; David Turay; Carlos J Diaz Osterman; Ron B Moyron; Grace E Esebanmen; Arjun Ashok; Nathan R Wall Journal: Biologics Date: 2015-07-09
Authors: Tamara Sequeiros; Marta García; Melania Montes; Mireia Oliván; Marina Rigau; Eva Colás; Inés de Torres; Juan Morote; Jaume Reventós; Andreas Doll Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2013-11-25 Impact factor: 3.411