| Literature DB >> 31289587 |
Youjin Kim1,2, Sun-Ju Byeon3,4, Joonyoung Hur1, Kangkook Lee1, Dongin Kim5, Jin-Hyung Ahn5, Sang Hoon Lee5, Weon-Kyoo You5, Seung Tae Kim1, Se Hoon Park1, Won Ki Kang1, Kyoung-Mee Kim3, Jeeyun Lee1.
Abstract
Background: Emerging evidence suggests that delta-like ligand 4 (DLL4) and other members of the Notch pathway may offer new targets for development of anti-angiogenesis drugs for the treatment of several tumor types. However, the role of DLL4 in gastric cancer (GC) remains unclear. In this study, we investigated the impact of DLL4 overexpression on recurrence and survival in gastric cancer (GC) patients.Entities:
Keywords: DLL4; Gastric cancer; anti-angiogenesis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31289587 PMCID: PMC6603391 DOI: 10.7150/jca.30257
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cancer ISSN: 1837-9664 Impact factor: 4.207
Figure 1Representative microphotographs of DLL4 immunohistochemistry. (A) low DLL4 expression, intestinal-type; (B) high DLL4 expression, intestinal-type; (C) low DLL4 expression, diffuse-type; and (D) high DLL4 expression, diffuse-type gastric adenocarcinomas
Patients and disease characteristics in the gastric cancer and according to DLL4 status.
| Characteristic | N=336 (%) | DLL 4 (low) n=269 (80.1%) | DLL 4 (high) n=67 (19.9%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median (range), years | 57 (28-77) | 56 (28-77) | 59 (33-77) | 0.104 |
| < 60 | 195 (58.0) | 162 (60.2) | 33 (49.3) | |
| >60 | 141 (42.0) | 107 (39.8) | 34 (50.7) | |
| Male | 217 (64.6) | 172 (63.9) | 45 (67.2) | 0.622 |
| Female | 119 (35.4) | 97 (36.1) | 22 (32.8) | |
| 0.296 | ||||
| Cardias | 17 (5.1) | 12 (4.5) | 5 (7.5) | |
| Body | 159 (47.3) | 133 (49.4) | 26 (38.7) | |
| Antrum | 125 (37.2) | 95 (35.3) | 30 (44.8) | |
| Whole/multiple | 35 (10.4) | 29 (10.8) | 6 (9.0) | |
| 0.042 | ||||
| ADC,WD | 5 (1.5) | 2 (0.7) | 3 (4.5) | |
| ADC,MD | 109 (32.4) | 83 (30.9) | 26 (38.8) | |
| ADC,PD | 147 (43.8) | 119 (44.2) | 28 (41.8) | |
| Signet ring cell | 75 (22.3) | 65 (24.2) | 10 (14.9) | |
| 1 | 7 (2.1) | 4 (1.5) | 3 (4.5) | 0.308 |
| 2 | 98 (29.2) | 77 (28.6) | 21 (31.3) | |
| 3 | 193 (57.4) | 156 (58.0) | 37 (55.2) | |
| 4 | 38 (11.3) | 32 (11.9) | 6 (9.0) | |
| Intestinal | 132 (39.2) | 92 (34.2) | 40 (59.7) | < 0.001 |
| Diffuse | 189 (56.3) | 164 (61.0) | 25 (37.3) | |
| Mixed | 15 (4.5) | 13 (4.8) | 2 (3.0) | |
| 1 | 8 (2.4) | 7 (2.6) | 1 (1.5) | 0.511 |
| 2a | 64 (19.0) | 54 (20.1) | 10 (14.9) | |
| 2b | 158 (47.0) | 120 (44.6) | 38 (56.7) | |
