| Literature DB >> 29197353 |
Monika Bauden1, Theresa Kristl2, Agata Sasor3, Bodil Andersson1, György Marko-Varga2, Roland Andersson1, Daniel Ansari4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epigenetic alterations have been recognized as important contributors to the pathogenesis of PDAC. However, the role of histone variants in pancreatic tumor progression is still not completely understood. The aim of this study was to explore the expression and prognostic significance of histone protein variants in PDAC patients.Entities:
Keywords: Biomarkers; Epigenetics; H1.3; Histone variants; Immunohistochemistry; LC-MS/MS; Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29197353 PMCID: PMC5712195 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-017-3834-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Evaluation of H1.3 immunohistochemistry [18]
| Immunoreactivity | |
| H1.3 + cells | |
| 0 | 0–4% |
| 1 | 5–24% |
| 2 | 25–49% |
| 3 | 50–100% |
| Intensity | |
| 0 | negative |
| 1 | mild |
| 2 | intermediate |
| 3 | intense |
Fig. 1Profile of histone variants and H1.3 distribution in PDAC tissue. Histone variant profile is summarized in (A). Positive staining of H1.3 in PDAC is illustrated in (B) and (C). Positive H1.3 staining of tumor cells and TILs is indicated by the arrows. The images were magnified 10× (B) and 20× (C)
Fig. 2Distribution of histone-associated PTMs. Amino acid sequence alignments, representing the linker histone H1 variants and the main core histone families. The individual modified residues are indicated by the color of the annotated modifications
Fig. 3Subcellular expression of H1.3 in PDAC specimens. Membrane/cytosol staining of H1.3 in PDAC tumor cells with mild, intermediate and intense intensity is illustrated in (a, b and c), respectively. The nuclear staining of H1.3 in PDAC tumor cells with mild, intermediate and intense intensity is illustrated in (d, e and f), respectively. The images were magnified 20× (c)
The correlation between H1.3 expression and clinicopathological data in resected PDAC (n = 62)
| H1.3 expression | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of patients (%) | Positive | Negative |
| |
| Age (years), median [IQR] | 67 [43–76] | 66 [43–78] | 73 [58–76] | 0.012 |
| Male gender | 29 (47) | 25 (50) | 4 (33) | 0.173 |
| Tumor size (cm), median [IQR] | 3 [0.3–8.5] | 3 [1–8.5] | 3 [0.3–4] | 0.285 |
| Poor differentiation | 36 (58) | 31 (62) | 5 (42) | 0.173 |
| Lymph node metastasis | 38 (61) | 31 (62) | 7 (58) | 0.815 |
| Resection margin status (R1) | 18 (29) | 14 (28) | 4 (33) | 0.721 |
| Adjuvant chemotherapy | 46 (74) | 36 (72) | 10 (83) | 0.420 |
IQR interquartile range
Fig. 4Kaplan-Meier survival curves for patients with positive or negative H1.3 expression
Multivariate Cox regression analysis (n = 62)
| Hazard ratio | 95% CI |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unadjusted | |||
| H1.3 expression (positive vs negative) | 2.4 | 1.2–5.3 | 0.018 |
| Adjusteda | |||
| H1.3 expression (positive vs negative) | 2. 6 | 1.1–6.1 | 0.029 |
CI confidence interval. aAdjusted for age, gender, tumor size, differentiation, lymph node metastasis, margin status and adjuvant chemotherapy