| Literature DB >> 25329885 |
Stefan Welte1, Toni Urbanik1, Christin Elßner1, Nicole Kautz1, Bruno Christian Koehler1, Nina Waldburger2, Justo Lorenzo Bermejo3, Federico Pinna2, Karl-Heinz Weiss4, Peter Schemmer5, Dirk Jaeger1, Thomas Longerich2, Kai Breuhahn2, Henning Schulze-Bergkamen6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The deubiquitinase CYLD removes (K-63)-linked polyubiquitin chains from proteins involved in NF-κB, Wnt/ß-catenin and Bcl-3 signaling. Reduced CYLD expression has been reported in different tumor entities, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Furthermore, loss of CYLD has been shown to contribute to HCC development in knockout animal models. This study aimed to assess subcellular CYLD expression in tumor tissues and its prognostic significance in HCC patients undergoing liver resection or liver transplantation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25329885 PMCID: PMC4199737 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110591
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Baseline characteristics of HCC patients corresponding to CYLD expression in the cytoplasma (cyt°CYLD+/−) or nucleus (nucCYLD+/−).
| Variables | N | nucCYLD− | nucCYLD+ |
| cyt°CYLD− | cyt°CYLD+ |
| |||||
|
| 95 | 43 | 52 | 0.46 | 38 | 57 | 0.84 | |||||
| men | 74 | (78%) | 35 | (81%) | 39 | (75%) | 30 | (78%) | 44 | (77%) | ||
| women | 21 | (22%) | 8 | (19%) | 13 | (25%) | 8 | (21%) | 13 | (23%) | ||
|
| 95 | 43 | 52 | 0.038 | 38 | 57 | 0.55 | |||||
| G1 | 13 | (14%) | 3 | (7%) | 10 | (19%) | 5 | (13%) | 8 | (14%) | ||
| G2 | 54 | (57%) | 22 | (51%) | 32 | (62%) | 19 | (50%) | 35 | (61%) | ||
| G3 | 25 | (26%) | 17 | (40%) | 8 | (15%) | 13 | (34%) | 12 | (21%) | ||
| G4 | 3 | (3%) | 1 | (2%) | 2 | (4%) | 1 | (3%) | 2 | (4%) | ||
|
| 95 | 43 | 52 | 0.11 | 38 | 57 | 0.93 | |||||
| <60 y | 37 | (39%) | 13 | (30%) | 24 | (46%) | 15 | (40%) | 22 | (39%) | ||
| >60 y | 58 | (61%) | 30 | (70%) | 28 | (54%) | 23 | (60%) | 35 | (61%) | ||
|
| 83 | 38 | 45 | 0.68 | 33 | 50 | 0.9 | |||||
| <5 cm | 37 | (45%) | 16 | (42%) | 21 | (47%) | 15 | (46%) | 22 | (44%) | ||
| >5 cm | 46 | (55%) | 22 | (58%) | 24 | (53%) | 18 | (54%) | 28 | (56%) | ||
|
| 83 | 37 | 46 | 0.83 | 33 | 50 | 0.01 | |||||
| negative | 37 | (45%) | 16 | (43%) | 21 | (46%) | 9 | (27%) | 28 | (56%) | ||
| positive | 46 | (55%) | 21 | (57%) | 25 | (54%) | 24 | (73%) | 22 | (44%) | ||
|
| 81 | 36 | 45 | 0.065 | 32 | 49 | 0.02 | |||||
| <8 IU/ml | 43 | (53%) | 15 | (83%) | 28 | (62%) | 12 | (37,5%) | 31 | (63%) | ||
| >8 IU/ml | 38 | (47%) | 21 | (17%) | 17 | (38%) | 20 | (62,5%) | 18 | (37%) | ||
|
| 89 | 41 | 48 | 0.55 | 34 | 55 | 0.85 | |||||
| A | 68 | (77%) | 33 | (81%) | 35 | (73%) | 25 | (73%) | 43 | (78%) | ||
| B | 11 | (12%) | 5 | (12%) | 6 | (12%) | 5 | (15%) | 6 | (11%) | ||
| C | 10 | (11%) | 3 | (7%) | 7 | (15%) | 4 | (12%) | 6 | (11%) | ||
|
| 91 | 41 | 50 | 0.76 | 36 | 55 | 0.66 | |||||
| negative | 68 | (75%) | 30 | (73%) | 38 | (76%) | 26 | (72%) | 42 | (76%) | ||
| positive | 23 | (25%) | 11 | (27%) | 12 | (24%) | 10 | (28%) | 13 | (24%) | ||
|
| 87 | 40 | 47 | 0.89 | 34 | 53 | 0.33 | |||||
| B | 16 | (18%) | 7 | (17,5%) | 9 | (20%) | 8 | (23,5%) | 8 | (15%) | ||
| C | 19 | (22%) | 8 | (20%) | 11 | (23%) | 9 | (26,5%) | 10 | (19%) | ||
|
| 87 | 40 | 47 | 0.54 | 32 | 55 | 0.53 | |||||
| normal | 58 | (67%) | 28 | (70%) | 30 | (33%) | 20 | (63%) | 38 | (70%) | ||
| increased | 29 | (33%) | 12 | (30%) | 17 | (67%) | 12 | (38%) | 17 | (30%) | ||
Bilirubin levels >1 mg/dl were depicted as “increased”. AFP serum levels: normal range <8 IU/ml).
Figure 1Survival of HCC patients after liver surgery according to subcellular CYLD expression.
