| Literature DB >> 20028503 |
Li-Ru He1, Meng-Zhong Liu, Bin-Kui Li, Hui-Lan Rao, Yi-Ji Liao, Xin-Yuan Guan, Yi-Xin Zeng, Dan Xie.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Trimethylation of lysine 27 on histone H3 (H3K27me3) by enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) is an epigenetic mark that mediates gene silencing. EZH2 is overexpressed and correlates with poor prognosis in many cancers. However, the clinical implication of H3K27me3 in human malignancies has not been well established. We wished to ascertain whether a correlation exists between the expression of H3K27me3 and clinical outcome in a group of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 20028503 PMCID: PMC2804715 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-9-461
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
H3K27me3 expression and clinicopathologic variables (Chi-square test)
| H3K27me3 expression (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Case | low | high | |
| Age (years) | 0.255 | |||
| ≤55a | 54 | 32(59.3) | 22(40.7) | |
| >55 | 44 | 21(47.7) | 23(52.3) | |
| Gender | 0.720 | |||
| Male | 82 | 45(54.9) | 37(45.1) | |
| Female | 16 | 8(50.0) | 8(50.0) | |
| Location | 0.341 | |||
| Cervical | 24 | 15(62.5) | 9(37.5) | |
| Thoracic | 74 | 38(51.4) | 36(48.6) | |
| WHO grade | 0.016 | |||
| G1 | 24 | 16(66.7) | 8(33.3) | |
| G2 | 50 | 30(60.0) | 20(40.0) | |
| G3-4 | 24 | 7(29.2) | 17(70.8) | |
| Tumor size (cm) | 0.019 | |||
| ≤6b | 56 | 36(64.3) | 20(35.7) | |
| >6 | 42 | 17(40.5) | 25(59.5) | |
| T status | 0.024 | |||
| T2-3 | 47 | 31(66.0) | 16(34.0) | |
| T4 | 51 | 22(43.1) | 29(56.9) | |
| N status | 0.929 | |||
| N0 | 16 | 8(50.0) | 8(50.0) | |
| N1 | 82 | 40(48.8) | 42(51.2) | |
| M status | 0.651 | |||
| M0 | 59 | 33(55.9) | 26(44.1) | |
| M1-lymc | 39 | 20(51.3) | 19(48.7) | |
| CRT response | 0.094 | |||
| Effective | 61 | 37(60.7) | 24(39.3) | |
| Resistant | 37 | 16(43.2) | 21(56.8) | |
| Locoregional progression | 0.009 | |||
| Absent | 51 | 34(66.7) | 17(33.3) | |
| Present | 47 | 19(40.4) | 28(59.6) | |
| Distant progression | 0.299 | |||
| Absent | 62 | 36(58.1) | 26(41.9) | |
| Present | 36 | 17(47.2) | 19(52.8) | |
aMean age. bMean tumor size. cDistant lymph node metastasis.
Figure 1Immunohistochemical stainings of H3K27me3 in human esophageal tissues. (A) A normal esophageal mucosa (case 13) showed low expression of H3K27me3 protein, in which less than 50% of normal esophageal squamous cells showed positive staining of H3K27me3 in nuclei (200×). (B) An ESCC case (case 21) demonstrated low expression of H3K27me3, in which less than 50% of squamous cell carcinoma cells showed positive staining of H3K27me3 protein in nuclei (200×). (C) High expression of H3K27me3 was observed in an ESCC (case 39), where more than 70% carcinoma cells demonstrated positive staining of H3K27me3 in nuclei (200×). (D) A primary ESCC (case 52) was observed high expression of H3K27me3, where more than 90% carcinoma cells showed positive staining of H3K27me3 protein in nuclei (200×). (E) Another ESCC (case 7) was observed high expression of EZH2, where more than 90% of carcinoma cells showed positive staining of EZH2 protein in nuclei (400×). (F) High expression of H3K27me3 (more than 80% of carcinoma cells showed positive expression of H3K27me3) was observed in the same ESCC case 7 (400×). (G) For the 53 ESCC cases with high EZH2 expression, an average of 55.0% of the ESCC cells stained positive with H3K27me3 antibody, a percentage of cancer cells that was significantly larger than that (43.3%) in the remaining 45 cancers with a low expression of EZH2 (P = 0.036, independent sample t test).
Figure 2Locoregional progression-free survival curves for total cohort and different subsets of ESCC patients. (A) Total patients, (B) T2-3 subset, (C) T4 subset, (D) N0 subset, (E) N1 subset, (F) M0 subset, (G) M1-lym subset, (H) Chemoradiotherapy effective and (I) chemoradiotherapy resistant subsets: low expression (dashed line), high expression (solid line).
Univariate analysis of H3K27me3 for LPFS (log-rank test)
| LPFS (months) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Case | Mean | Median | |
| Total | 0.010 | |||
| Low expression | 53 | 33.5 | 20.6 | |
| High expression | 45 | 19.4 | 10.4 | |
| T status | ||||
| T2-3 | 0.048 | |||
| Low expression | 31 | 39.4 | 33.1 | |
| High expression | 16 | 25.9 | 20.0 | |
| T4 | 0.224 | |||
| Low expression | 22 | 23.6 | 9.7 | |
| High expression | 29 | 12.9 | 8.6 | |
| N status | ||||
| N0 | 0.005 | |||
| Low expression | 8 | 62.5 | NRa | |
| High expression | 8 | 11.9 | 7.4 | |
| N1 | 0.230 | |||
| Low expression | 40 | 26.2 | 13.6 | |
| High expression | 42 | 20.5 | 12.7 | |
| M status | ||||
| M0 | 0.018 | |||
| Low expression | 33 | 40.8 | 29.5 | |
| High expression | 26 | 22.6 | 10.4 | |
| M1-lym | 0.117 | |||
| Low expression | 20 | 20.5 | 14.7 | |
| High expression | 19 | 13.4 | 9.9 | |
| CRT response | ||||
| Effective | 0.022 | |||
| Low expression | 37 | 40.2 | 29.6 | |
| High expression | 24 | 24.0 | 14.1 | |
| Resistant | 0.715 | |||
| Low expression | 16 | 14.9 | 8.6 | |
| High expression | 21 | 12.6 | 8.5 | |
a Not reached.
Multivariate Cox regression analysis for LPFS
| LPFS | ||
|---|---|---|
| Variable | HRa(95% CIb) | |
| H3K27me3 expression | 0.065 | |
| Low | 1.000 | |
| High | 1.568 (0.972-2.528) | |
| CRT response | 0.023 | |
| Effective | 1.000 | |
| Resistant | 1.820 (1.084-3.055) | |
| T status | 0.013 | |
| T2-3 | 1.000 | |
| T4 | 1.376 (1.068-1.772) | |
| M status | 0.029 | |
| M0 | 1.000 | |
| M1-lym | 1.721 (1.056-2.806) | |
aHazard ratio. bConfidence interval.