| Literature DB >> 27439521 |
Yan Zhou1, Beili Wang1, Jiong Wu1, Chunyan Zhang1, Yiwen Zhou1, XinRong Yang2, Jian Zhou2, Wei Guo3, Jia Fan4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study was carried out to determine the prognostic significance of preoperative peripheral epithelial cell adhesion molecule- positive (EpCAM (+)) circulating tumor cell (CTC) and T regulatory (Treg) cell levels in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients for the prediction of postoperative recurrence following curative resection.Entities:
Keywords: Circulating tumor cells; Epithelial cell adhesion molecule; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Regulatory T cells; Tumor recurrence
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27439521 PMCID: PMC4955266 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-2526-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Fig. 1Expression of EpCAM mRNA+ CTC and Treg/CD4+ in HCC recurrence vs no recurrence group. a, Based on 2−ΔΔ q algorithm transformation, the relative EpCAM mRNA expression of CTC in HCC patients with or without tumor recurrence after resection. EpCAM mRNA+ CTC showed significantly higher in recurrence patients (p = 0.001); b, The high ratio of Treg/CD4+ was observed d in recurrence group (p = 0.0197)
Association of clinical characteristics and pathological factors with early recurrence
| Variables | Early recurrence |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | |||
| Age | ≤50 | 15 | 8 | 0.365 |
| >50 | 20 | 6 | ||
| Sex | male | 26 | 10 | 0.838 |
| female | 9 | 4 | ||
| HBsAg | Negative | 7 | 2 | 0.641 |
| Postive | 28 | 12 | ||
| HBeAg | Negative | 27 | 9 | 0.357 |
| Postive | 8 | 5 | ||
| HBVDNA | <5*102 | 21 | 10 | 0.453 |
| >5*102 | 14 | 4 | ||
| ALT (U/L) | ≤40 | 30 | 9 | 0.412 |
| >40 | 5 | 5 | ||
| AFP (ng/ml) | ≤400 | 23 | 10 | 0.768 |
| >400 | 12 | 4 | ||
| EpCAM mRNA+ CTC (2-ΔΔCq) | Low (<2.22) | 28 | 4 |
|
| High (≥2.22) | 7 | 10 | ||
| Treg/CD4+ (%) | <5.07 | 31 | 9 |
|
| ≥5.07 | 4 | 5 | ||
| Child-Pugh stage | A | 34 | 14 | 0.523 |
| B | 1 | 0 | ||
| Liver cirrhosis | No | 9 | 3 | 0.753 |
| Yes | 26 | 11 | ||
| Tumor number | Single | 33 | 11 | 0.101 |
| Multiple | 2 | 3 | ||
| Tumor size (cm) | ≤5 | 21 | 8 | 0.854 |
| >5 | 14 | 6 | ||
| Tumor encapsulation | Complete | 16 | 5 | 0.523 |
| None | 19 | 9 | ||
| Satellite lesion | No | 34 | 10 |
|
| Yes | 1 | 4 | ||
| Vascular invasion | No | 21 | 4 |
|
| Yes | 14 | 10 | ||
| Edmondson stage | I-II | 22 | 9 | 0.925 |
| II-IV | 13 | 5 | ||
| BCLC stage | 0 + A | 33 | 11 | 0.101 |
| B + C | 2 | 3 | ||
Abbreviations: ALT alanine transaminase, HBsAg Hepatitis B surface antigen, AFP alphafetoprotein, HBeAg Hepatitis B e antigen. p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically-significant
Association of EpCAM+ CTCs with clinical characteristics
| Clinical characteristics | CTC (2-ΔΔCq) |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low (<2.22) | High (≥2.22) | |||
| Age (y) | ≤50 | 13 | 10 | 0.224 |
| >50 | 19 | 7 | ||
| Sex | Female | 9 | 4 | 0.729 |
| Male | 23 | 13 | ||
| HBsAg | Negative | 7 | 2 | 0.384 |
| Postive | 25 | 15 | ||
| HBeAg | Negative | 24 | 12 | 0.586 |
| Postive | 8 | 5 | ||
| HBVDNA | <5*102 | 21 | 10 | 0.703 |
| >5*102 | 11 | 7 | ||
| Child-Pugh score | A | 32 | 16 | 0.166 |
| B | 0 | 1 | ||
| Liver cirrhosis | No | 8 | 4 | 0.909 |
| Yes | 24 | 13 | ||
| ALT (U/L) | ≤40 | 19 | 14 | 0.103 |
| >40 | 13 | 3 | ||
| AFP (ng/ml) | ≤400 | 28 | 11 | 0.060 |
| >400 | 4 | 6 | ||
| Tumor number | Single | 30 | 4 | 0.210 |
| Multiple | 2 | 3 | ||
| Tumor size (cm) | ≤5 | 18 | 11 | 0.566 |
| >5 | 14 | 6 | ||
| Tumor encapsulation | Complete | 15 | 6 | 0.436 |
| None | 17 | 11 | ||
| Satellite lesion | No | 30 | 4 | 0.210 |
| Yes | 2 | 3 | ||
| Vascular invasion | No | 20 | 5 |
|
| Yes | 12 | 12 | ||
| Edmondson stage | I-II | 20 | 11 | 0.879 |
| II-IV | 12 | 6 | ||
| BCLC stage | 0 + A | 30 | 14 | 0.210 |
| B + C | 2 | 3 | ||
| Treg/CD4+ (%) | <5.07 | 29 | 11 |
