| Literature DB >> 24606961 |
Shaojun Lin, Qiaojuan Guo, Jiangmei Wen, Chao Li, Jin Lin, Xiaofei Cui, Nianli Sang1, Jianji Pan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stanniocalcin 2 (STC2) is overexpressed in several types of human cancers, and its overexpression positively correlates to tumor progression and poor prognosis. However, the clinical significance of STC2 overexpression in nasopharyngeal carcinomas (NPC) has not been investigated. This study examined STC2 expression in a cohort of 94 NPC samples, and explored its value in clinical diagnosis and prognosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24606961 PMCID: PMC4015363 DOI: 10.1186/1756-9966-33-26
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exp Clin Cancer Res ISSN: 0392-9078
Figure 1STC2 expression in tumor adjacent nasopharyngeal epithelia with normal morphology and carcinoma cells as determined by immunohistochemistry studies. A: STC2 expressed in local tumor (× 200). B: Traditional HE staining, NPC, (× 200). C: STC2 was overexpressed in the tumor zone (× 100). D: Negative Control: NPC tissue stained at the same conditions except that no specific antibody (anti-STC2) was added (× 100). Scale bar: 50 μm in A and B; 100 μm in C and D.
Figure 2Criteria for STC2 expression intensity scoring. Representative micrographs were shown as labelled (× 200). All micrographs were taken and processed at identical conditions. Scale bar: 50 μm.
STC2 positivity in NPC and adjacent nasopharyngeal epithelia
| Tumor cells | 42 (75.0%) | 14 (25%) | 9.583 | 0.002 |
| Adjacent epithelia | 26 (46.4%) | 30 (53.6%) |
Correlation between STC2 positivity and clinical parameters of NPC
| Gender | Male | 48 | 20 | 0.239 | 0.625 |
| Female | 17 | 9 | |||
| Age | ≤50 y | 37 | 13 | 1.178 | 0.278 |
| >50 y | 28 | 16 | |||
| Histology | WHO* II | 4 | 1 | 0.002 | 0.966 |
| WHO III | 61 | 28 | | | |
| T classification | 1-2 | 16 | 13 | 3.840 | 0.050 |
| 3-4 | 49 | 16 | | | |
| N classification | 0-1 | 36 | 14 | 0.407 | 0.523 |
| 2-3 | 29 | 15 | | | |
| Clinical stage | I | 2 | 2 | 1.281 | 0.734 |
| II | 8 | 2 | | | |
| III | 34 | 16 | | | |
| IV | 21 | 9 | |||
*WHO, World Health Organization; Age in years (y).
Correlation between STC2 positivity and radiation sensitivity
| IMRT | No | 32 | 14 | 18 | 5.992 | 0.014* |
| Yes | 22 | 17 | 5 | |||
| 2D-RT | No | 30 | 26 | 4 | 0.000 | 1.000 |
| Yes | 10 | 8 | 2 | |||
IMRT, Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy; 2D-RT, Two-Dimensional conventional Radiation Therapy; Residual, Presence of residual tumors. P value showing statistically significance was indicated by *.
Figure 3High STC2 expression predicts inferior outcomes in NPC patients. Survival data were analyzed and plotted using the Kaplan–Meier method. Patients were classified into STC2 negative or positive according to STC2 immunohistochemistry. *: P <0.05. A. Local regional failure-free survival (LRFS); B. Distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS); C. Overall Survival (OS); and D. Progression-free survival (PFS).
Correlation between STC2 positivity and 5-year outcomes
| OS | 72.2 | 96.4 | 3.867 | 0.049* |
| PFS | 63.0 | 92.9 | 7.236 | 0.007* |
| LRRFS | 82.2 | 92.9 | 1.326 | 0.250 |
| DMFS | 77.0 | 96.4 | 4.854 | 0.028* |
OS, Overall survival; PFS, Progression-free survival; LRRFS, Locoregional relapse-free survival; DMFS, Distant metastasis-free survival. P values showing statistically significance were indicated by *.
