| Literature DB >> 28881799 |
Min Wu1,2,3, Lujun Chen1,2,4, Ting Xu1,2,3, Bin Xu1,2,4, Jingting Jiang1,2,4, Changping Wu1,2,4,5.
Abstract
We have previously reported that the higher expression of TF in human esophageal cancer tissues was significantly associated with tumor invasion, intratumoral microvessel density and patients' postoperative prognoses. Besides its trans-membranous form, TF also has alternatively spliced transcripts. In the present study, the transcripts of the two TF isoforms, flTF and asTF, in human gastric cancer tissues were determined by real-time PCR, and the correlation between the expression of TF isoforms and patient's clinicopathological features was also analyzed. Our results showed that the relative mRNA expression levels of flTF and asTF in human gastric cancer tissues was significantly higher than those in normal tissues (P=0.035 and P=0.006, respectively). The relative mRNA expression level of asTF was significantly associated with age (P=0.018), meanwhile, we could not find that flTF or asTF expression level was correlated with any other characteristics of the patients, including gender, TNM stage, pathological grade, tumor size, histological type, or chemotherapy sensitivity. Univariate analysis demonstrated that the overall survival rate of gastric cancer patients with lower flTF or asTF expression level was greater than those with higher expression level (P=0.018 and =0.038, respectively). Multivariate COX model analysis also demonstrated that flTF expression (P=0.048) or asTF expression (P=0.002) could be used as independent prognostic predictors in human gastric cancer. Thus, both flTF and asTF mRNA expression levels in cancer tissues could be used as useful risk factors for evaluating the prognoses of patients suffering from gastric cancer.Entities:
Keywords: alternative splice; gastric cancer; prognosis; tissue factor
Year: 2017 PMID: 28881799 PMCID: PMC5581098 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.17942
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1The structure of flTF and asTF
(A) The exons of flTF and asTF. (B) The electrophoresis analysis of the PCR products of flTF and asTF. Left panel, the primers for flTF as well as asTF adopted from the reference. Right panel, the primers designed by ourselves which were used in the real-time PCR assay.
Figure 2The mRNA expression levels of flTF and asTF in human gastric tissues
(A) The mRNA expression level of flTF in gastric cancer tissues was significantly higher than that in normal gastric tissues. (B) The mRNA expression level of asTF in gastric cancer tissues was significantly higher than that in normal gastric tissues.
Correlation between patients’ clinical parameters and the mRNA expression levels of flTF and asTF in human gastric cancer tissues
| Clinical parameters | Cases | flTF expression level | Cases | asTF expression level | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High (n, %) | Low (n, %) | High (n, %) | Low (n, %) | |||||||
| Gender | ||||||||||
| Male | 34 | 18(52.9) | 16(47.1) | 0.318 | 0.573 | 34 | 15(44.1) | 19(55.9) | 1.028 | 0.311 |
| Female | 18 | 11(61.1) | 7(38.9) | 17 | 5(29.4) | 12(70.6) | ||||
| Age (years) | ||||||||||
