| Literature DB >> 19014602 |
Wenjie Jiao1, Jing Xu, Jinsheng Zheng, Yi Shen, Lesheng Lin, Jian Li.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endothelin(ET) axis plays a key role in many tumor progression and metastasis via various mechanisms such as angiogenesis, mediating extracellular matrix degradation and inhibition of apoptosis. However, there is limited information regarding the clinical significance of plasma big ET-1 levels in esophageal cancer patients. Circulating plasma big ET-1 levels were measured in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma(ESCC) to evaluate the value of ET-1 as a biomarker for predicting tumor recurrence and patients survival.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2008 PMID: 19014602 PMCID: PMC2605466 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-8-334
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Correlation between preoperative plasma big ET-1 levels and clinicopathologic variables in ESCC patients
| Characteristic | Number of patients (n) | Preoperative plasma big ET-1 levels (pg/ml) | P value |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 78 | 4.62 ± 0.72 | 0.285 |
| Female | 30 | 4.85 ± 0.63 | |
| Age, y | |||
| ≤ 60 yrs | 41 | 4.67 ± 0.55 | 0.876 |
| >60 yrs | 67 | 4.72 ± 0.86 | |
| Smoking | |||
| Light-smoker | 42 | 4.78 ± 0.39 | 0.386 |
| Non-smoker | 66 | 4.65 ± 0.64 | |
| Drinking | |||
| Light-drinker | 35 | 4.73 ± 0.27 | 0.674 |
| Non-drinker | 73 | 4.68 ± 0.50 | |
| Site of tumor | |||
| upper | 12 | 4.75 ± 0.91 | 0.763 |
| Middle | 57 | 4.70 ± 0.57 | |
| Lower | 39 | 4.69 ± 0.83 | |
| Tumor differenciation | |||
| Well | 30 | 4.61 ± 0.54 | 0.354 |
| Moderate | 48 | 4.64 ± 0.68 | |
| Poor | 30 | 4.88 ± 0.47 | |
| Tumor class | |||
| T1 | 33 | 4.42 ± 0.61 | 0.001 |
| T2 | 38 | 4.60 ± 0.34 | |
| T3 | 37 | 5.01 ± 0.84 | |
| T4 | 0 | 0 | |
| Lymph node metastasis | |||
| N0 | 63 | 4.45 ± 0.59 | <0.001 |
| N1 | 45 | 5.06 ± 0.63 | |
| Stage | |||
| I | 28 | 4.41 ± 0.52 | 0.003 |
| II | 48 | 4.68 ± 0.76 | |
| III | 32 | 5.25 ± 0.82 | |
| IV | 0 | 0 |
Figure 1Changes in plasma big ET-1 levels following esophagectomy. *elevated on POD1 and POD2(P < 0.001) and **reduced on POD10 and POD30(P < 0.001) compared with preoperative levels.
Figure 2Kaplan-Meier survival curve in relation to preoperative plasma big ET-1 levels in patients with ESCC. The overall survival of patients with elevated big ET-1 levels was significantly lower than that of patients with normal levels(log-rank test P = 0.001).
Univariate analysis for predictors of overall survival in patients with ESCC
| Variable | Hazard Ratio | 95% Confidence Interval | P value |
| Age (>60 vs. ≤ 60) | 0.834 | 0.512–1.357 | 0.834 |
| Gender (male vs. female) | 1.183 | 0.727–1.924 | 0.499 |
| Site of tumor (upper vs. middle vs. lower) | 1.310 | 0.916–1.872 | 0.139 |
| Differenciation (well vs. moderate vs. poor) | 1.084 | 0.799–1.470 | 0.604 |
| Tumor class (T1 vs. T2 vs. T3 vs. T4) | 2.763 | 1.632–4.854 | 0.008 |
| Lymph node status (No vs. N1) | 2.978 | 1.541–3.647 | 0.010 |
| Stage (I vs. II vs. III vs. IV) | 3.037 | 1.451–4.860 | <0.001 |
| Plasma big ET-1 levels (normal vs. elevated) | 2.494 | 1.302–3.806 | 0.002 |
Multivariate analysis for predictors of overall survival in patients with ESCC
| Variable | Hazard Ratio | 95% Confidence Interval | P value |
| Tumor class | 2.878 | 1.805–4.576 | 0.010 |
| Lymph node status | 2.921 | 1.951–3.988 | 0.015 |
| Stage | 3.083 | 1.259–5.731 | 0.002 |
| Plasma big ET-1 levels | 2.629 | 1.375–4.054 | 0.003 |
Figure 3Kaplan-Meier survival curve in relation to preoperative plasma big ET-1 levels in patients with ESCC. The disease-free survival of patients with elevated big ET-1 levels was significantly lower than that of patients with normal levels(log-rank test P < 0.001).