| Literature DB >> 29854808 |
Tai-Jan Chiu1, Hung-I Lu2, Chang-Han Chen3,4,5, Wan-Ting Huang6, Yu-Ming Wang7, Wei-Che Lin8, Shau-Hsuan Li1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The osteopontin has been involved in therapeutic resistance in a variety of cancers. But, the significance of osteopontin expression on the prognosis of patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) receiving chemoradiotherapy is unclear.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29854808 PMCID: PMC5952509 DOI: 10.1155/2018/9098215
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Clinicopathologic features of 80 patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy.
| Parameters | Number of cases (percentage) |
|---|---|
| Age (years) (mean: 54.3, median: 53, range 37–77) | |
| <50 | 25 (31%) |
| 50≦Age < 60 | 28 (35%) |
| 60≦Age < 70 | 22 (28%) |
| 70≦Age | 5 (6%) |
| Sex | |
| Male | 77 (96%) |
| Female | 3 (4%) |
| Clinical 7th AJCC stage | |
| II | 21 (26%) |
| III | 59 (74%) |
| Clinical T classification | |
| T2 | 7 (9%) |
| T3 | 36 (45%) |
| T4 | 37 (46%) |
| Clinical N classification | |
| N0 | 20 (25%) |
| N1 | 25 (31%) |
| N2 | 25 (31%) |
| N3 | 10 (13%) |
| Tumor grade | |
| Grade 1 | 16 (20%) |
| Grade 2 | 43 (54%) |
| Grade 3 | 21 (26%) |
| Primary tumor location | |
| Upper | 15 (19%) |
| Middle | 31 (39%) |
| Lower | 34 (42%) |
| Osteopontin expression | |
| Low | 42 (52%) |
| Median | 15 (19%) |
| High | 23 (29%) |
| pCR | |
| Absent | 59 (74%) |
| Present | 21 (26%) |
pCR, pathological complete response.
Figure 1Immunohistochemical staining of osteopontin. (a) Representative example of low osteopontin expression in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. (b) Representative example of osteopontin overexpression in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Associations between osteopontin expression and clinicopathologic parameters.
| Parameters | Osteopontin expression | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Low expression | Overexpression |
| |
| Age | |||
| <53 y/o | 22 | 17 | 0.50 |
| ≧53 y/o | 20 | 21 | |
| Clinical 7th AJCC stage | |||
| II | 9 | 12 | 0.30 |
| III | 33 | 26 | |
| Clinical T classification | |||
| T2/3 | 21 | 22 | 0.48 |
| T4 | 21 | 16 | |
| Clinical N classification | |||
| N0 | 9 | 11 | 0.44 |
| N1/2/3 | 33 | 27 | |
| Clinical N classification | |||
| N0/1 | 27 | 18 | 0.13 |
| N2/3 | 15 | 20 | |
| Tumor grade | |||
| Grade 1/2 | 30 | 29 | 0.62 |
| Grade 3 | 12 | 9 | |
| Primary tumor location | |||
| Upper/middle | 24 | 22 | 0.95 |
| Lower | 18 | 16 | |
Associations between pathological complete response and clinicopathologic parameters.
| Parameters | Pathological complete response | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Present | Absent |
| |
| Age | |||
| <53 y/o | 9 | 30 | 0.53 |
| ≧53 y/o | 12 | 29 | |
| Clinical 7th AJCC stage | |||
| II | 8 | 13 | 0.15 |
| III | 13 | 46 | |
| Clinical T classification | |||
| T2/3 | 16 | 27 | 0.016 |
| T4 | 5 | 32 | |
| Clinical N classification | |||
| N0 | 6 | 14 | 0.66 |
| N1/2/3 | 15 | 45 | |
| Clinical N classification | |||
| N0/1 | 15 | 30 | 0.10 |
| N2/3 | 6 | 29 | |
| Tumor grade | |||
| Grade 1/2 | 15 | 44 | 0.78 |
| Grade 3 | 6 | 15 | |
| Primary tumor location | |||
| Upper/middle | 9 | 37 | 0.11 |
| Lower | 12 | 22 | |
| Osteopontin | |||
| Low expression | 15 | 27 | 0.043 |
| Overexpression | 6 | 32 | |
Statistically significant.
Results of univariate log-rank analysis of prognostic factors for overall survival and disease-free survival in 80 patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy.
| Factors | Number of patients | Overall survival (OS) | Disease-free survival (DFS) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5-year OS rate (%) |
| 5-year DFS rate (%) |
| ||
| Age | |||||
| <53 y/o | 39 | 26% | 0.73 | 21% | 0.56 |
| ≧53 y/o | 41 | 29% | 25% | ||
| Osteopontin | |||||
| Low expression | 42 | 33% | 0.017 | 31% | 0.038 |
| Overexpression | 38 | 21% | 13% | ||
| Clinical 7th AJCC stage | |||||
| II | 21 | 43% | 0.13 | 29% | 0.27 |
| III | 59 | 22% | 21% | ||
| Clinical T classification | |||||
| T2/3 | 43 | 35% | 0.024 | 28% | 0.035 |
| T4 | 37 | 19% | 16% | ||
| Clinical N classification | |||||
| N0 | 20 | 35% | 0.46 | 25% | 0.70 |
| N1/2/3 | 60 | 25% | 22% | ||
| Clinical N classification | |||||
| N0/1 | 45 | 33% | 0.064 | 25% | 0.15 |
| N2/3 | 35 | 20% | 20% | ||
| Tumor grade | |||||
| Grade 1/2 | 59 | 25% | 0.40 | 19% | 0.38 |
| Grade 3 | 21 | 33% | 33% | ||
| Primary tumor location | |||||
| Upper/middle | 46 | 28% | 0.61 | 23% | 0.60 |
| Lower | 34 | 27% | 23% | ||
pCR, pathological complete response. Statistically significant.
Figure 2(a) Overall survival according to osteopontin expression. (b) Disease-free survival according to osteopontin expression.
Figure 3Endogenous osteopontin depletion by osteopontin siRNA sensitized the cytotoxicity to cisplatin in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cell lines. (a) The endogenous expression level of osteopontin was determined by western blotting in TE10 and TE14 cells transfected with si-Control or si-Osteopontin. (b) TE10 and TE14 cells transfected with si-Control or si-Osteopontin were incubated with 10 μM cisplatin for 48 hours, and their viability was measured and compared to that of untreated respective cells. OPN: osteopontin. P < 0.05; P < 0.01; P < 0.001.
Figure 4Osteopontin promoted cell proliferation and drove cisplatin resistance in an ESCC cell line. (a) TE10 cells stimulated with OPN protein promoted cell growth. TE10 cells were treated with indicated concentrations of OPN, and cell growth was analyzed on days 1–4 by MTT assay. Data were normalized against the OD570 value on day 1 of each treatment. The results represent the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. (b) OPN affected the chemosensitivity of ESCC cells to cisplatin. TE10 cells were cultured in the cisplatin and/or OPN in a dose-dependent manner, and their viability was measured. P < 0.05; P < 0.01; P < 0.001.