BACKGROUND: There is a need to identify new markers to assess recurrence risk in early-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. We explored the prognostic impact of ether-a-gò-gò-related gene 1 channels and some hypoxia markers, in patients with nonmetastatic (stage I, II, and III) CRC. METHODS: The expression of hERG1, vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A), glucose transporter 1, carbonic anhydrase IX (CA-IX), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGF-R), and p53 was tested by immunohistochemistry in 135 patients. The median follow-up was 35 months. Clinicopathologic parameters and overall survival were evaluated. RESULTS: hERG1 displayed a statistically significant association with Glut-1, VEGF-A, CA-IX, and EGF-R; p53 with VEGF-A and CA-IX; Glut-1 with the age of the patients; and EGF-R with TNM and mucin content. TNM and CA-IX were prognostic factors at the univariate analysis; TNM, hERG1, and Glut-1, at the multivariate analysis. Risk scores calculated from the final multivariate model allowed to stratify patients into four different risk groups: A) stage I-II, Glut-1 positivity, any hERG1; B) stage I-II, Glut-1 and hERG1 negativity; C) stage I-II, Glut-1 negativity, hERG1 positivity; D) stage III, any Glut-1 and any hERG1. CONCLUSIONS: hERG1 positivity with Glut-1 negativity identifies a patient group with poor prognosis within stage I-II CRC. The possibility that these patients might benefit from adjuvant therapy, independently from the TNM stage, is discussed. IMPACT: More robust prognostic and predictive markers, supplementing standard clinical and pathologic staging, are needed for node-negative patients.
BACKGROUND: There is a need to identify new markers to assess recurrence risk in early-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. We explored the prognostic impact of ether-a-gò-gò-related gene 1 channels and some hypoxia markers, in patients with nonmetastatic (stage I, II, and III) CRC. METHODS: The expression of hERG1, vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A), glucose transporter 1, carbonic anhydrase IX (CA-IX), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGF-R), and p53 was tested by immunohistochemistry in 135 patients. The median follow-up was 35 months. Clinicopathologic parameters and overall survival were evaluated. RESULTS:hERG1 displayed a statistically significant association with Glut-1, VEGF-A, CA-IX, and EGF-R; p53 with VEGF-A and CA-IX; Glut-1 with the age of the patients; and EGF-R with TNM and mucin content. TNM and CA-IX were prognostic factors at the univariate analysis; TNM, hERG1, and Glut-1, at the multivariate analysis. Risk scores calculated from the final multivariate model allowed to stratify patients into four different risk groups: A) stage I-II, Glut-1 positivity, any hERG1; B) stage I-II, Glut-1 and hERG1 negativity; C) stage I-II, Glut-1 negativity, hERG1 positivity; D) stage III, any Glut-1 and any hERG1. CONCLUSIONS:hERG1 positivity with Glut-1 negativity identifies a patient group with poor prognosis within stage I-II CRC. The possibility that these patients might benefit from adjuvant therapy, independently from the TNM stage, is discussed. IMPACT: More robust prognostic and predictive markers, supplementing standard clinical and pathologic staging, are needed for node-negative patients.
Authors: C C Wykoff; N J Beasley; P H Watson; K J Turner; J Pastorek; A Sibtain; G D Wilson; H Turley; K L Talks; P H Maxwell; C W Pugh; P J Ratcliffe; A L Harris Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2000-12-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: S Pastoreková; S Parkkila; A K Parkkila; R Opavský; V Zelník; J Saarnio; J Pastorek Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 1997-02 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Gennaro Galizia; Eva Lieto; Francesca Ferraraccio; Ferdinando De Vita; Paolo Castellano; Michele Orditura; Vincenzo Imperatore; Anna La Mura; Giovanni La Manna; Margherita Pinto; Giuseppe Catalano; Carlo Pignatelli; Fortunato Ciardiello Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2006-04-18 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Laurence Goethals; Annelies Debucquoy; Christiaan Perneel; Karel Geboes; Nadine Ectors; Harlinde De Schutter; Freddy Penninckx; William H McBride; Adrian C Begg; Karin M Haustermans Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J H Dolderer; H Schuldes; H Bockhorn; M Altmannsberger; C Lambers; D von Zabern; D Jonas; H Schwegler; R Linke; U H Schröder Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2009-07-04 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: J Saarnio; S Parkkila; A K Parkkila; K Haukipuro; S Pastoreková; J Pastorek; M I Kairaluoma; T J Karttunen Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 1998-07 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: E Lastraioli; G Perrone; A Sette; A Fiore; O Crociani; S Manoli; M D'Amico; M Masselli; J Iorio; M Callea; D Borzomati; G Nappo; F Bartolozzi; D Santini; L Bencini; M Farsi; L Boni; F Di Costanzo; A Schwab; A Onetti Muda; R Coppola; A Arcangeli Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Ghada M K GabAllah; Mona Salah El-Din Habib; Shimaa El-Shafey Soliman; Zienab A Kasemy; Suzy F Gohar Journal: Saudi J Gastroenterol Date: 2017 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.485
Authors: David M Pier; George S G Shehatou; Susan Giblett; Christine E Pullar; Derek J Trezise; Catrin A Pritchard; R A John Challiss; John S Mitcheson Journal: Mol Pharmacol Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 4.436
Authors: Elena Lastraioli; Tiziano Lottini; Lapo Bencini; Marco Bernini; Annarosa Arcangeli Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-08-03 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Simon J A van Kuijk; Ala Yaromina; Ruud Houben; Raymon Niemans; Philippe Lambin; Ludwig J Dubois Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2016-03-29 Impact factor: 6.244