BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of cancer testis antigens in pharyngeal cancer is understudied. METHODS: We recruited 90 patients who were treated for pharyngeal cancer. Monoclonal antibodies 57B and B9.8.1.1 were used for detection of MAGE-A and NY-ESO-1 genes. RESULTS: MAGE-A and NY-ESO-1 gene products were detectable in 70.0% and 33.3% of pharyngeal tumors, respectively. No correlation was established between MAGE-A and NY-ESO-1 expression and TNM staging at presentation. Survival analysis showed a trend toward a shorter 5-year disease-free survival in the group of patients with MAGE-A-positive tumors (log-rank test, p = .122). In contrast, a trend toward a prolonged 5-year disease-free survival was observed in the group of patients with NY-ESO-1-positive tumors (log-rank test, p = .219). CONCLUSION: In a large population of patients with pharyngeal cancer and available 5-year survival data, prognosis tended to be poorer with MAGE-A expression and better with NY-ESO-1 expression, but the correlations did not reach statistical significance.
BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of cancer testis antigens in pharyngeal cancer is understudied. METHODS: We recruited 90 patients who were treated for pharyngeal cancer. Monoclonal antibodies 57B and B9.8.1.1 were used for detection of MAGE-A and NY-ESO-1 genes. RESULTS: MAGE-A and NY-ESO-1 gene products were detectable in 70.0% and 33.3% of pharyngeal tumors, respectively. No correlation was established between MAGE-A and NY-ESO-1 expression and TNM staging at presentation. Survival analysis showed a trend toward a shorter 5-year disease-free survival in the group of patients with MAGE-A-positive tumors (log-rank test, p = .122). In contrast, a trend toward a prolonged 5-year disease-free survival was observed in the group of patients with NY-ESO-1-positive tumors (log-rank test, p = .219). CONCLUSION: In a large population of patients with pharyngeal cancer and available 5-year survival data, prognosis tended to be poorer with MAGE-A expression and better with NY-ESO-1 expression, but the correlations did not reach statistical significance.
Authors: Sang Tae Noh; Hyoung Shin Lee; Soo Jin Lim; Sung Won Kim; Hee Kyung Chang; Junghwan Oh; Chang-Ho Jeon; Jong Wook Park; Kang Dae Lee Journal: Int J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-05-26 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Mark van Duin; Annemiek Broyl; Yvonne de Knegt; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Paul G Richardson; Wim C J Hop; Bronno van der Holt; Debora Joseph-Pietras; George Mulligan; Rachel Neuwirth; Surinder S Sahota; Pieter Sonneveld Journal: Haematologica Date: 2011-07-26 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Yu Qi; Ke Xin Cao; Fu Chen Xing; Chun Yang Zhang; Qi Huang; Kai Wu; Feng Biao Wen; Song Zhao; Xin Li Journal: Oncol Lett Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 2.967