| Literature DB >> 23599755 |
Xin Yin1, Yi-Wei Li, Jian-Jun Jin, Yin Zhou, Zheng-Gang Ren, Shuang-Jian Qiu, Bo-Heng Zhang.
Abstract
Recently, growing evidence has demonstrated that aberrant expression of pluripotent stem cell-related genes may confer primitive and aggressive traits and be associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes in certain solid cancers. However, the role of pluripotent stem cell gene expression in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unexplored. We evaluated the expression of the pluri potent stem cell genes Oct4, Sox2 and Klf4, as well as that of the c-Myc, Nanog and Lin28 genes in HCC samples and corresponding adjacent non-tumor liver samples obtained from 57 patients using quantitative real-time reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR). The results revealed that six pluripotent stem cell gene expression levels were upregulated in the tumor tissues compared with the corresponding adjacent non-tumor liver tissues. In HCC tissues, aberrant expression of Sox2 and Lin28 was associated with a large tumor size (P=0.02 and P=0.03, respectively), while increased expression levels of c-Myc (P=0.01) were correlated with vascular invasion. Moreover, high Klf4 expression levels were associated with aggressive tumor behaviors in terms of vascular invasion (P=0.02) and poor tumor differentiation (P=0.03). Survival analysis revealed that Klf4 expression was independently associated with overall survival [OS; hazard ratio (HR), 8.61; 95% confidential interval (CI), 2.7-27.5; P<0.001] and recurrence-free survival (RFS; HR, 3.96; 95% CI, 1.3-11.6; P=0.01). In conclusion, pluripotent stem cell genes are associated with HCC progression and a poor prognosis. The development of therapeutic strategies, including adjuvant therapy, that take cancer stem cell (CSC)-related markers into consideration is likely to be a key factor in further improvements of the prognosis of HCC patients undergoing curative liver resection.Entities:
Keywords: curative liver resection; hepatocellular carcinoma; pluripotent stem cell genes; prognosis
Year: 2013 PMID: 23599755 PMCID: PMC3628965 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2013.1151
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Figure 1Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis of six pluripotent stem cell genes in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) tissue and adjacent non-tumor liver tissue. The results demonstrated a higher expression of Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, c-Myc and Nanog mRNA in HCC tissues compared with non-tumor liver tissues (P<0.05 for all genes tested).
Figure 2X-tile analysis of the prognostic significance of Oct4, Sox2 and Klf4 in HCC patients. The plot shows the χ2 log-rank values created when the cohort was divided into a matched training and validation set. The cut-off point highlighted by the black/white circle in the left panels is demonstrated in a histogram (middle panels) and a Kaplan-Meier plot (right panels). The optimal cut-off point for each gene was defined by the most significant base in the X-tile analysis, and are as follows: (A) 4.0 for Oct4 (Pmin=0.02); (B) 4.3 for Sox2 (Pmin=0.05); and (C) 5.7 for Klf4 (Pmin<0.001).
Figure 3X-tile analysis of the prognostic significance of c-Myc, Nanog and Lin28 in HCC patients. The optimal cut-off point for each gene was defined by the most significant base in the X-tile analysis, and are as follows: (A) 7.3 for c-Myc (Pmin=0.26); (B) 4.7 for Nanog (Pmin=0.01); and (C) 4.2 for Lin28 (Pmin=0.38).
Correlation between pluripotent stem cell gene expression and clinicopathological variables in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients.
