| Literature DB >> 27304186 |
Yan-Yan Liu1,2, Shao-Jun Lin3, Yuan-Yuan Chen4, Li-Na Liu5, Liu-Bin Bao5, Lin-Quan Tang1, Jing-Song Ou6, Zhi-Gang Liu7, Xiao-Zhong Chen4, Yan Xu4, Jun Ma1, Anthony T Chan8, Ming Chen4, Yun-Fei Xia1, Wan-Li Liu1, Yi-Xin Zeng1, Hai-Qiang Mai1, Mu-Sheng Zeng1, Jian-Ji Pan3, Xing Zhang1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to assess the prognostic value of pretreatment high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and investigate the possible biological effects of these lipoproteins on NPC cells in vitro. EXPERIMENTALEntities:
Keywords: high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; nasopharyngeal carcinoma; prognosis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27304186 PMCID: PMC5190001 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.7160
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1Kaplan-Meier estimate of overall survival (OS) for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) according to serum HDL-C levels
The following analyses are presented: OS (A) in 530 patients in the training cohort; OS (B) in 982 patients in the validation cohort A; and OS (C) in 500 patients in the validation cohort B. P values were calculated using the log-rank test.
Clinical characteristic of patients according to HDL-C levels in the training and validation cohorts
| Characteristic | Training cohort ( | Validation cohort ( | Validation cohort ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| low HDL-C group | high HDL-C group | low HDL-C group | high HDL-C group | low HDL-C group | high HDL-C group | |
| Total no· of patients | 256 (48.3%) | 274 (51.7%) | 563 (57.3%) | 419 (42.7%) | 338 (67.6%) | 162 (32.4%) |
| Age, years | ||||||
| ≤ 45 | 132 (51.6%) | 131 (47.8%) | 279 (49.6%) | 178 (42.5%) | 130 (38.5%) | 49 (30.2%) |
| > 45 | 124 (48.4%) | 143 (52.2%) | 284 (50.4%) | 241 (57.5%) | 208 (61.5%) | 113 (69.8%) |
| Sex | ||||||
| Male | 196 (76.6%) | 197 (71.9%) | 443 (78.7%) | 281 (67.1%) | 259 (76.6%) | 103 (63.6%) |
| Female | 60 (23.4%) | 77 (28.1%) | 120 (21.3%) | 138 (32.9%) | 79 (23.4%) | 59 (36.4%) |
| Pathology | ||||||
| WHO type II | 11 (4.2%) | 13 (4.7%) | 18 (3.2%) | 10 (2.4%) | NA | NA |
| WHO type III | 245 (95.8%) | 261 (95.3%) | 545 (96.8%) | 409 (97.6%) | NA | NA |
| Tumor stage | ||||||
| T1 | 22 (8.6%) | 37 (13.5%) | 17 (3.0%) | 14 (3.3%) | 64 (18.9%) | 32 (19.8%) |
| T2 | 100 (39.1%) | 100 (36.5%) | 173 (30.7%) | 130 (31.0%) | 143 (42.3%) | 76 (46.9%) |
| T3 | 47 (18.4%) | 46 (16.8%) | 264 (46.9%) | 189 (45.1%) | 86 (25.4%) | 31 (19.1%) |
| T4 | 87 (34.0%) | 91 (33.2%) | 109 (19.4%) | 86 (20.5%) | 45 (13.3%) | 23 (14.2%) |
| Node stage | ||||||
| N0 | 56 (21.9%) | 74 (27.0%) | 97 (17.2%) | 70 (16.7%) | 68 (20.1%) | 33 (20.4%) |
| N1 | 85 (33.2%) | 99 (36.1%) | 205 (36.4%) | 143 (34.1%) | 114 (33.7%) | 65 (40.1%) |
| N2 | 107 (41.8%) | 92 (33.6%) | 209 (37.1%) | 173 (41.3%) | 116 (34.3%) | 51 (31.5%) |
| N3 | 8 (3.1%) | 9 (3.3%) | 52 (9.2%) | 33 (7.9%) | 40 (11.8%) | 13 (8.0%) |
| TNM stage | ||||||
| I | 8 (3.1%) | 10 (3.6%) | 4 (0.7%) | 2 (0.5%) | 18 (5.3%) | 8 (4.9%) |
| II a–b | 58 (22.7%) | 87 (31.8%) | 85 (15.1%) | 56 (13.4%) | 83 (24.6%) | 50 (30.9%) |
| III | 94 (36.7%) | 78 (28.5%) | 319 (56.7%) | 252 (60.1%) | 159 (47.0%) | 68 (42.0%) |
| IV a–b | 96 (37.5%) | 99 (36.1%) | 155 (27.5%) | 109 (26.0%) | 78 (23.1%) | 36 (22.2%) |
| Overall survival | ||||||
| Deaths | 78 (30.5%) | 108 (39.4%) | 153 (27.2%) | 152 (36.3%) | 43 (12.7%) | 32 (19.8%) |
| 5-year | 80.2% | 72.0% | 78.5% | 71.4% | 83.60% | 76.20% |
Data are n (%) or median (IQR). NA = not information available. * χ2 test.
