| Literature DB >> 25779358 |
Se-Il Go1, Gyung Hyuck Ko2, Won Sup Lee1, Rock Bum Kim3, Jeong-Hee Lee2, Sang-Ho Jeong4, Young-Joon Lee4, Soon Chan Hong4, Woo Song Ha4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The present study is to investigate the significance of CD44 variant 9 (CD44v9) expression as a biomarker in primary gastric cancer.Entities:
Keywords: Biological markers; CD44 variant; Prognosis; Stomach neoplasms; Survival
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25779358 PMCID: PMC4720095 DOI: 10.4143/crt.2014.227
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Res Treat ISSN: 1598-2998 Impact factor: 4.679
Fig. 1.Representative figures of immunohistochemical staining for CD44 variant 9 (CD44v9) expression on the basis of positive criteria. Membranous reactions were scored in accordance to the percentage of CD44v9-positive cells as follows: (A) immunonegativity (0%-4%), (B) 1+ reactivity intensity (5%-19%), (C) 2+ reactivity intensity (20%-49%), (D) 3+ reactivity intensity (50%-100%) (A-D, ×200).
Fig. 2.Representative findings of immunohistochemical staining for CD44 variant 9 (CD44v9) in various gastric tissues. (A) Foveolar and fundic gland cells in normal tissue. Most of the foveolar and fundic gland cells were negative for CD44v9. (B) Antral gland cells in normal tissue. Some of the neck cells and antral gland cells were positive for CD44v9. (C) Antral gland cells in Helicobacter pylori–infected gastritis mucosa. Some of the antral gland cells in this H. pylori–infected gastric mucosa were positive for CD44v9. (D) Intestinal metaplastic cells. Some of the intestinal metaplastic cells were positive for CD44v9. (E) Low-grade tubular adenoma. (F) High-grade tubular adenoma. Many tumor cells are positive in a high-grade tubular adenoma. (G) Early gastric cancer cells. Many tumor cells were positive in an early gastric cancer confined within mucosa. (H) Advanced gastric cancer cells (A-H, ×200).
Fig. 3.CD44 variant 9 (CD44v9)–positive rates various gastric cancer tissues. Positive criteria for CD44v9 were defined as follows: immunohistochemical staining (IHC) score more than 0 (A, B), IHC score more than 1+ (C), and IHC score of 3+ (D) (*p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01, vs. control). EGC, early gastric cancer; AGC, advanced gastric cancer.
Baseline characteristics of patients
| Characteristic | CD44v9 positive (n=164) | CD44v9 negative (n=169) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median age (range, yr) | 66 (26-85) | 63 (24-81) | |
| Sex | |||
| Male | 104 (63.4) | 114 (67.5) | 0.438 |
| Female | 60 (36.6) | 55 (32.5) | |
| Location | |||
| Upper | 21 (11.8) | 21 (12.4) | 0.987 |
| Middle | 31 (18.9) | 33 (19.5) | |
| Lower | 112 (68.3) | 115 (68.0) | |
| Operation | |||
| Subtotal gastrectomy | 115 (70.1) | 117 (69.2) | 0.921 |
| Total gastrectomy | 41 (25.0) | 41 (24.3) | |
| Proximal gastrectomy | 6 (3.7) | 9 (5.3) | |
| Wedge resection | 2 (1.2) | 2 (1.2) | |
| No. of LN dissections | |||
| < 15 | 28 (17.1) | 24 (14.2) | 0.470 |
| ≥ 15 | 136 (82.9) | 145 (85.8) | |
| TNM stage | |||
| I | 93 (56.7) | 92 (54.4) | 0.884 |
| II | 32 (19.5) | 33 (19.5) | |
| III | 39 (23.8) | 44 (26.0) | |
| Tumor size (cm) | |||
| < 4 | 85 (50.3) | 68 (41.5) | 0.106 |
| ≥ 4 | 84 (49.7) | 96 (58.5) | |
| WHO classification | |||
| Well differentiated | 41 (25.0) | 28 (16.6) | < 0.001 |
| Moderately differentiated | 62 (37.8) | 44 (26.0) | |
| Poorly differentiated | 48 (29.3) | 72 (42.6) | |
| Signet-ring cell carcinoma | 4 (2.4) | 23 (13.6) | |
| Mucinous adenocarcinoma | 7 (4.3) | 1 (0.6) | |
| Undifferentiated | 2 (1.2) | 1 (0.6) | |
| Lauren classification | |||
| Intestinal | 134 (81.7) | 108 (63.9) | < 0.001 |
| Diffuse | 21 (12.8) | 55 (32.5) | |
| Mixed | 9 (5.5) | 6 (3.6) |
Values are presented as number (%) unless otherwise indicated. CD44v9, CD44 variant 9; LN, lymph node; WHO, World Health Organization.
