| Literature DB >> 30112355 |
Leonardo do Prado Lima1, Carla Jorge Machado2, João Bernardo Sancio Rocha Rodrigues1, Leonardo de Souza Vasconcellos3, Eduardo Paulino Junior4, Paula Vieira Teixeira Vidigal4, Vivian Resende1.
Abstract
Background and Aim: The epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) has been proposed as a marker for cancer stem cells in human hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as well as in the development of novel target therapies. This study aimed to investigate the immunohistochemical expression of EpCAM and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) in HCC patients and their association with clinicopathological characteristics.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30112355 PMCID: PMC6077358 DOI: 10.1155/2018/5970852
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol ISSN: 2291-2789
Demographic and clinicopathological characteristics in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Female | 13 (31.71) | 0.019 |
| Male | 28 (68.29) | |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Mean (Standard Deviation) | 59.2 (9.5) | N/A |
| Median (IIQ) | 59 (54;66) | |
| Minimum; Maximum | 25; 75 | |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| No | 22 (53.65) | 0.357 |
| Yes | 19 (46.34) | |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Idiopathic | 7 (17.07) | 0.241 |
| Alcohol | 5 (12.20) | 0.058 |
| Virus B | 12 (29.26) | 0.528 |
| Virus C | 17 (41.46) | 0.015 |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Mean (Standard Deviation) | 1864.1 (9266.3) | N/A |
| Median (IIQ) | 59 (54;66) | |
| Minimum; Maximum | 1.9; 59900 | |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Less than 100 | 26 (63.41) | 0.001 |
| 100 to 400 | 7 (17.07) | 0.027 |
| Greater than 400 | 8 (15.51) | 0.061 |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Minor hepatectomy | 28 (68.29) | 0.019 |
| Larger hepatectomy | 13 (31.71) | |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Single nodule | 32 (78.0) | <0.001 |
| Multiple | 9 (22,0) | |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| ≤ 5 cm | 23 (56.1) | 0.357 |
| > 5 cm | 18 (43.9) | |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| I | 18 (43.9) | 0.150 |
| II | 17 (41.5) | 0.268 |
| III | 6 (14.6) | 0.011 |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| No | 24 (58.5) | 0.584 |
| Yes | 17 (41.5) | |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Well | 19 (46.3) | 0.077 |
| Moderate | 18 (43.9) | 0.150 |
| Poor | 4 (9.8) | 0.001 |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Negative | 29 (70.7) | 0.008 |
| Positive | 12 (29.3) | |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Negative | 29 (70.7) | 0.008 |
| Positive | 12 (29.3) | |
Note: a homogeneity test was performed between the categories; ∗ p <0.10; ∗∗ p <0.05; ∗∗∗ p <0.01.
Association between the immunohistochemical expressions of EpCAM and AFP in hepatocellular carcinoma.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative | Positive | |||
| Negative | 25 (86.2%) | 4 (13.8%) | 29 (100.0%) | |
| Positive | 4 (33.3%) | 8 (66.7%) | 12 (100.0%) | 0.002 |
|
| 29 (70.7%) | 12 (29.2%) | 41 (100.0%) | |
∗: statistical significance measured by Fisher's exact test.
Association between clinicopathological variables and expression of alpha-fetoprotein in hepatocellular carcinoma.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative | Positive | Negative | Positive | |||||
|
| ||||||||
| Idiopathic | 6 (85.71%) | 1 (14.29%) | 7 (100.0%) | 6 (85.71%) | 1 (14.29%) | 7 (100.0%) | ||
| Ethanol | 3 (60.00%) | 2 (40.00%) | 5 (100.0%) | 0.703 | 4 (80.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 5 (100.0%) | 0.673 |
| Virus B | 8 (66.67%) | 4 (33.33%) | 12 (100.0%) | 7 (58.33%) | 5 (41.67%) | 12 (100.0%) | ||
| Virus C | 12 (70.59%) | 5 (29.11%) | 17 (100.0%) | 12 (70.59%) | 5 (29.41%) | 17 (100.0%) | ||
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Single node | 23 (71.88%) | 9 (28.12%) | 32 (100.0%) | 0.999 | 22 (68.75%) | 10 (31.25%) | 32 (100.0%) | 0.702 |
| Multiple | 6 (66.67%) | 3 (33.33%) | 9 (100.0%) | 7 (77.78%) | 2 (22.22%) | 9 (100.0%) | ||
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| ≤ 5 cm | 14 (60.87%) | 9 (39.13%) | 23 (100.0%) | 0.171 | 13 (56.52%) | 10 (43.48%) | 23 (100.0%) | 0.038 |
| > 5 cm | 15 (83.33%) | 3 (16.67%) | 18 (100.0%) | 16 (88.89%) | 2 (11.11%) | 18 (100.0%) | ||
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| I | 15 (83.33%) | 3 (16.67%) | 18 (100.0%) | 13 (72.22%) | 5 (27.78%) | 18 (100.0%) | ||
| II | 11 (64.71%) | 6 (35.29%) | 17 (100.0%) | 0.241 | 11 (64.71%) | 6 (35.29%) | 17 (100.0%) | 0.728 |
| III | 3 (50.00%) | 3 (50.00%) | 6 (100.0%) | 5 (83.33%) | 1 (29.27%) | 6 (100.0%) | ||
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| No | 20 (83.33%) | 4 (16.67%) | 24 (100.0%) | 0.045 | 18 (75.00%) | 6 (25.00%) | 24 (100.0%) | 0.507 |
| Yes | 9 (52.94%) | 8 (47.06%) | 17 (100.0%) | 11 (64.71%) | 6 (35.29%) | 17 (100.0%) | ||
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Well | 15 (78.95%) | 4 (21.05%) | 19 (100.0%) | 0.492 | 16 (84.21%) | 3 (15.79%) | 19 (100.0%) | 0.182 |
| Moderate | 11 (61.11%) | 7 (38.89%) | 18 (100.0%) | 11 (61.11%) | 7 (38.89%) | 18 (100.0%) | ||
| Poor | 3 (75.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 1 (100.0%) | 2 (50.00%) | 2 (50.00%) | 4 (100.0%) | ||
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Up to 100 | 23 (88.46%) | 3 (11.53%) | 26 (100.0%) | 0.003 | 21 (80.76%) | 5 (19.24%) | 26 (100.0%) | 0.006 |
| 100 a 400 | 3 (42.85%) | 4 (57.14%) | 7 (100.0%) | 5 (71.42%) | 2 (28.58%) | 7 (100.0%) | ||
| > 400 | 3 (37.5%) | 5 (62.50%) | 8 (100.0%) | 3 (37.50%) | 5 (62.50%) | 8 (100.0%) | ||
∗: statistical significance by Fisher's exact test.