Univariate logrank analyses of prognostic parameters of NPC
| STC2 | Positive | 65 | 12 | 0.049* | 22 | 0.007* | 10 | 0.250 | 14 | 0.028* |
| | Negative | 29 | 1 | | 2 | | 2 | | 1 | |
| Gender | Male | 68 | 11 | 0.190 | 20 | 0.162 | 10 | 0.336 | 13 | 0.190 |
| Female | 26 | 2 | | 4 | | 2 | | 2 | | |
| Age | ≤ 50 years | 50 | 5 | 0.288 | 11 | 0.371 | 8 | 0.365 | 5 | 0.083 |
| >50 years | 44 | 8 | | 13 | | 4 | | 10 | | |
| T classification | 1-2 | 29 | 2 | 0.151 | 6 | 0.441 | 5 | 0.411 | 3 | 0.269 |
| 3-4 | 65 | 11 | | 18 | | 7 | | 12 | | |
| N classification | 0-1 | 50 | 4 | 0.070 | 11 | 0.270 | 6 | 0.709 | 6 | 0.200 |
| 2-3 | 44 | 9 | | 13 | | 6 | | 9 | | |
| Clinical stage | I | 4 | 0 | 0.004* | 0 | 0.472 | 0 | 0.781 | 0 | 0.317 |
| II | 10 | 0 | | 2 | | 2 | | 0 | | |
| III | 50 | 4 | | 13 | | 6 | | 9 | | |
| IV | 30 | 9 | | 9 | | 4 | | 6 | | |
| Treatment | RT alone | 18 | 4 | 0.360 | 5 | 0.783 | 1 | 0.324 | 4 | 0.373 |
| CRT | 76 | 9 | | 19 | | 11 | | 11 | | |
| Radiotherapy | IMRT | 54 | 3 | 0.008* | 10 | 0.050* | 2 | 0.001* | 5 | 0.567 |
| 2D-RT | 40 | 10 | | 14 | | 10 | | 14 | | |
| Residual | Yes | 32 | 4 | 0.875 | 4 | 0.048* | 2 | 0.194 | 3 | 0.211 |
| No | 62 | 9 | 20 | 10 | 12 | |||||
*P values showing statistically significance were indicated by *.
“Events” are numbers of failed cases regarding OS, PFS, LRRFS and DMFS.
Multivariate survival analyses of prognostic parameters of NPC
| STC2 | 7.534 | 0.928-61.197 | 0.059 | 7.853 | 1.825-33.796 | 0.006* | 2.080 | 0.347-12.484 | 0.423 | 8.065 | 1.056-61.572 | 0.044* |
| T classification | 0.610 | 0.105-3.534 | 0.582 | 0.590 | 0.180-1.932 | 0.383 | 0.176 | 0.032-0.954 | 0.044* | 0.816 | 0.179-3.729 | 0.794 |
| N classification | 3.723 | 0.852-16.270 | 0.081 | 2.316 | 1.023-5.244 | 0.044* | 1.229 | 0.224-6.754 | 0.812 | 4.105 | 1.168-14.431 | 0.028* |
| Clinical stages | 6.517 | 2.015-21.082 | 0.002* | 1.667 | 0.807-3.442 | 0.167 | 1.161 | 0.337-4.003 | 0.813 | 2.596 | 1.066-6.323 | 0.036* |
| RT vs CRT | 0.278 | 0.051-1.507 | 0.138 | 0.906 | 0.268-3.067 | 0.874 | 3.561 | 0.286-44.327 | 0.324 | 0.364 | 0.081-1.632 | 0.187 |
| IMRT vs 2D-RT | 0.351 | 0.077-1.597 | 0.176 | 1.085 | 0.422-2.792 | 0.865 | 0.122 | 0.027-0.557 | 0.007* | 5.917 | 1.548-22.610 | 0.009* |
| Residual tumor | 0.876 | 0.229-3.354 | 0.846 | 0.249 | 0.084-0.740 | 0.012* | 0.771 | 0.153-3.895 | 0.753 | 0.113 | 0.025-0.505 | 0.004* |
, P values; statistically significant ones were indicated by *; , Hazard Ratio; 95% CI: 95% confidence interval.