| Literature DB >> 19995427 |
Wei He1, Zhihui Wang, Qi Wang, Qingxia Fan, Chengcao Shou, Junsheng Wang, Karl-Erik Giercksky, Jahn M Nesland, Zhenhe Suo.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: HIWI, the human homologue of Piwi family, is present in CD34+ hematopoietic stem cells and germ cells, but not in well-differentiated cell populations, indicating that HIWI may play an impotent role in determining or maintaining stemness of these cells. That HIWI expression has been detected in several type tumours may suggest its association with clinical outcome in cancer patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19995427 PMCID: PMC2801519 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-9-426
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Clinicopathological features and HIWI expression in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
| Parameters | Cases (%) | Cytoplasma | Nucleus | Cytoplasma and Nucleus | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | Low | High | Low | Moderate | High | |||||
| Age | 0.683 | 0.830 | 0.727 | ||||||||
| <51 | 48 (31.4) | 21 | 27 | 31 | 17 | 13 | 26 | 9 | |||
| 51-60 | 52 (34.0) | 25 | 27 | 36 | 16 | 19 | 23 | 10 | |||
| >60 | 53 (34.6) | 21 | 32 | 37 | 16 | 14 | 30 | 9 | |||
| Gender | 0.448 | 0.666 | 0.251 | ||||||||
| Male | 93 (60.8) | 43 | 50 | 62 | 31 | 31 | 43 | 19 | |||
| Female | 60 (39.2) | 24 | 36 | 42 | 18 | 15 | 36 | 9 | |||
| Location | 0.813 | 0.311 | 0.556 | ||||||||
| Upper | 14 (9.2) | 5 | 9 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 5 | |||
| Middle | 101 (66.0) | 44 | 57 | 71 | 30 | 31 | 53 | 17 | |||
| Lower | 35 (22.9) | 16 | 19 | 24 | 11 | 11 | 18 | 6 | |||
| Missing | 3 (2.0) | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | |||
| Size | 0.778 | 0.881 | 0.705 | ||||||||
| <31 mm | 25 (16.3) | 11 | 14 | 18 | 7 | 7 | 15 | 3 | |||
| 31-60 mm | 105 (68.6) | 48 | 57 | 73 | 32 | 34 | 53 | 18 | |||
| >60 mm | 14 (9.2) | 5 | 9 | 9 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 4 | |||
| Missing | 9 (5.9) | 3 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 3 | |||
| Lymph node metastasis | 0.904 | 0.232 | 0.593 | ||||||||
| - | 99 (64.7) | 43 | 56 | 64 | 35 | 27 | 53 | 19 | |||
| + | 54 (35.3) | 24 | 30 | 40 | 14 | 19 | 26 | 9 | |||
| UICC stage | 0.074 | 0.148 | 0.662 | ||||||||
| I | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| II | 100 (65.4) | 49 | 51 | 64 | 36 | 32 | 49 | 19 | |||
| III | 53 (34.6) | 18 | 35 | 40 | 13 | 14 | 30 | 9 | |||
| IV | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| T stage | 0.035* | 0.278 | 0.002* | ||||||||
| I | 5 (3.3) | 4 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | |||
| II | 39 (25.5) | 23 | 16 | 31 | 8 | 19 | 16 | 4 | |||
| III | 100 (65.4) | 37 | 63 | 63 | 37 | 24 | 52 | 24 | |||
| IV | 9 (5.9) | 3 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 9 | ||||
| Histological grade | 0.011* | 0.352 | 0.126 | ||||||||
| Well | 53 (34.6) | 31 | 22 | 37 | 16 | 21 | 26 | 6 | |||
| Moderate | 60 (39.2) | 25 | 35 | 37 | 23 | 17 | 28 | 15 | |||
| Poor | 40 (26.1) | 11 | 29 | 30 | 10 | 8 | 25 | 7 | |||
| Patients at follow-up | <0.001* | 0.981 | 0.001* | ||||||||
| Alive | 56 (36.6) | 35 | 21 | 38 | 18 | 27 | 19 | 10 | |||
| Dead | 97 (63.4) | 32 | 65 | 66 | 31 | 19 | 60 | 18 | |||
* P < 0.05
Figure 1a: Immunocytochemistry of HIWI in Kyse140 and Kyse450 cell lines; b: Western-blot analysis of HIWI in these two cell lines. α-Tubulin was set as a loading control.
Figure 2Immunohistochemistry of HIWI in esophageal squamous cell carcinomas (×200). a-c: Tissue array sections; d-g: paraffin-embedded conventional sections. a: Negative; b: Strong cytoplasmic staining; c: Strong staining in both cytoplasm and nuclei; d: Strong cytoplasmic staining; e: Strong staining in both cytoplasm and nuclei; f: Strong nuclear staining; g: Strong cytoplasmic staining in seminoma (positive control).
Immunohistochemical staining results for HIWI
| Score | Cytoplasm | Nucleus | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | (%) | n | (%) | |
| 0 | 37 | (24.2) | 78 | (51.0) |
| 1 | 1 | (0.7) | 0 | (0.0) |
| 2 | 5 | (3.3) | 3 | (2.0) |
| 3 | 24 | (15.7) | 23 | (15.0) |
| 4 | 5 | (3.3) | 5 | (3.3) |
| 6 | 41 | (26.8) | 23 | (15.0) |
| 9 | 40 | (26.1) | 21 | (13.7) |
| Total | 153 | (100.0) | 153 | (100.0) |
Figure 3Kaplan-Meier survival curves for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients with regard to HIWI protein expression: overall survival versus HIWI expression in both cytoplasm and nuclei. Patients with low HIWI expression tumours showed a better overall survival than patients with moderate or high expression tumours, while there was no difference between the moderate expression group and high expression group. p values were determined by the log-rank test.
Figure 4Kaplan-Meier survival curves for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients with regard to HIWI protein expression: overall survival versus HIWI expression in cytoplasm. Patients with high cytoplasmic HIWI expression tumours showed a poorer outcome than that with low cytoplasmic expression tumours. p values were determined by the log-rank test.
Figure 5Kaplan-Meier survival curves for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients with regard to HIWI protein expression: overall survival versus HIWI expression in nuclei. There was no correlation between patients' outcome and the expression level of HIWI in nuclei of tumour cells. p values were determined by the log-rank test.
Multivariate analysis of death events
| Parameters | Ratio of risk (RR) | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 1.057 | 0.806-1.385 | 0.689 |
| Gender | 1.119 | 0.709-1.767 | 0.628 |
| Location | 1.170 | 0.785-1.745 | 0.441 |
| Size | 0.925 | 0.585-1.462 | 0.739 |
| Lymph node metastasis | 2.280 | 1.429-3.636 | 0.001* |
| T stage | 1.885 | 1.204-2.951 | 0.006* |
| Histological grade | 3.085 | 2.242-4.247 | <0.001* |
| HIWI in cytoplasm | 2.247 | 1.375-3.670 | 0.001* |
| HIWI in nuclei | 1.230 | 0.761-1.988 | 0.397 |
* P < 0.05