| ≤60 | 19 | 13(68.4) | 6(31.6) | 1.943 | 0.163 | 18 | 11(61.1) | 7(38.9) | 5.595 | |
| >60 | 33 | 16(48.5) | 17(51.5) | 33 | 9(27.3) | 24(72.7) | ||||
| Tumor stage | ||||||||||
| T2 | 3 | 2(66.7) | 1(33.3) | 2.484 | 0.289 | 3 | 1(33.3) | 2(66.7) | 1.106 | 0.575 |
| T3 | 7 | 2(28.6) | 5(71.4) | 7 | 4(57.1) | 3(42.9) | ||||
| T4 | 42 | 25(59.5) | 17(40.5) | 41 | 15(36.6) | 26(63.4) | ||||
| Nodal stage | ||||||||||
| N0 | 3 | 2(66.7) | 1(33.3) | 1.44 | 0.696 | 2 | 1(50.0) | 1(50.0) | 0.952 | 0.813 |
| N1 | 8 | 3(37.5) | 5(62.5) | 8 | 2(25.0) | 6(75.0) | ||||
| N2 | 18 | 11(61.1) | 7(38.9) | 18 | 7(38.9) | 11(61.1) | ||||
| N3 | 23 | 13(56.5) | 10(43.5) | 23 | 10(43.5) | 13(56.5) | ||||
| Distant metastasis | ||||||||||
| No | 45 | 25(55.6) | 20(44.4) | 0.006 | 0.937 | 44 | 17(38.6) | 27(61.4) | 0.045 | 0.832 |
| Yes | 7 | 4(57.1) | 3(42.9) | 7 | 3(42.9) | 4(57.1) | ||||
| TNM stage | ||||||||||
| I | 1 | 1(100.0) | 0(0.0) | 2.092 | 0.553 | 1 | 0(0.0) | 1(100.0) | 0.686 | 0.876 |
| II | 6 | 2(33.3) | 4(66.7) | 5 | 2(40.0) | 3(60.0) | ||||
| III | 38 | 22(57.9) | 16(42.1) | 38 | 15(39.5) | 23(60.5) | ||||
| IV | 7 | 4(57.1) | 3(42.9) | 7 | 3(42.9) | 4(57.1) | ||||
| Tumor size (cm) | ||||||||||
| ≤5 | 18 | 10(55.6) | 8(44.4) | 0.029 | 0.864 | 18 | 6(33.3) | 12(66.7) | 0.213 | 0.644 |
| >5 | 31 | 18(58.1) | 13(41.9) | 30 | 12(40.0) | 18(60.0) | ||||
| Invasion to the whole layer | ||||||||||
| No | 10 | 4(40.0) | 6(60.0) | 1.248 | 0.264 | 10 | 5(50.0) | 5(50.0) | 0.607 | 0.436 |
| Yes | 42 | 25(59.5) | 17(40.5) | 41 | 15(36.6) | 26(63.4) | ||||
| Histological type | ||||||||||
| Well-differentiated | 28 | 12(42.9) | 16(57.1) | 3.808 | 0.051 | 28 | 7(25.0) | 21(75.0) | 2.316 | 0.128 |
| Poor-differentiated | 18 | 13(72.2) | 5(27.8) | 17 | 8(47.1) | 9(52.9) | ||||
| Chemo-sensitivity | ||||||||||
| Insensitive | 19 | 12(63.2) | 7(36.8) | 0.012 | 0.912 | 18 | 6(33.3) | 12(66.7) | 0.121 | 0.728 |
| Sensitive | 26 | 16(61.5) | 10(38.5) | 26 | 10(38.5) | 16(61.5) | ||||
Values in bold signify P < 0.05.
Cox model analysis of flTF mRNA expression level in predicting gastric patients’ prognoses
| Clinical parameters | Univariate | Multivariate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI | |||
| Gender | ||||||
| Male / Female | 0.76 | 0.31∼1.84 | 0.543 | 1.36 | 0.27∼6.74 | 0.707 |
| Age (year) | ||||||
| 50-60/<50 | 0.37 | 0.11∼1.23 | 0.104 | 2.63 | 0.32∼21.45 | 0.366 |
| ≥60/<50 | 0.26 | 0.09∼0.76 | 2.13 | 0.19-24.28 | 0.543 | |
| Histo-pathological type | ||||||
| Ulcer / Invasive | 0.54 | 0.21∼1.40 | 0.204 | 1.34 | 0.25∼7.19 | 0.733 |
| Others / Invasive | 0.72 | 0.22∼2.37 | 0.594 | 6.80 | 0.71∼65.52 | 0.097 |
| Tumor size | ||||||
| ≥5cm/<5cm | 7.03 | 1.62∼30.54 | 13.98 | 1.95∼100.34 | ||
| Depth of invasion | ||||||
| Whole layer / Non-whole layer | 1.88 | 0.62∼5.72 | 0.268 | 0.87 | 0.12∼6.10 | 0.885 |
| Nodal metastasis | ||||||
| Yes / No | 1.49 | 0.35∼6.38 | 0.595 | 4.05 | 0.47∼34.71 | 0.202 |
| Differentiation | ||||||
| Poor / Well | 2.33 | 0.91∼5.94 | 0.077 | 3.38 | 0.92∼12.44 | 0.067 |
| Distant metastasis | ||||||
| Yes / No | 3.04 | 0.97∼9.52 | 0.056 | 16.57 | 2.10∼130.48 | |
| flTF mRNA expression level | ||||||
| High / Low | 3.19 | 1.22∼8.35 | 6.03 | 1.02∼35.71 | ||
Values in bold signify P < 0.05.
