| Literature DB >> 26818094 |
Shui-Shen Zhang1,2,3,4, Xuan Xie5, Jing Wen6,7,8, Kong-Jia Luo9,10,11, Qian-Wen Liu12,13,14, Hong Yang15,16,17, Yi Hu18,19,20, Jian-Hua Fu21,22,23.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: TRPV6 is over-expressed and promotes the proliferation and invasion in many cancers. The association between the expression of TRPV6 and clinical outcome in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has not been studied yet. We aim to elucidate the role of TRPV6 in predicting prognosis of patients with ESCC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26818094 PMCID: PMC4730645 DOI: 10.1186/s13000-016-0457-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagn Pathol ISSN: 1746-1596 Impact factor: 2.644
Fig. 1TRPV6 was down-regulated in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. TRPV6 mRNA was markedly decreased in tumor tissues than that in paired adjacent non-tumor tissues (a and b). TRPV6 mRNA was down-regulated in ten esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cell lines when compared with pooled samples from 45 patients of adjacent non-tumor tissues (Np) (c)
Fig. 2Representative of TRPV6 expression in three pairs of ESCC tumor and adjacent non-tumor tissue detected by immunostaining with anti-TRPV6 antibody (brown). (magnification: 100×)
The association between TRPV6 expression and clinicopathologic features in patients with ESCC
| Characteristic | mRNA cohort | Protein cohort | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case | Downregulation (%) |
| Case | Downregulation (%) |
| |
| Age | 0.827 | 0.407 | ||||
| ≤ 58 | 72 | 28(38.9) | 113 | 58(51.3) | ||
| > 58 | 102 | 38(37.3) | 105 | 48 (45.7) | ||
| Gender | 0.298 | 0.093 | ||||
| Male | 126 | 45(35.7) | 121 | 65(53.7) | ||
| Female | 48 | 21(43.8) | 97 | 41(42.3) | ||
| Location | 0.992 | 0.364 | ||||
| Upper | 35 | 13(37.1) | 49 | 20(40.8) | ||
| Middle | 94 | 36(38.3) | 152 | 76(50.0) | ||
| Lower | 45 | 17(37.8) | 17 | 10(58.8) | ||
| Differentiation | 0.133 | 0.398 | ||||
| Grade 1 | 41 | 16(39.0) | 24 | 14(58.3) | ||
| Grade 2 | 91 | 29(31.9) | 147 | 67(45.6) | ||
| Grade 3 | 42 | 21(50.0) | 47 | 25(53.2) | ||
| pT category | 0.089 | 0.073 | ||||
| T1–2 | 43 | 15(34.4) | 80 | 37(46.7) | ||
| T3–4 | 131 | 64(48.8) | 138 | 82(59.3) | ||
| pN category | 0.854 | 0.459 | ||||
| N0 | 96 | 37(38.5) | 124 | 63(50.8) | ||
| N1–3 | 78 | 29(37.2) | 94 | 43(45.7) | ||
| Pathological staging | 0.827 | 0.365 | ||||
| I–II | 101 | 39(38.6) | 137 | 67(48.8) | ||
| III | 73 | 27(37.0) | 81 | 42(52.2) | ||
aChi-square test
Fig. 3Kaplan-Meier curves showed that no significant association between TRPV6 expression and disease-specific survival of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma was noted either in mRNA cohort (a) or protein cohort (b)
Univariate analysis of TRPV6 expression and clinicopathological factors for disease specific survival in patients with ESCC
| Characteristic | mRNA cohort | Protein cohort | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-year DSS (%) |
| 3-year DSS (%) |
| |
| TRPV6 expression | 0.531 | 0.244 | ||
| Downregulation | 53.8 | 34.0 | ||
| Normal expression | 59.6 | 42.9 | ||
| Age | 0.145 | 0.448 | ||
| ≤ 58 | 60.6 | 38.9 | ||
| > 58 | 55.3 | 38.1 | ||
| Gender | 0.653 | 0.880 | ||
| Male | 58.1 | 40.2 | ||
| Female | 55.9 | 37.2 | ||
| Location | 0.545 | 0.428 | ||
| Upper | 64.4 | 30.6 | ||
| Middle | 56.1 | 40.1 | ||
| Lower | 55.2 | 47.1 | ||
| Differentiation | 0.330 | 0.010 | ||
| Grade 1 | 62.6 | 54.2 | ||
| Grade 2 | 60.7 | 40.8 | ||
| Grade 3 | 45.4 | 23.4 | ||
| pT category | 0.040 | 0.002 | ||
| T1–2 | 66.4 | 52.5 | ||
| T3–4 | 55.6 | 30.4 | ||
| pN category | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||
| N0 | 74.0 | 54.0 | ||
| N1–3 | 37.5 | 18.1 | ||
| Pathological staging | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||
| I–II | 72.1 | 53.3 | ||
| III | 37.5 | 13.6 | ||
aKaplan-Meier method (log-rank test)
DSS, disease specific survival
Fig. 4Univariate analysis showed that pT category (a), pN category (b), and pathological staging (c) were significantly associate disease specific survival of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the mRNA cohort
Fig. 5Univariate analysis showed that differentiation (a), pT category (b), pN category (c), and pathological staging (d) were significantly associate disease specific survival of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the protein cohort
Multivariate survival analysisa for disease specific survival in patients with ESCC
| Prognostic factor | mRNA cohort | Protein cohort | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95 % CI |
| HR | 95 % CI |
| |
| Differentiation | - | - | - | 1.58 | 1.16-2.15 | 0.004 |
| pT category | 1.40 | 0.80-2.46 | 0.240 | 1.36 | 0.92-2.01 | 0.127 |
| pN category | 2.95 | 1.89-4.62 | <0.001 | 2.93 | 2.07-4.15 | <0.001 |
aCox’s proportional hazards regression analysis (Forward stepwise)
HR, hazard ratio
95 % CI, 95 % confidence interval
-,unavailable
Fig. 6Two cohorts both showed that TRPV6 played a contradicting role in predicting survival of male and female patients. Downregulation of TRPV6 was associated with a poor 3-year disease specific survival in patients with male in mRNA (a) and protein cohort (c). Downregulation of TRPV6 was significantly associated with favorable 3-year disease specific survival in patients with female in mRNA (b) and protein cohort (d)