| Literature DB >> 30546430 |
Abstract
Correlation of xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group F (XPF) expression with gastric cancer and prognosis was investigated. We randomly selected 76 gastric cancer patients who were admitted to the Second People's Hospital of Dezhou City and received treatment, and detected XPF expression in gastric cancer tissues (observation group) and normal gastric mucosa adjacent to tumor (control group) via immunohistochemistry. Correlation between XPF expression and clinicopathological indicators of gastric cancer was verified via single-factor Chi-square test. Cox's proportional hazard regression model was used in the analysis of influencing factors of patient's prognosis, and Kaplan-Meier was used to analyze the survival rates of XPF-positive and -negative patients. In the observation group, the XPF-positive rate was significantly higher than that in the control group with a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). Single-factor analysis showed that XPF expression was correlated with the family history and Laurén classification (P<0.05). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed that the survival time of XPF-positive patients was shorter than that of XPF-negative patients (P<0.05). Multifactorial analysis using Cox's hazards model suggested that XPF was an independent factor affecting the prognosis of gastric cancer (P<0.05). In conclusion, XPF expression plays an important role in the occurrence and development of gastric cancer, and a high expression of XPF suggests a poor prognosis of gastric cancer patients.Entities:
Keywords: gastric cancer; immunohistochemistry; xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group F
Year: 2018 PMID: 30546430 PMCID: PMC6256733 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2018.9529
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
General characteristics of the patients.
| Item | Case | Ratio (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Sex | ||
| Male | 42 | 55.26 |
| Female | 34 | 44.74 |
| Age (years) | ||
| <60 | 36 | 47.36 |
| ≥60 | 40 | 52.64 |
| Degree of differentiation | ||
| Highly differentiated adenocarcinoma | 36 | 47.36 |
| Moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma | 27 | 35.52 |
| Poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma | 13 | 17.11 |
| Tumor size | ||
| <3 cm | 27 | 35.53 |
| 3–5 cm | 30 | 39.47 |
| >5 cm | 19 | 25.00 |
Comparison of XPF expression between the two groups.
| XPF expression | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | N (case) | Negative cases | Positive cases | Ratio of positive cases (%) |
| Observation group | 76 | 22 | 54 | 71.05 |
| Control group | 76 | 48 | 28 | 36.84 |
| χ2 | 16.551 | |||
| P-value | <0.0001 | |||
XPF, xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group F.
Figure 1.Xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group F (XPF)-positive cells in the observation group.
Correlation between XPF expression and each clinicopathological index.
| XPF expression | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinicopathological indexes | Cases | Negative case | Positive case | Positive rate (%) | χ2 | P-value |
| Sex | ||||||
| Male | 42 | 12 | 30 | 71.42 | 0.002 | 0.956 |
| Female | 34 | 9 | 25 | 73.35 | ||
| Age (year) | ||||||
| <60 | 36 | 11 | 25 | 69.44 | 0.001 | 0.968 |
| ≥60 | 40 | 11 | 29 | 72.50 | ||
| History of liver cancer in immediate family members | ||||||
| Yes | 32 | 7 | 25 | 78.12 | 9.949 | 0.014 |
| No | 44 | 23 | 21 | 52.27 | ||
| Tumor site | ||||||
| Gastric body | 25 | 7 | 18 | 72.00 | 0.094 | 0.954 |
| Gastric antrum | 36 | 11 | 25 | 69.44 | ||
| Gastric cardia + gastric fundus | 15 | 4 | 11 | 73.33 | ||
| Quantity of mass | ||||||
| 1 | 35 | 10 | 25 | 71.42 | 0.007 | 0.929 |
| ≥2 | 41 | 11 | 30 | 73.17 | ||
| Diameter of tumor (cm) | ||||||
| <5 | 51 | 15 | 36 | 70.58 | 0.049 | 0.823 |
| ≥5 | 25 | 6 | 19 | 76.00 | ||
| Laurén classification | ||||||
| Diffuse-type | 31 | 18 | 13 | 41.93 | 12.420 | 0.002 |
| Mixed-type | 17 | 2 | 15 | 88.23 | ||
| Intestinal-type | 28 | 7 | 21 | 75.00 | ||
| Smoking | ||||||
| Yes | 31 | 7 | 24 | 77.42 | 0. 309 | 0.578 |
| No | 45 | 14 | 31 | 68.89 | ||
| Lymphatic metastasis (lymph nodes) | ||||||
| ≤5 | 46 | 13 | 33 | 71.74 | 0.012 | 0.912 |
| >5 | 30 | 8 | 22 | 73.33 | ||
| Infiltration depth | ||||||
| Mucosa and submucosa | 17 | 5 | 12 | 70.58 | 0.404 | 0.817 |
| Muscular layer | 35 | 9 | 26 | 74.28 | ||
| Serosal or subserosal | 24 | 8 | 16 | 66.67 | ||
| TNM staging | ||||||
| I | 21 | 6 | 15 | 71.43 | 0.167 | 0.982 |
| II | 24 | 6 | 18 | 75.00 | ||
| III | 18 | 5 | 13 | 72.22 | ||
| IV | 13 | 3 | 10 | 76.92 | ||
XPF, xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group F.
Analysis of factors affecting the prognosis of gastric cancer via the Cox hazards model.
| Related factors | B | SE | Wald | OR (95% CI) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 0.042 | 0.013 | 0.543 | 0.567 (0.726–0.936) | 0.436 |
| Age (years) | 0.028 | 0.009 | 0.332 | 0.964 (0.824–1.137) | 0.202 |
| Smoking | −0.038 | 0.037 | 0.237 | 1.035 (0.228–1.425) | 0.113 |
| Tumor site | −0.043 | 0.084 | 1.143 | 0.937 (0.425–1.948) | 0.223 |
| Tumor size | 0.036 | 0.032 | 0.217 | 1.046 (1.035–1.876) | 0.535 |
| Laurén classification | 0.015 | 0.042 | 1.085 | 0.875 (0.532–1.452) | 0.247 |
| TNM staging | 0.485 | 0.052 | 5.012 | 2.025 (1.023–3.627) | 0.003 |
| XPF expressions | 0.463 | 0.026 | 6.015 | 3.564 (1.143–5.835) | 0.017 |
| Infiltration depth | 0.516 | 0.037 | 0.437 | 0.875 (0.532–0.952) | 0.124 |
| Lymphatic metastasis | −0.028 | 0.141 | 0.767 | 1.025 (0.623–1.627) | 0.215 |
XPF, xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group F; TNM, tumor node metastasis.
Figure 2.Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.
Comparison of inspection results using 3 different statistics for survival analysis.
| Type | χ2 value | df | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Log Rank (Mantel-Cox) | 9.205 | 1 | 0.002 |
| Breslow (Generalized Wilcoxon) | 8.196 | 1 | 0.004 |
| Tarone-Ware | 8.772 | 1 | 0.003 |