| Oct4 | Sox2 | Klf4 | c-Myc | Nanog | Lin28 | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||||
| Variables | High n=19 | Low n=38 | P-value | High n=13 | Lo n=44 | P-value | High n=7 | Low n=50 | P-value | High n=21 | Low n=36 | P-value | High n=13 | Low n=44 | P-value | High n=28 | Low n=29 | P-value |
| Gender | ||||||||||||||||||
| Male | 16 | 32 | 1.0 | 9 | 39 | 0.09 | 4 | 44 | 0.04 | 19 | 29 | 0.32 | 10 | 38 | 0.41 | 21 | 27 | 0.06 |
| Female | 3 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 2 | ||||||
| Age (years) | ||||||||||||||||||
| ≤50 | 8 | 23 | 0.19 | 3 | 28 | 0.01 | 3 | 28 | 0.51 | 13 | 18 | 0.38 | 5 | 26 | 0.19 | 12 | 19 | 0.09 |
| >50 | 11 | 15 | 10 | 16 | 4 | 22 | 8 | 18 | 8 | 18 | 16 | 10 | ||||||
| HBsAg | ||||||||||||||||||
| Positive | 1 | 2 | 1.0 | 1 | 2 | 0.66 | 0 | 3 | 0.51 | 0 | 3 | 0.17 | 0 | 3 | 0.33 | 2 | 1 | 0.53 |
| Negative | 18 | 36 | 12 | 42 | 7 | 47 | 21 | 33 | 13 | 41 | 26 | 28 | ||||||
| Liver cirrhosis | ||||||||||||||||||
| Presence | 2 | 4 | 1.0 | 3 | 3 | 0.09 | 2 | 4 | 0.10 | 1 | 5 | 0.28 | 1 | 5 | 0.71 | 3 | 3 | 0.96 |
| Absence | 17 | 34 | 10 | 41 | 5 | 46 | 20 | 31 | 12 | 39 | 25 | 26 | ||||||
| AFP ( | ||||||||||||||||||
| Positive >20 | 6 | 12 | 1.0 | 2 | 16 | 0.15 | 1 | 17 | 0.29 | 7 | 11 | 0.83 | 4 | 14 | 0.94 | 9 | 9 | 0.93 |
| Negative <20 | 13 | 26 | 11 | 28 | 6 | 33 | 14 | 25 | 9 | 30 | 20 | 19 | ||||||
| Tumor number | ||||||||||||||||||
| Single | 12 | 30 | 0.20 | 8 | 34 | 0.26 | 5 | 37 | 0.89 | 14 | 28 | 0.36 | 10 | 32 | 0.76 | 21 | 21 | 0.83 |
| Multiple | 7 | 8 | 5 | 10 | 2 | 13 | 7 | 8 | 3 | 12 | 7 | 8 | ||||||
| Tumor size | ||||||||||||||||||
| <5 | 10 | 18 | 0.71 | 4 | 24 | 0.02 | 4 | 24 | 0.65 | 11 | 17 | 0.71 | 7 | 21 | 0.70 | 10 | 15 | 0.03 |
| >5 | 9 | 20 | 9 | 20 | 3 | 26 | 10 | 19 | 6 | 23 | 18 | 11 | ||||||
| Vascular invasion | ||||||||||||||||||
| Yes | 6 | 10 | 0.17 | 5 | 11 | 0.34 | 4 | 12 | 0.02 | 10 | 6 | 0.01 | 6 | 10 | 0.10 | 7 | 9 | 0.60 |
| No | 13 | 28 | 8 | 33 | 3 | 38 | 11 | 30 | 7 | 34 | 21 | 20 | ||||||
| Tumor encapsulation | ||||||||||||||||||
| Complete | 11 | 16 | 0.26 | 5 | 22 | 0.34 | 5 | 22 | 0.17 | 13 | 14 | 0.09 | 9 | 18 | 0.07 | 13 | 14 | 0.90 |
| Incomplete | 8 | 22 | 8 | 22 | 2 | 28 | 8 | 22 | 4 | 26 | 15 | 15 | ||||||
| Differentiation | ||||||||||||||||||
| I–II | 14 | 35 | 0.12 | 11 | 38 | 0.87 | 5 | 44 | 0.03 | 18 | 31 | 0.97 | 10 | 39 | 0.26 | 24 | 25 | 0.96 |
| III–IV | 5 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 4 | ||||||
| TNM stage | ||||||||||||||||||
| I | 8 | 16 | 0.85 | 4 | 20 | 0.62 | 3 | 21 | 0.49 | 9 | 15 | 0.21 | 5 | 19 | 0.56 | 10 | 14 | 0.341 |
| II | 9 | 16 | 7 | 18 | 4 | 21 | 7 | 18 | 5 | 20 | 15 | 10 | ||||||
| III | 2 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 8 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | ||||||
Data are given as the median.
Diameter of multiple tumors was calculated as the sum of the size of every single tumor. HBsAg, hepatitis B surface antigen; AFP, α-fetoprotein.
Figure 4Overall survival (OS) as assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients according to pluripotent stem cell gene expression. High levels of Oct4, Klf4 and Nanog mRNA expression were significantly correlated with a poorer OS (P= 0.01, P= 0.02 and P<0.01, respectively).
Figure 5Recurrence-free survival (RFS) as assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients according to pluripotent stem cell gene expression. A high level of Klf4 mRNA expression was significantly correlated with a poorer RFS (P=0.009).