Cox model analysis of asTF mRNA expression level in predicting gastric patients’ prognoses
| Clinical parameters | Univariate | Multivariate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI | |||
| Gender | ||||||
| Male / Female | 0.76 | 0.31∼1.84 | 0.543 | 0.52 | 0.07∼4.13 | 0.534 |
| Age (year) | ||||||
| 50-60/<50 | 0.37 | 0.11∼1.23 | 0.104 | 7.45 | 0.52∼106.87 | 0.140 |
| ≥60/<50 | 0.26 | 0.09∼0.76 | 2.63 | 0.25∼27.44 | 0.419 | |
| Histo-pathological type | ||||||
| Ulcer / Invasive | 0.54 | 0.21∼1.40 | 0.204 | 1.98 | 0.39∼10.19 | 0.414 |
| Others / Invasive | 0.72 | 0.22∼2.37 | 0.594 | 25.91 | 2.02∼331.81 | |
| Tumor size | ||||||
| ≥5cm/<5cm | 7.03 | 1.62∼30.54 | 28.56 | 3.50∼233.00 | ||
| Depth of invasion | ||||||
| Whole layer / Non-whole layer | 1.88 | 0.62∼5.72 | 0.268 | 3.10 | 0.581∼16.54 | 0.185 |
| Nodal metastasis | ||||||
| Yes / No | 1.49 | 0.35∼6.38 | 0.595 | 4.12 | 0.40∼42.48 | 0.235 |
| Differentiation | ||||||
| Poor / Well | 2.33 | 0.91∼5.94 | 0.077 | 4.78 | 1.07∼21.33 | |
| Distant metastasis | ||||||
| Yes / No | 3.04 | 0.97∼9.52 | 0.056 | 17.40 | 2.37∼127.85 | |
| asTF mRNA expression level | ||||||
| High / Low | 2.50 | 1.05∼5.95 | 10.74 | 2.32∼49.59 | ||
Values in bold signify P < 0.05.
Figure 3Prognostic value of flTF and asTF levels in human gastric cancer tissues
(A) The overall survival rate of the patients with low flTF was significantly better than those with high flTF. (B) The overall survival rate of the patients with low asTF was significantly better than those with high asTF. (C) The overall survival rate of the patients with both low flTF and asTF was significantly better than those with flTF and asTF either high group. (D) The overall survival rate of the patients with flTF and asTF both high was significantly poorer than other patients. (E) The overall survival rate of the patients with flTF and asTF either high group was significantly better than those with flTF and asTF both high group. (F) There was a significant difference among the three subgroups, namely the patients with flTF and asTF both low, the patients with flTF and asTF either high, and the patients with flTF and asTF both high.
Sequences of primers and probes
| Genes | Sequences (5′→3′) |
|---|---|
| flTF (ref. [ | |
| Forward primer | TGATGTGGATAAAGGAGAAAACTACTG |
| Reverse primer | CTACCGGGCTGTCTGTACTCTTC |
| Probe | FAM-TTCAAGCAGTGATTCCCTCCCGAACA-TAMRA |
| asTF (ref. [ | |
| Forward primer | GGGATGTTTTTGGCAAGGACTTA |
| Reverse primer | CCAGGATGATGACAAGGATGATG |
| Probe | FAM-AATCTTCAAGTTCAGGAAAGAAATATTCTACATCATTGGA-TAMRA |
| asTF(self-designed) | |
| Forward primer | ATCTTCAAGTTCAGGAAAGAAATATTCTAC |
| Reverse primer | GCTCTGCCCCACTCCTGCC |
| Probe | FAM-TTGGAGCTGTGGTATTTGTGGTCATCATC-TAMRA |
| β-actin | |
| Forward primer | GGAAGGTGAAGGTCGGAGTC |
| Reverse primer | CGTTCTCAGCCTTGACGGT |
| Probe | FAM-TTTGGTCGTATTGGGCGCCTG-TANRA |