Summary of multivariate analyses of prognostic factors in the training and validation cohort
| Endpoint | Training Cohort | Validation Cohort | Validation Cohort | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | ||||
| Death | ||||||
| Sex, male vs female | 0.915 (0.652–1.285) | 0.609 | 0.784 (0.596–1.031 | 0.081 | 1.012 (0.597–1.714) | 0.965 |
| Age, ≥ 45 years vs < 45years | 2.069 (1.527–2.802) | < 0.001 | 1.577 (1.248–1.991) | < 0.001 | 3.090 (1.692–5.644) | < 0.001 |
| WHO pathological type, type III vs type II | 1.436 (0.701–2.942) | 0.323 | 0.791 (0.555–1.129) | 0.197 | NA | NA |
| T classification, T3–4 vs T1–2 | 1.638 (1.217–2.206) | 0.001 | 1.591 (1.235–2.051) | < 0.001 | 3.103 (1.933–4.980) | < 0.001 |
| N classification, N2–3 vs N0–1 | 1.732 (1.282–2.339) | < 0.001 | 2.060 (1.634–2.596) | < 0.001 | 1.963 (1.227–3.139) | 0.005 |
| HDL-C, mmol/L (≥ 1.295 vs < 1.295) | 1.443 (1.075–1.936) | 0.015 | 1.451 (1.155–1.822) | 0.001 | 1.934 (1.213–3.083) | 0.006 |
Figure 4Study profile
Figure 2HDL promotes proliferation and enhances the transformation ability of NPC cells
The effects of HDL (50 μg/mL) on SUNE2 (A) and 5-8F (B) cell proliferation were determined by MTT assay. (C) Colony formation assay was performed on SUNE2 and 5-8F cell lines cultured with medium alone or HDL at 50 μg/mL for 6 days. (D) A Boyden chamber assay was performed. SUNE2 and 5-8F cells were plated on the upper cell culture inserts, and the culture medium was plated in the lower chambers in the presence or absence of HDL at 50 μg/mL for 24 h. Original magnification, ×400. (E) The expression of SR-B1 in SR-B1 shRNA (shRNA#1, shRNA#2) or scramble shRNA-expressing SUNE2 cells was analyzed using Western blot. (F) The effects of HDL (50 μg/mL) on SR-B1 shRNA or scramble shRNA cell proliferation were determined by MTT assay. (G) A colony formation assay of SR-B1 shRNA or scramble shRNA cells cultured with HDL at 50 μg/mL for 6 days was performed. (H) A Boyden chamber assay was performed. SR-B1 shRNA or scramble shRNA cells were plated on the upper cell culture inserts, and the culture medium was plated in the lower chambers in the presence of HDL at 50 μg/mL for 24 h. Original magnification, ×400. (I) The cells were incubated with HDL (50 μg/mL) for the indicated time periods, and extracts were analyzed by Western blot. The ratios of phospho-Src to Src (p-Src/Src), PI3K to GAPDH (PI3K/GAPDH), phospho-AKT to AKT (p-AKT/AKT) and phospho-ERK to ERK (p-ERK/ERK) were calculated after densitometric analysis was performed on the Western blots. (J) A schematic representation of the major molecular mechanism of the biological effects of HDL on NPC cells. Error bars represent SEM. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001 compared with the cells treated with medium alone.
Figure 3HDL increases the chemoresistance of NPC cells
The growth curves of SUNE2 (A, C) and 5–8F (B, D) cells 48 h post-treatment with the indicated doses of DDP (the right panel) and Taxol (the left panel). DDP (2 μg/mL) and Taxol (1 μg/mL)-induced apoptosis was assessed in SUNE2 (E) and 5–8F (F) cells in the presence or absence of HDL at 50 μg/mL. Error bars represent SEM. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001.