Fig. 4.Kaplan-Meier curves for overall survival according to CD44 variant 9 (CD44v9) status in the whole patients.
Fig. 5.Kaplan-Meier curves for overall survival according to CD44 variant 9 (CD44v9) status in patients with each TNM stage: stage I (A), stage II (B), stage III (C). The overall survival by immunoexpression intensities (0, 1+/2+, and 3+) at each early gastric cancer and advanced gastric cancer: stage I (D), stage II or III (E).
Cox proportional hazard model and validation from 1,000 bootstrap samples for overall survival in patients with stage I (n=185)
| Variable | Univariate | Multivariate | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | 95% CI (bootstrap) | p-value (bootstrap) | |
| Age (yr)[ | ||||||||
| < 65 | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| ≥ 65 | 2.453 | 1.066-5.646 | 0.035 | 2.480 | 1.076-5.714 | 0.033 | 0.137-1.981 | 0.017 |
| Sex[ | ||||||||
| Female | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Male | 3.688 | 1.107-12.284 | 0.034 | 4.572 | 1.365-15.316 | 0.014 | 0.525-12.839 | 0.018 |
| Location | ||||||||
| Lower | Reference | - | ||||||
| Upper or middle | 1.204 | 0.536-2.702 | 0.653 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Tumor size (cm)[ | ||||||||
| ≤ 2.7 | Reference | - | ||||||
| > 2.7 | 0.891 | 0.412-1.927 | 0.770 | - | - | - | - | - |
| WHO classification | ||||||||
| W/D or M/D | Reference | - | ||||||
| Others[ | 0.593 | 0.249-1.411 | 0.237 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Lauren classification | ||||||||
| Intestinal | Reference | - | ||||||
| Diffuse or mixed | 0.985 | 0.395-2.452 | 0.973 | - | - | - | - | - |
| No. of LN dissections | ||||||||
| ≥ 15 | Reference | - | ||||||
| < 15 | 1.752 | 0.760-4.039 | 0.188 | - | - | - | - | - |
| CD44v9[ | ||||||||
| Negative | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Positive | 2.860 | 1.202-6.805 | 0.017 | 3.375 | 1.413-8.063 | 0.006 | 0.384-2.420 | 0.004 |
HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; WHO, World Health Organization; W/D, well differentiated; M/D, moderately differentiated; LN, lymph node; CD44v9, CD44 variant 9.
Variables used in multivariate analysis,
Median tumor size was 2.7 cm in stage I,
Poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, signet-ring cell carcinoma, and mucinous adenocarcinoma were included in this category.
Impact of CD44v9 of primary tumor on lymph node metastasis
| Positive criteria | CD44v9 status | Lymph node metastasis | p-value | CD44v9 status in primary tumor | CD44v9 status in lymph node | p-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Presence | Absence | Positive | Negative | |||||
| ≥ 1 | Positive | 65 (39.6) | 99 (60.4) | 0.659 | Positive | 8 (72.7) | 3 (27.3) | 0.175 |
| Negative | 63 (37.3) | 106 (62.7) | Negative | 3 (33.3) | 6 (66.7) | |||
| ≥ 2 | Positive | 31 (44.3) | 39 (55.7) | 0.258 | Positive | 5 (62.5) | 3 (37.5) | 0.018 |
| Negative | 97 (36.9) | 166 (63.1) | Negative | 1 (8.3) | 11 (91.7) | |||
| ≥ 3 | Positive | 12 (60.0) | 8 (40.0) | 0.041 | Positive | 4 (100) | 0 | < 0.001 |
| Negative | 116 (37.1) | 197 (62.9) | Negative | 0 | 16 (100) | |||
Values are presented as number (%). CD44v9, CD44 variant 9.
Fig. 6.The positive expression of CD44 variants and prognosis in a meta-analysis of the previous studies (n=5). a)Hirata et al. [12] studied with early gastric cancer alone and the end point was recurrence. Diamonds are the summary estimate from the pooled studies with 95% confidence interval (CI).
Fig. 7.The positive expression of CD44 variants and the risk of lymph node metastasis in a meta-analysis of the previous studies (n=5). a)CD44v5: Muller et al. [17] studied both CD44v5 and CD44v6 in the same paper. The values were different, so we analyzed the data separately. Diamonds are the summary estimate from the pooled studies with 95% confidence interval (CI).