| Literature DB >> 19497117 |
Anxun Wang1, Xiqiang Liu, Shihu Sheng, Hui Ye, Tingsheng Peng, Fei Shi, David L Crowe, Xiaofeng Zhou.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent proteomic studies identified Hsp27 as a highly over-expressed protein in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). Clinical studies that attempted to evaluate the prognostic values of Hsp27 yielded inconsistent results, which may be due to inclusion of OSCC cases from multiple anatomic sites. In this study, to determine the utility of Hsp27 for prognosis, we focused on oral tongue SCC (OTSCC), one of the most aggressive forms of OSCC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19497117 PMCID: PMC2696470 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-9-167
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Clinical Characterization of the oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma (OTSCC) Patients*
| All OTSCCs | OTSCCs with follow-up data | Dysplastic lesions | Normal | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median (Range) | 48 (21–77) | 46.5 (21–73) | 51 (30–82) | 47 (30–72) | |
| Male: n (%) | 43 (53.75) | 20 (47.62) | 17 (54.84) | 6 (40.00) | |
| Female: n (%) | 37 (46.25) | 22 (52.38) | 14 (45.16) | 9 (60.00) | |
| Tongue: n (%) | 80 (100) | 42 (100) | 31 (100) | 15 (100) | |
| Stage 4: n (%) | 5 (6.25) | 4 (9.52) | |||
| Stage 3: n (%) | 14 (17.50) | 8 (19.05) | |||
| Stage 2: n (%) | 38 (47.50) | 21 (50.00) | |||
| Stage 1: n (%) | 23 (28.75) | 9 (21.43) | |||
| Stage 2: n (%) | 13 (16.25) | 8 (19.05) | |||
| Stage 1: n (%) | 19 (23.75) | 12 (28.57) | |||
| Stage 0: n (%) | 48 (60.00) | 22 (52.38) | |||
| Stage 4: n (%) | 15 (18.75) | 10 (23.81) | |||
| Stage 3: n (%) | 25 (31.25) | 16 (38.09) | |||
| Stage 2: n (%) | 18 (22.50) | 7 (16.67) | |||
| Stage 1: n (%) | 22 (27.50) | 9 (21.43) | |||
| Well: n (%) | 46 (57.50) | 25 (59.52) | |||
| Mod: n (%) | 20 (25.00) | 7 (16.67) | |||
| Poor: n (%) | 14 (17.50) | 10 (23.81) | |||
* The M stage data is not available.
Figure 1Immunohistochemistry analyses of Hsp27 expression on normal tongue, dysplastic lesions, primary oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma (OTSCC) and lymph node metastasis tissue samples. Immunohistochemistry analyses for Hsp27 were performed as described in Material and Methods on A: normal tongue mucosa (n = 15), B: dysplastic lesions (n = 31), C: well differentiated primary OTSCC (n = 46), D: moderately differentiated primary OTSCC (n = 20), E: poorly differentiated primary OTSCC (n = 14), and F: lymph node metastasis (n = 32). Representative Images (×200) were shown.
Correlations among clinical and histopathological features of primary OTSCC*
| Age | Gender | pT stage | pN stage | C stage | Grade | Ki67 | Hsp27 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.01 | -0.04 | -0.13 | -0.06 | -0.10 | 0.18 | 0.26 ** | ||
| 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.12 | 0.00 | 0.07 | -0.03 | |||
| 0.44 *** | 0.81 *** | -0.14 | -0.14 | 0.00 | ||||
| 0.78 *** | 0.06 | -0.03 | 0.16 | |||||
| -0.01 | -0.07 | 0.06 | ||||||
| 0.23 ** | -0.29 *** | |||||||
| 0.04 | ||||||||
*Spearman Correlation Coefficients were presented. pT: pathological T-stage; pN: pathological N-stage.
** p < 0.05
*** p < 0.01
Association of Hsp27 expression and Ki67 index with differentiation*
| Hsp27 (IHC) | Ki67 index | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | Average | Variance | Average | Variance | |
| 46 | 1.90 | 0.45 | 0.225 | 0.019 | |
| 20 | 1.74 | 0.47 | 0.302 | 0.025 | |
| 14 | 1.34 | 0.39 | 0.316 | 0.040 | |
| (p = 0.025872) | (p = 0.061275) | ||||
*One-way ANOVA was used to assess the association of Hsp27 and Ki67 with grading.
Figure 2The effects of Hsp27 expression on prognosis. Kaplan-Meier plots of overall survival in patient groups defined by Hsp27 immunohistochemistry (High Hsp27: moderate to high staining, Low Hsp27: no detectable or low staining). The difference in survival rates is statistically significant (p < 0.05).
The effects of clinical and pathohistological parameters on prognosis*
| Univariate Analysis | Multivariate Analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | p value | HR (95% CI) | p value | |
| 0.991 (0.958, 1.025) | 0.5941 | |||
| 1.991 (0.849, 4.670) | 0.1135 | |||
| 2.565 (0.924, 7.121) | 0.0706 | |||
| 1.514 (0.893, 2.564) | 0.1233 | |||
| 0.679 (0.179, 2.568) | 0.5680 | |||
| 1.501 (0.889, 2.534) | 0.1291 | |||
| 0.547 (0.034, 8.761) | 0.6698 | |||
* Analysis was done with Cox proportional hazard regression. HR: hazard ratio; 95% CI: 95% confidence interval.