| Literature DB >> 22639817 |
Yu-Tsai Lin1, Hui-Ching Chuang, Chang-Han Chen, Gian Luca Armas, Han-Ku Chen, Fu-Min Fang, Chao-Cheng Huang, Chih-Yen Chien.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypoxic tumors are refractory to radiation and chemotherapy. High expression of biomarkers related to hypoxia in head and neck cancer is associated with a poorer prognosis. The present study aimed to evaluate the clinicopathological significance of erythropoietin receptor (EPOR) expression in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22639817 PMCID: PMC3406939 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-12-194
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Clinical profile and correlation between the clinicopathological features and EPOR expression in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)
| Low expression | High expression | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 239 | 133 | 106 | 0.128 |
| Female | 17 | 13 | 4 | |
| Age, years | ||||
| <60 | 202 | 114 | 88 | 0.0758 |
| ≥60 | 54 | 32 | 22 | |
| T classification | ||||
| T1, T2 | 94 | 73 | 21 | <0.001* |
| T3, T4 | 162 | 73 | 89 | |
| N classification | ||||
| Positive | 103 | 46 | 57 | <0.001* |
| Negative | 153 | 100 | 53 | |
| TNM stage | ||||
| I, II | 66 | 60 | 6 | <0.001* |
| III, IV | 190 | 86 | 104 | |
EPOR, erythropoietin receptor; *statistically significant (p < 0.05).
Figure 1Immunostaining for EPOR expression in oral squamous cell carcinoma. (A) The representative tumor shows only weak EPOR immunoreactivity in the neoplastic epithelial cells at the border of the tumor. (B) The representative tumor exhibits diffuse and strong EPOR immunoreactivity in the neoplastic epithelial cells. Note that some inflammatory cells are also positive for EPOR. Original magnification, 100 × .
Figure 2Q-RT-PCR and Western blot analyses of EPOR expression in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). (A) The mRNA expression level of EPOR was determined by Q-RT-PCR in 12-paired OSCC patients (from early tumor stage to late tumor stage). Results were normalized against the expression level of GAPDH mRNA in each sample. (B) The Western blot analysis showed high EPOR expression in the tumor tissue compared with that in the adjacent non-tumor tissue in 8-paired tissue samples (from early tumor stage to late tumor stage). β-Actin was used as an internal control. EPOR, erythropoietin receptor; N, adjacent non-tumor tissue; T, tumor tissue.
Figure 3The 5-year (a) overall and (b) disease-specific survival rates were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier analysis. The patients with a low level of EPOR immunostaining in the tumor had a significantly better survival rate compared to those with a high level of EPOR immunostaining.
Correlation between the 5-year overall survival rate and clinicopathological features in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)
| Gender | |||
| Male | 239 | 60.8 | 0.1 |
| Female | 17 | 81.9 | |
| EPOR | |||
| Low expression | 146 | 69.6 | 0.0011* |
| High expression | 110 | 51.5 | |
| Age, years | |||
| <60 | 202 | 64.5 | 0.0685 |
| ≥60 | 54 | 51.9 | |
| T classification | |||
| T1, T2 | 94 | 79.8 | <0.001* |
| T3, T4 | 162 | 50.7 | |
| N classification | |||
| Negative | 153 | 75 | <0.001* |
| Positive | 103 | 41.2 | |
| TNM stage | |||
| I, II | 66 | 89.4 | <0.001* |
| III, IV | 190 | 52.2 | |
EPOR, erythropoietin receptor; *statistically significant (p < 0.05).
Correlation between the 5-year disease-specific survival rate and clinicopathological features in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)
| Gender | |||
| Male | 239 | 64.8 | 0.174 |
| Female | 17 | 81.9 | |
| EPOR | |||
| Low expression | 146 | 73.5 | 0.0017* |
| High expression | 110 | 55.9 | |
| Age, years | |||
| <60 | 202 | 67.9 | 0.142 |
| ≥60 | 54 | 58.6 | |
| T classification | |||
| T1, T2 | 94 | 81.9 | <0.001* |
| T3, T4 | 162 | 56.6 | |
| N classification | |||
| Negative | 153 | 79.4 | <0.001* |
| Positive | 103 | 45.8 | |
| TNM stage | |||
| I, II | 66 | 90.9 | <0.001* |
| III, IV | 190 | 57.2 | |
EPOR: erythropoietin receptor; *statistically significant (p < 0.05).
Risk factors affecting 5-year overall survival rate determined by Cox’s regression analysis
| T classification | |||
| T3, T4 vs. T1, T2 | 2.219 | 1.171–4.206 | 0.015 |
| N classification | |||
| Positive vs. Negative | 2.651 | 1.679–4.187 | <0.001 |
Risk Factors affecting 5-year disease-specific survival rate determined by Cox’s regression analysis
| T classification | |||
| T3, T4 vs. T1, T2 | 2.152 | 1.103–4.202 | 0.025 |
| N classification | |||
| Positive vs. Negative | 2.651 | 1.766–4.763 | <0.001 |