|
| ≥5.07 | 3 | 6 | ||
| Early recurrence | No | 28 | 7 |
|
| Yes | 4 | 10 | ||
p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically-significant
Association of Treg/CD4+ with clinical characteristics
| Clinical characteristics | Treg/CD4+ <5.07 % | Treg/CD4 ≥ 5.07 % |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (y) | ≤50 | 16 | 7 |
|
| >50 | 24 | 2 | ||
| Sex | Male | 13 | 0 |
|
| Female | 27 | 9 | ||
| HBsAg | Negative | 8 | 1 | 0.534 |
| Postive | 32 | 8 | ||
| HBeAg | Negative | 30 | 6 | 0.609 |
| Postive | 10 | 3 | ||
| HBVDNA | <5*102 | 25 | 6 | 0.815 |
| >5*102 | 15 | 3 | ||
| Child-Pugh score | A | 39 | 9 | 0.632 |
| B | 1 | 0 | ||
| Liver cirrhosis | No | 10 | 2 | 0.861 |
| Yes | 30 | 7 | ||
| ALT (U/L) | ≤75 | 26 | 7 | 0.460 |
| >75 | 14 | 2 | ||
| AFP (ng/ml) | ≤400 | 32 | 7 | 0.881 |
| >400 | 8 | 2 | ||
| Tumor number | Single | 36 | 8 | 0.921 |
| Multiple | 4 | 1 | ||
| Tumor size (cm) | ≤5 | 25 | 4 | 0.319 |
| >5 | 15 | 5 | ||
| Tumor encapsulation | Complete | 17 | 4 | 0.915 |
| None | 23 | 5 | ||
| Satellite lesion | No | 38 | 6 |
|
| Yes | 2 | 3 | ||
| Vascular invasion | No | 22 | 3 | 0.240 |
| Yes | 18 | 6 | ||
| Edmondson stage | I-II | 25 | 6 | 0.815 |
| II-IV | 15 | 3 | ||
| BCLC stage | 0 + A | 37 | 7 | 0.187 |
| B + C | 3 | 2 | ||
p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically-significant
Association between EpCAM+ CTC and Treg/CD4+
| EpCAM mRNA + CTC(2-ΔΔCT) |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low (<2.22) | High (≥2.22) | |||
| Treg/CD4+ (%) | <5.07 | 29 | 11 |
|
| >5.07 | 3 | 6 | ||
p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically-significant
Fig. 2Association between EpCAM+ CTC and Treg/CD4+ ratio. Distribution of Treg/CD4+ ratio in EpCAM -positive and negative group. The cutoff to discriminate between CTC-positive and -negative was set at 2.0 [9]
Analyses of risk factors for HCC recurrence
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95 % CI) |
| HR (95 % CI) |
| |
| Age (>50y vs. ≤ 50y) | 0.626 (0.217–1.804) | 0.385 | N.A. | |
| Gender (Male vs. Female) | 0.886 (0.278–2.827) | 0.838 | N.A. | |
| HBsAg (Positive vs. Negative) | 1.433 (0.321–6.406) | 0.638 | N.A. | |
| Cirrhosis (Positive vs. Negative) | 1.323 (0.369–4.743) | 0.668 | N.A. | |
| Child-Pugh grade (B vs. A) | 0.048 (0.000–23944) | 0.700 | N.A. | |
| ALT (>40 U/L vs. ≤ 40 U/L) | 0.783 (0.246–2.497) | 0.679 | N.A. | |
| AFP (>400 ng/ml vs. ≤ 400 ng/ml) | 2.258 (0.756–6.743) | 0.145 | N.A. | |
| Tumor number (multiple vs. one) | 3.570 (0.998–12.896) | 0.052 | N.A. | |
| Tumor size (>5 cm vs. ≤5 cm) | 1.094 (0.379–3.154) | 0.868 | N.A. | |
| Tumor encapsulation (Yes vs. No) | 1.425 (0.477–4.252) | 0.526 | N.A. | |
| Satellite lesion (Yes vs. No) | 5.726 (1.771–18.509) |
| 5.917 (1.342–26.078) |
|
| Vascular invasion (Yes vs. No) | 2.943 (0.922–9.399) | 0.068 | N.A. | |
| Edmondson classification (III-IV vs. I-II) | 1.057 (0.354–3.155) | 0.921 | N.A. | |
| BCLC stage (B + C vs. 0 + A) | 3.496 (0.966–12.646) | 0.056 | N.A. | |
| EpCAM+ CTC 2-ΔΔCq (≥2.22 vs. < 2.22) | 6.580 (2.056–21.055) |
| 6.668 (1.943–22.883) |
|
| Treg/CD4+(≥5.07 vs. < 5.07) | 2.993 (0.998–8.947) |
| 0.825 (0.196–3.468) | 0.792 |
Fig. 3The Prognostic significance of EpCAM mRNA+ CTC and Treg/CD4+ ratio in HCC patients. a. Kaplan–Meier analysis of HCC patients receiving curative resection treatment according to relative preoperative EpCAM expression <2.22 or ≥2.22 (2−ΔΔC q algorithm transformation). b. Kaplan–Meier analysis of patients with HCC undergoing curative resection according to preoperative Treg/CD4+ <5.07 % or ≥5.07 %. c. Prognostic significance of combination of EpCAM mRNA+ CTC and Treg/CD4+ load with respect to time to recurrence in patients with high EpCAM mRNA+ CTC (≥2.22) and high Treg/CD4+(≥5.07 %), high EpCAM mRNA+ CTC(<2.22) and low Treg/CD4+(<5.07 %), low/no EpCAM mRNA+ CTC (<2.22) and high Treg/CD4+(≥5.07 %), and low/no EpCAM mRNA+ CTC (<2.22) and low Treg/CD4+(<5.07 %)