| Literature DB >> 26469707 |
Irena Saarinen1, Tuomas Mirtti2, Heikki Seikkula3, Peter J Boström3, Pekka Taimen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer among men in western countries. While active surveillance is increasingly utilized, the majority of patients are currently treated with radical prostatectomy. In order to avoid over-treatment, there is an indisputable need for reliable biomarkers to identify the potentially aggressive and lethal cases. Nuclear intermediate filament proteins called lamins play a role in chromatin organization, gene expression and cell stiffness. The expression of lamin A is associated with poor outcome in colorectal cancer but to date the prognostic value of the lamins has not been tested in other solid tumors.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26469707 PMCID: PMC4607298 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140671
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Clinicopathological variables of the patient cohort (n = 501).
| Variable | Number of patients | |
|---|---|---|
| Age | ||
| <60 years | 169 (34%) | |
| 60–65 years | 187 (37%) | |
| >65 years | 143 (29%) | |
| PSA group (μg/L) | ||
| <10 | 306 (61%) | |
| 10–20 | 116 (23%) | |
| >20 | 38 (8%) | |
| pT-category | ||
| pT2 | 209 (42%) | |
| pT3a | 160 (32%) | |
| pT3b | 52 (10%) | |
| Gleason group | ||
| <7 | 181 (36%) | |
| 7 | 199 (40%) | |
| >7 | 96 (19%) | |
| Extraprostatic extension | ||
| Yes | 203 (41%) | |
| Surgical margin | ||
| Positive | 190 (38%) | |
| Lymph node status | ||
| N+ | 21 (4%) | |
| BCR | ||
| Yes | 157 (31%) | |
| Alive | 444 (89%) | |
| Death due Pca | 20 (4%) | |
| Death, other | 37 (7%) | |
| Follow-up time (months) | ||
| Median | 91 | |
| Range | 1–167 |
a Pathological T (pT) category refers to the stage of primary tumor in the TNM tumor staging system. pT2 = Tumor confined within prostate, pT3a = Extracapsular extension, pT3b = tumor invading seminal vesicle(s).
The distribution of expression for each lamin in the patient cohort.
| Number of patients | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marker | GS | Low expression | High expression | Total |
| Lamin A | IHC grade 0–1 | IHC grade 2–3 | ||
| Entire group | 251 (52.0%) | 232 (48.0%) | 483 | |
| Subgroup (GS>6) | 141 (50.0%) | 141 (50.0%) | 282 | |
| Lamin C | IHC grade 0 | IHC grade 1–3 | ||
| Entire group | 41 (22.9%) | 138 (77.1%) | 179 | |
| Subgroup (GS>6) | 22 (21.4%) | 81 (78.6%) | 103 | |
| Lamin B1 | IHC grade 0–2 | IHC grade 3 | ||
| Entire group | 142 (30.3%) | 327 (69.7%) | 469 | |
| Subgroup (GS>6) | 82 (30.0%) | 191 (70.0%) | 273 | |
| Lamin B2 | IHC grade 0–1 | IHC grade 2–3 | ||
| Entire group | 169 (37.5%) | 282 (62.5%) | 451 | |
| Subgroup (GS>6) | 88 (33.5%) | 175 (66.5%) | 263 | |
*GS = Gleason score
Uni- and multivariate Cox regression analysis for risk of biochemical recurrence.
In addition to entire study cohort, a subpopulation of patients with GS>6 tumor was analyzed separately.
| Entire group | Subgroup (GS>6) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate | Multivariate | Univariate | Multivariate | ||||||||||
| Variable | HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | |
| Gleason score | |||||||||||||
| <7 | ref | ref | na | na | |||||||||
| 7 | 1.9 | 1.2–3.0 | <0.003 | 1.3 | 0.8–2.3 | 0.32 | ref | ref | |||||
| >7 | 4.8 | 3.0–7.5 | <0.001 | 2.6 | 1.5–4.7 | 0.001 | 2.4 | 1.7–3.5 | <0.001 | 2.0 | 1.0–3.3 | <0.002 | |
| sPSA | |||||||||||||
| Continuous | 1.06 | 1.05–1.08 | <0.001 | 1.04 | 1.02–1.06 | <0.001 | 1.05 | 1.04–1.07 | <0.001 | 1.04 | 1.02–1.06 | <0.001 | |
| pT category | |||||||||||||
| pT2 | ref | ref | ref | ref | |||||||||
| pT3 | 3.1 | 2.1–4.6 | <0.001 | 2.2 | 1.3–3.5 | 0.002 | 2.3 | 1.4–3.7 | 0.001 | 1.7 | 1.0–2.9 | 0.053 | |
| Lamin A | |||||||||||||
| Low | ref | ref | ref | ref | |||||||||
| High | 1.0 | 0.7–1.3 | 0.85 | 0.81 | 0.5–1.2 | 0.29 | 0.9 | 0.6–1.3 | 0.58 | 0.7 | 0.5–1.1 | 0.15 | |
| Lamin B1 | |||||||||||||
| Low | ref | ref | ref | ref | |||||||||
| High | 1.5 | 1.0–2.2 | 0.04 | 1.8 | 1.1–2.9 | 0.023 | 1.7 | 1.0–2.7 | 0.036 | 1.6 | 0.9–2.9 | 0.077 | |
| Lamin B2 | |||||||||||||
| Low | ref | ref | ref | ref | |||||||||
| High | 1.1 | 0.8–1.6 | 0.48 | 0.95 | 0.6–1.4 | 0.81 | 0.95 | 0.6–1.4 | 0.82 | 0.85 | 0.5–1.4 | 0.49 | |
| Lamin C | |||||||||||||
| Low | ref | ref | ref | ref | |||||||||
| High | 1.0 | 0.5–1.9 | 0.88 | 0.70 | 0.3–1.7 | 0.41 | 1.1 | 0.5–2.5 | 0.9 | 0.58 | 0.2–1.7 | 0.32 | |
HR, hazard ratio (describes the relative risk of the event at any given time based on comparing the group with the reference group); 95% CI, 95% confidence interval (A 95% confidence interval means that 95% of the values of an unobservable parameter of interest would set in the interval if the experiment is repeated); na, not available; ref, reference
* Significant p-value
a Pathological T category refers to the stage of primary tumor in the TNM tumor staging system. pT2 = Tumor confined within prostate, pT3 = Tumor invading extraprostatic tissue and/or seminal vesicle(s).
