| Literature DB >> 28415703 |
Yixin Zhu1, Weijin Yang2,3, Guangnian Ji4, Nan Lin2,3, Weihang Wu2,3, Ping Xiong1, Chenxin Zheng1, Lei Yan1, Peng Wan2,3, Yu Wang2,3.
Abstract
Expression of bromodomain protein 4 (BRD4) has been reported to predict a worse prognosis in solid tumors. However, its expression profile and prognostic value in gastric carcinoma (GC) remains unknown. Here we investigated BRD4 expression in GC and explored its association with patient survival. Tissue samples were obtained from 95 GC patients who underwent surgical resection to remove the primary tumor from January 2009 to December 2010. Immunohistochemistry was used to detect the expression of BRD4 in GC tissues and adjacent normal tissues. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to analyze the data of BRD4 expression profile and clinicopathological characteristics. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed BRD4 was overexpressed in GC tissue compared with adjacent normal tissue. BRD4 expression was significantly associated with TNM stage (p < 0.001), lymphatic permeation (p = 0.011), and vital status at the end of follow-up (p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier survival curves and the log-rank test demonstrated that higher BRD4 expression was an adverse predictive factor for survival in GC. Multivariate analysis by Cox proportional hazards regression revealed that BRD4 expression was an independent worse prognostic factor in GC. In conclusion, BRD4 could act as a potential biomarker for prognostic assessment of GC.Entities:
Keywords: BRD4; gastric adenocarcinoma; predictor; prognosis; surgical resection
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28415703 PMCID: PMC5458191 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.16087
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Clinicopathological characteristics of patients with gastric carcinoma
| Clinicopathological characteristics | Number of cases ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Number of cases | % | |
| < 60 | 39 | 41.1 |
| ≥ 60 | 56 | 58.9 |
| Male | 70 | 73.7 |
| Female | 25 | 26.3 |
| No | 46 | 48.4 |
| Yes | 49 | 51.6 |
| Well differentiated | 8 | 8.4 |
| Moderately differentiated | 47 | 49.5 |
| Poorly differentiated | 40 | 42.1 |
| T1 | 20 | 21.6 |
| T2 | 20 | 21.6 |
| T3 | 21 | 22.1 |
| T4 | 34 | 35.7 |
| Absent | 34 | 35.8 |
| Present | 61 | 64.2 |
| Ulcerative type | 73 | 76.8 |
| Papillary type | 1 | 1.1 |
| Superficial type | 11 | 11.6 |
| Protrude type | 5 | 5.3 |
| Massive type | 2 | 2.1 |
| Infiltrative type | 3 | 3.2 |
| Adenocarcinoma | 86 | 90.5 |
| Signet-ring cell carcinoma | 9 | 9.5 |
| No | 68 | 71.6 |
| Yes | 27 | 28.4 |
| Low | 73 | 78.5 |
| High | 20 | 21.5 |
| Low | 50 | 52.6 |
| High | 45 | 47.4 |
| Alive | 39 | 41.1 |
| Dead | 56 | 58.9 |
Figure 1Immunohistochemical staining of BRD4 protein in gastric carcinoma (red arrow) and adjacent normal tissue (yellow arrow)
Tissue samples were observed under an Olympus CX41 light microscope (Tokyo, Japan). Digital images were obtained using Moticam 2206 (Motic Instruments, Richmond, British Columbia, Canada) and Motic Images Advanced 3.2 software at different magnifications.
Relationship between clinicopathological characteristics and BRD4 expression in patients with gastric carcinoma
| Characteristics | BRD4 expression | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Low (%) | High (%) | ||
| < 60 | 21 (53.8) | 18 (46.2) | 1.000 |
| ≥ 60 | 29 (51.8) | 27 (48.2) | |
| Male | 38 (54.3) | 32 (45.7) | 0.645 |
| Female | 12 (48.0) | 13 (52.0) | |
| No | 27 (58.7) | 19 (41.3) | 0.306 |
| Yes | 23 (46.9) | 26 (53.1) | |
| T1 | 17 (85.0) | 3 (15.0) | <0.001 |
| T2 | 15 (75.0) | 5 (25.0) | |
| T3 | 10 (47.6) | 11 (52.4) | |
| T4 | 8 (23.5) | 26 (76.5) | |
| Absent | 24 (70.6) | 10 (29.4) | 0.011 |
| Present | 26 (42.6) | 35 (57.4) | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 46 (53.5) | 40 (46.5) | 0.731 |
| Signet-ring cell carcinoma | 4 (44.4) | 5 (55.6) | |
| Low | 37 (50.7) | 36 (49.3) | 0.804 |
| High | 11 (55.0) | 9 (45.0) | |
| Alive | 35 (89.7) | 4 (10.3) | < 0.001 |
| Dead | 15 (26.8) | 41 (73.2) | |
Note: Bold values are significant at p < 0.05.
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis of overall survival in patients with gastric carcinoma
| Characteristics | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | |||
| < 60 | 1 | 0.185 | ||
| ≥ 60 | 0.690 (0.399–1.194) | |||
| Male | 1 | 0.104 | ||
| Female | 1.593 (0.909–2.794) | |||
| No | 1 | 0.376 | ||
| Yes | 1.270 (0.749–2.153) | |||
| pT1 | 1 | < 0.001 | 1 | 0.007 |
| pT2 | 1.495 (0.474–4.711) | 2.616 (0.566–12.100) | ||
| pT3 | 4.811 (1.758–13.169) | 4.609 (1.159–18.336) | ||
| pT4 | 7.836 (2.997–20.489) | 7.313 (1.944–27.517) | ||
| Adenocarcinoma | 1 | 0.861 | ||
| Signet-ring cell carcinoma | 1.085 (0.433–2.721) | |||
| Present | 1 | < 0.001 | 1 | 0.642 |
| Absent | 0.156 (0.070–0.346) | 0.537 (0.039–7.387) | ||
| pN0 | 1 | <0.001 | 1 | 0.507 |
| pN1–pN3 | 6.932 (3.120–15.401) | 2.455 (0.173–34.854) | ||
| Low | 1 | 0.361 | ||
| High | 0.727 (0.367–1.442) | |||
| Low | 1 | < 0.001 | 1 | < 0.001 |
| High | 6.387 (3.480–11.720) | 3.859 (1.988–7.489) | ||
Note: Bold values are significant at p < 0.05.
Figure 2Survival analysis of patients with gastric carcinoma by the Kaplan–Meier method
Patients with higher BRD4 expression in tumor tissue were closely correlated with poorer overall survival than patients with lower expression (p < 0.05).