Kaplan-Meier analysis (N = 95) for overall survival (OS) of patients receiving liver resection, for the following subgroups: (nucCYLD+/cyt°CYLD−, nucCYLD+/cyt°CYLD+, nucCYLD−/cyt°CYLD+ and nucCYLD−/cyt°CYLD− (P = 0.06). Positive nuclear (nucCYLD+) and cytoplasmic (cyt°CYLD+) CYLD staining was defined as an immunohistochemical score (IHS) ≥3 for nucCYLD+ and ≥6 for cyt°CYLD+ (IHS ranging from 0 to 12, obtained by multiplication of the intensity and the quantity score).
Figure 2Nuclear CYLD expression in correlation to tumor grading in human HCC tissues.
(A) Representative staining of positive and negative nuclear CYLD expression in HCC specimens. 10- and 40-fold magnification (nucCYLD+; upper left and nucCYLD−, upper right panel). Representative staining of corresponding Ki67 expression in HCC specimens. 10-fold magnification (lower panels). (B) Nuclear expression of CYLD (IHS score 0–12) in HCC (G1 = 13, G2 = 54, G4 = 25 G4 = 3) and normal liver tissues (N = 7) correlated to grading (Spearman correlation coefficient: −0.423, P<0.001). (C) Nuclear expression of CYLD related to the ratio of Ki67 positive nuclei in HCC (nucCYLD+; N = 47; nucCYLD−; N = 41) and normal liver tissues (N = 7) (Spearman correlation coefficient: −0.271, P = 0.006).
Univariate Cox analysis of different clinical, laboratory and histopathological parameters and CYLD expression for overall survival (OS).
| Univariate | Univariate | ||||||||
| Variables (N) | N* | HR (95% CI) | Global | Variables (N) | N* | HR (95% CI) | Global | ||
|
|
| ||||||||
| men | (69) | 35 | 0.98 (0.47–2.04) | 0.95 | A | (64) | 27 | 0.55 (0.29–1) | 0.07 |
| women | (19) | 9 | (Ref.) | B/C | (20) | 14 | (Ref.) | ||
|
|
| ||||||||
| 1–2 | (67) | 27 | 0.55 (0.296–1.0) | 0.05 | negativ | (65) | 34 | 1.87 (0.86–4.09) | 0.12 |
| 3–4 | (28) | 17 | (Ref.) | positive | (21) | 8 | (Ref.) | ||
|
|
| ||||||||
| <60 | (35) | 16 | 0.66 (0.35–1.25) | 0.2 | negative | (49) | 28 | 1.43 (0.738–2.75) | 0.29 |
| >60 | (53) | 28 | (Ref.) | B/C | (34) | 13 | (Ref.) | ||
|
|
| ||||||||
| <5 cm | (37) | 10 | 0.37 (0.18–0.76) | 0.007 | normal | (55) | 26 | 0.93 (0.49–1.8) | 0.84 |
| >5 cm | (46) | 27 | (Ref.) | increased | (28) | 14 | (Ref.) | ||
|
|
| ||||||||
| negativ | (37) | 13 | 0.54 (0.27–1.08) | 0.08 | negative | (33) | 17 | 1.16 (0.63–2.15) | 0.63 |
| positive | (46) | 25 | (Ref.) | positive | (55) | 27 | (Ref.) | ||
|
|
| ||||||||
| <8 IU/ml | (42) | 15 | 0.433 (0.22–0.85) | 0.015 | negative | (40) | 27 | 2.14 (1.15–3.98) | 0.02 |
| >8 IU/ml | (35) | 22 | (Ref.) | positive | (48) | 17 | (Ref.) | ||
CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio. N = 95; N*: Number of uncensored patients (patients who experienced the event).
Multivariate Cox regression analysis of CLYD expression and clinical/laboratory/histopathological features for the prediction of overall survival (OS).
| Multivariate | ||||
| Variables | (N) | N* | HR (95% CI) | Global |
|
| ||||
| A | (53) | 21 | 0.4 (0167–0.97) | 0.04 |
| B/C | (15) | 9 | (Ref.) | |
|
| ||||
| 1–2 | (47) | 17 | 0.7 (0.296–1.698) | 0.44 |
| 3–4 | (21) | 13 | (Ref.) | |
|
| ||||
| negative | (27) | 16 | 1.56 (0.71–3.41) | 0.27 |
| positive | (41) | 14 | (Ref.) | |
|
| ||||
| <5 cm | (32) | 8 | 0.34 (0.14–0.797) | 0.01 |
| >5 cm | (36) | 22 | (Ref.) | |
|
| ||||
| negative | (29) | 9 | 1 (0.392–2.68) | 0.96 |
| Positive | (39) | 21 | (Ref.) | |
|
| ||||
| <8 IU/ml | (38) | 12 | 0.4 (0.17–1) | 0.07 |
| >8 IU/ml | (30) | 18 | (Ref.) | |
CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio. N = 95; N*: Number of uncensored patients (patients who experienced the event).
Figure 3Overall survival of HCC patients with positive CYLD expression.
(A) Overall Survival (OS) in patients with positive (nucCYLD+; N = 48) and negative nuclear CYLD expression in HCC tissues (nucCYLD−; N = 40; P = 0.007). (B) OS in patients with positive (cyt°CYLD+, N = 55) and negative cytoplasmic CYLD expression (cyt°CYLD−; N = 33; P = 0.6).
Figure 4Correlation of CYLD expression with outcome after liver resection vs. liver transplantation.
(A) Kaplan-Meier analysis for overall survival (OS) of patients receiving liver resection with positive (nucCYLD+, N = 33) and negative nuclear CYLD expression (nucCYLD−; N = 29; P = 0.1). (B) OS of patients receiving liver transplantation with positive (nucCYLD+; N = 16) or negative nuclear CYLD expression (nucCYLD−; N = 11; P = 0.04).