| Literature DB >> 21138547 |
Viren Asher1, Raheela Khan, Averil Warren, Robert Shaw, Gerhard V Schalkwyk, Anish Bali, Heidi M Sowter.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is the second most common cancer of the female genital tract in the United Kingdom (UK), accounting for 6% of female deaths due to cancer. This cancer is associated with poor survival and there is a need for new treatments in addition to existing chemotherapy to improve survival. Potassium (K+) channels have been shown to be overexpressed in various cancers where they appear to play a role in cell proliferation and progression.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 21138547 PMCID: PMC3016344 DOI: 10.1186/1746-1596-5-78
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagn Pathol ISSN: 1746-1596 Impact factor: 2.644
Figure 1Western blot with samples from ovarian cancer tissue and SK-OV-3 cells demonstrating specific staining for Eag and HERG antibodies (Fig 1A and B) with corresponding actin blot.
Figure 2Immunocytochemistry of SK-OV-3 cells and effect of voltage gated K+ channel blockers 4-AP and TEA on their proliferation. Immunofluorescence staining of SK-OV-3 cells with (A) Eag and (B) HERG antibodies. Eag localises to the cell membrane and cytoplasm with little nuclear staining whereas HERG expression is mainly nuclear (higher magnification is shown in inset) (C) 4-AP significantly inhibited SK-OV-3 cell proliferation at 1,2 and 5 mM at 72 and 96 hrs while TEA (D) showed similar inhibition at 5 mM that was significant at 96 hours only.
Patient characteristics (n = 336)
| 62 (24-90) | |
|---|---|
| 19.5 (0-271) | |
| n (%) | |
| 1 | 84 (25.0) |
| 2 | 36 (10.7) |
| 3 | 166 (49.4) |
| 4 | 40 (11.9) |
| Missing | 10 (3.0) |
| n (%) | |
| G1 | 39 (11.6) |
| G2 | 73 (21.7) |
| G3 | 221 (65.8) |
| Missing | 3 (0.9) |
| n (%) | |
| No macroscopic disease (Optimal debulking) | 128 (38.1) |
| Macroscopic disease left | 194 (57.7) |
| Missing | 14 (4.2) |
| n (%) | |
| Serous | 178 (53) |
| Mucinous | 35 (10.4) |
| Endometriod | 42 (12.5) |
| Clear cell | 25 (7.4) |
| Undifferentiated | 54 (16.1) |
| Missing | 2 (0.6) |
| n (%) | |
| Yes | 236 (70.2) |
| No | 92 (27.4) |
| Missing | 8 (2.4) |
| n (%) | |
| Low/Intermediate | 196 (58.3) |
| High | 53 (15.8) |
| Missing | 87 (25.9) |
| n (%) | |
| Low/Intermediate | 181 (53.9) |
| High | 68 (20.2) |
| Missing | 87 (25.9) |
Figure 3Immunohistochemical staining of ovarian cancer tissues and normal ovary and its correlation with survival. Representative section from a tissue microarray set showing (A) high and (B) low Eag immunohistochemical expression and low staining on the surface epithelium (arrow) of normal ovary (C). Similar results were obtained for HERG. (D) Kaplan-Meier survival curves from data represented on the above TMA show high Eag expression is associated with poor prognosis (P = 0.016), whereas increased HERG expression (E) is not.
Median survival based on Eag and HERG immunoreactivity and other prognostic markers.
| Median survival, Months(IQR) | P (log rank) | |
|---|---|---|
| Low/Intermediate | 24.1 (18.9-29.2) | |
| High | 13.8 (7.2-20.3) | 0.016 |
| Low/Intermediate | 22.4 (14.1-30.6) | |
| High | 16.4 (9.7-23.0) | 0.586 |
| 1 | 137.6 (48.8-226.3) | |
| 2 | 28.4 (4.8-51.9) | |
| 3 | 13.0 (9.0-16.9) | |
| 4 | 7.3 (0-15.2) | < 0.001 |
| G1 | 28.9 (17.2-40.5) | |
| G2 | 33.1 (16.4-49.7) | |
| G3 | 16.0 (13.0-18.9) | 0.001 |
| No macroscopic disease (Optimal debulking) | 65.2 (37.5-92.8) | |
| Macroscopic disease | 10.7 (7.6-13.7) | < 0.001 |
| Serous | 17.3 (12.6-21.9) | |
| Mucinous | 30.7 (0-64.7) | < 0.001 |
| Endometriod | 26.6 (5.3-47.8) | |
| Clear cell | 155 (89.7-222) | |
| Undifferentiated | 13.3(5.3-21.2) | |
| Yes | 20.3 (15.4-25.1) | |
| No | 18.8 (0.6-36.9) | 0.04 |
Distribution of prognostic markers for ovarian cancer stratified by Eag staining (Fisher's exact test)
| Prognostic Markers | No of patients stratified by Eag staining | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 52 | 10 | 0.587 |
| 2 | 23 | 7 | |
| 3 | 92 | 30 | |
| 4 | 23 | 5 | |
| G1 | 19 | 13 | 0.014 |
| G2 | 44 | 7 | |
| G3 | 133 | 32 | |
| No Macroscopic disease (Optimal debulking) | 85 | 13 | 0.011 |
| Macroscopic disease | 102 | 38 | |
| Serous | 110 | 27 | 0.622 |
| Mucinous | 17 | 8 | |
| Endometriod | 24 | 6 | |
| Clear cell | 17 | 3 | |
| Undifferentiated | 28 | 9 | |
| Yes | 144 | 37 | 0.594 |
| No | 48 | 15 | |
Cox proportional hazard model of overall survival using Eag staining (Low/Int versus high) with other prognostic factors.
| Variable | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | P |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.00 | |
| 2 | 1.77 (1.00-3.12) | 0.048 |
| 3 | 2.99 (1.83-4.88) | < 0.001 |
| 4 | 3.85 (2.02-7.34) | < 0.001 |
| No macroscopic disease (Optimal debulking) | 1.00 | |
| Macroscopic disease | 1.76 (1.19-2.62) | 0.005 |
| 1 | 1.00 | |
| 2 | 1.09 (0.63-1.88) | 0.756 |
| 3 | 1.18 (0.74-1.88) | 0.474 |
| Low/Int | 1.00 | |
| High | 1.25 (0.87-1.78) | 0.215 |