Uni- and multivariate Cox regression analysis for risk of prostate cancer-specific death.
In addition to entire study cohort, a subpopulation of patients with GS>6 tumor was analyzed separately.
| Entire group | Subgroup (GS>6) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate | Multivariate | Univariate | Multivariate | ||||||||||
| Variable | HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | |
| Gleason score | |||||||||||||
| <7 | ref | ref | na | na | |||||||||
| 7 | 8.8 | 1.0–71.0 | 0.042 | 9.3 | 1.1–77.4 | 0.039 | ref | ref | |||||
| >7 | 28.9 | 3.7–224.7 | 0.001 | 37.6 | 4.8–296.2 | 0.001 | 3.3 | 1.4–8.0 | 0.008 | 3.0 | 0.9–9.3 | 0.063 | |
| sPSA | |||||||||||||
| Continuous | 1.80 | 0.99–3.24 | 0.051 | 1.02 | 0.98–1.07 | 0.31 | |||||||
| pT category | |||||||||||||
| T2 | ref | ref | |||||||||||
| T3 | 60.3 | 1.4–2688.4 | 0.034 | 41.4 | 0.6–2642.6 | 0.079 | |||||||
| N category | |||||||||||||
| N0 | ref | ref | |||||||||||
| N1 | 6.5 | 2.5–16.9 | <0.001 | 5.5 | 2.1–14.6 | 0.001 | |||||||
| Lamin A | |||||||||||||
| Low | ref | ref | ref | ref | |||||||||
| High | 0.3 | 0.2–1.5 | 0.27 | 0.4 | 0.16–1.0 | 0.052 | 0.4 | 0.1–1.0 | 0.052 | 0.4 | 0.2–1.2 | 0.11 | |
| Lamin B1 | |||||||||||||
| Low | ref | ref | ref | ref | |||||||||
| High | 1.5 | 0.4–5.1 | 0.55 | 1.6 | 0.5–5.7 | 0.44 | 1.4 | 0.4–5.1 | 0.57 | 1.7 | 0.5–6.1 | 0.40 | |
| Lamin B2 | |||||||||||||
| Low | ref | ref | ref | ref | |||||||||
| High | 0.5 | 0.2–1.2 | 0.11 | 0.41 | 0.17–0.99 | 0.047 | 0.4 | 0.2–1.0 | 0.058 | 0.6 | 0.2–1.6 | 0.29 | |
| Lamin C | |||||||||||||
| Low | ref | ref | ref | ref | |||||||||
| High | 0.4 | 0.2–1.2 | 0.095 | 0.2 | 0.1–0.6 | 0.004 | 0.3 | 0.1–0.8 | 0.023 | 0.3 | 0.1–0.9 | 0.03 | |
HR, hazard ratio (describes the relative risk of the event at any given time based on comparing the group with the reference group); 95% CI, 95% confidence interval (A 95% confidence interval means that 95% of the values of an unobservable parameter of interest would set in the interval if the experiment is repeated); na, not available; ref, reference
* Significant p-value
a pathological tumor (pT) category refers to the stage (i.e. size and extent) of primary tumor in the TNM tumor staging system. pT2 = Tumor confined within prostate, pT3 = Tumor invading extraprostatic tissue and/or seminal vesicle(s).
b N category describes in TNM system weather (N1) or not (N0) the cancer has spread to the regional lymph nodes.
Fig 1Low lamin A expression in PCa predicts unfavorable DSS.
(A) Representative examples of TMA slides stained for lamin A with immunohistochemistry. Low and high power field images from both low and high expressing tumors are shown. (B-C) Kaplan-Meier analysis shows a trend between low lamin A expression and poor DSS in the entire cohort (B; p = 0.27). However, in the subpopulation of patients with Gleason score >6 tumors, there is statistically significant difference (C; p = 0.044).
Fig 2High lamin B1 expression in PCa predicts increased risk for BCR.
(A) Representative examples of TMA slides stained for lamin B1 with immunohistochemistry. Low and high power field images from both low and high expressing tumors are shown. (B-C) Kaplan-Meier analysis indicates that high lamin B1 expression predicts shorter time to BCR in the whole cohort (B; p = 0.038) but has no correlation with DSS (C; p = 0.55).
Fig 3Low lamin B2 expression in PCa predicts shortened DSS.
(A) Representative examples of TMA slides stained for lamin B2 with immunohistochemistry. Low and high power field images from both low and high expressing tumors are shown. (B-C) Kaplan-Meier analysis shows a trend between low lamin B2 expression and shortened DSS in the entire cohort (B; p = 0.099). In the subpopulation of patients with Gleason score >6 tumors, Kaplan-Meyer analysis slightly fails to show statistically significant difference but a strong trend is seen (C; p = 0.051).