| 3 | 95(28.3) | 79 (29.4) | 16 (23.9) | |
| 4 | 11 (3.3) | 9 (3.3) | 2 (3.0) | |
| 0 | 13 (3.9) | 11 (4.1) | 2 (3.0) | 0.130 |
| 1 | 202 (60.1) | 165 (61.3) | 37 (55.2) | |
| 2 | 87 (25.9) | 71 (26.4) | 16 (23.9) | |
| 3 | 34 (10.1) | 22 (8.2) | 12 (17.9) | |
| 0.037 | ||||
| II and IIIa | 271 (80.7) | 223 (82.9) | 48 (71.6) | |
| IIIb and IV | 65 (19.3) | 46 (17.1) | 19 (28.4) | |
| 0.018 | ||||
| negative | 281 (83.6) | 226(84.0) | 55(82.1) | |
| positive | 18 (5.4) | 9 (3.3) | 9 (13.4) | |
| unknown | 37 (11.0) | 34 (12.6) | 3 (4.5) | |
| 0.929 | ||||
| Subtotal | 199 (59.2) | 159 (59.1) | 40 (59.7) | |
| Total | 137 (40.8) | 110 (40.9) | 27 (40.3) | |
| No | 177 (52.5) | 143(50.3) | 34 (50.7) | 0.743 |
| Yes | 159 (47.5) | 126 (47) | 33 (49.3) | |
| No | 106 (31.5) | 86 (32.0) | 20 (29.9) | 0.738 |
| Yes | 230 (68.5) | 183 (68.0) | 47 (70.1) |
Figure 2Kaplan-Meier survival analysis according to the clinical stage of gastric cancer (GC). (A) Disease-free survival (DFS) in stage II-IV GC, (B) overall survival (OS) in stage II-IV GC, (C) DFS in stage II-IIIa GC, (D) OS in stage II-IIIa GC, (E) DFS in stage IIIb-IV GC, and (F) OS in stage IIIB-IV GC
Prognostic factors associated with DFS and OS as determined by univariate and multivariate analysis
| DFS | OS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | HR(95%CI) | Variables | HR(95%CI) | ||
| DLL 4 negative vs. positive | 1.93(1.27-2.95) | 0.002 | DLL 4 negative vs. positive | 1.95(1.24-3.08) | 0.004 |
| *Histological differentiation | 1.72(1.10-2.67) | 0.016 | *Histological differentiation | 1.83(1.12-2.99) | 0.015 |
| Borrman (1,2 vs 3,4) | 1.85(1.33-2.56) | <0.001 | Borrman (1,2 vs 3,4) | 2.16(1.52-3.08) | <0.001 |
| Lauren intestinal vs. diffuse | 1.53(1.10-2.14) | 0.012 | Lauren intestinal vs. diffuse | 1.70(1.08-2.68) | 0.019 |
| pT 1,2 vs. pT 3,4 | 2.26(1.54-3.30) | <0.001 | pT 1,2 vs. pT 3,4 | 2.46(1.62-3.73) | <0.001 |
| pN 0,1 vs. pN 2,3 | 2.73(1.87-4.00) | <0.001 | pN 0,1 vs. pN 2,3 | 2.57(1.69-3.90) | <0.001 |
| Stage(II/IIIa versus IIIb/IV) | 3.82(2.58-5.65) | <0.001 | Stage(II/IIIa versus IIIb/IV) | 3.55(2.31-4.56) | <0.001 |
| Surgical resection TG vs STG | 1.70(1.16-2.47) | 0.007 | Surgical resection TG vs STG | 1.84(1.22-2.80) | 0.004 |
| DLL 4 negative vs. positive | 1.80(1.14-2.86) | 0.012 | DLL 4 negative vs. positive | 2.07(1.23-3.46) | 0.006 |
| *Histological differentiation | 1.78(1.10-2.89) | 0.021 | Lauren intestinal vs. diffuse | 2.19(1.30-3.69) | 0.003 |
| Stage(II/IIIa versus IIIb/IV) | 3.95(2.56-6.11) | <0.001 | Stage(II/IIIa versus IIIb/IV) | 3.93(2.45-6.32) | <0.001 |