| Literature DB >> 31413753 |
Jun Wang1,2, Wen-Hao Xu1,2, Yu Wei1,2, Yao Zhu1,2, Xiao-Jian Qin1,2, Hai-Liang Zhang1,2, Ding-Wei Ye1,2.
Abstract
Objective: Growing evidence has proved that MRE11, a protein underpinned to be involved in DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair process, is correlated with cancer outcomes. However, its role in prostate cancer (PCa) remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the expression of MRE11 in tumor tissue and defining its value in predicting prognosis of PCa patients.Entities:
Keywords: DNA repair; MRE11; homologous recombination; prognosis; prostate cancer
Year: 2019 PMID: 31413753 PMCID: PMC6691708 DOI: 10.7150/jca.31454
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cancer ISSN: 1837-9664 Impact factor: 4.207
Clinicopathological characteristics in relation to MRE11 expression status in two cohorts
| Characteristics | FUSCC cohort | MRE11 expression | χ2 | TCGA cohort | MRE11 expression | χ2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHC positive | IHC negative | IHC positive | IHC negative | |||||||
| N (%) | ||||||||||
| Age | 5.287 | 0.772 | 0.380 | |||||||
| <65 years | 20 (25.6) | 11 (19.0) | 9 (45.0) | 333 (66.6) | 208 (65.2) | 125 (69.1) | ||||
| ≥65 years | 58 (74.4) | 47 (81.0) | 11 (55.0) | 167 (33.4) | 111 (34.8) | 56 (30.9) | ||||
| Year of diagnosis | 1.595 | 0.450 | 1.313 | 0.252 | ||||||
| 2010 | 12 (15.4) | 9 (15.5) | 3 (15.0) | - | - | - | ||||
| 2011 | 38 (48.7) | 26 (44.8) | 12 (60.0) | - | - | - | ||||
| 2012 | 28 (35.9) | 23 (39.7) | 5 (25.0) | - | - | - | ||||
| 2000-2006 | - | - | - | 71(14.2) | 41(12.9) | 30(16.6) | ||||
| 2007-2013 | - | - | - | 429(85.8) | 278(87.1) | 151(83.4) | ||||
| Laterality | 1.062 | 0.303 | 2.291 | 0.130 | ||||||
| Left/Right | 17(21.8) | 11(19.0) | 6(21.8) | 65 (13.0) | 36 (11.3) | 29 (16.0) | ||||
| Bilateral | 61(78.2) | 47(81.0) | 14(78.2) | 435 (87.0) | 283 (88.7) | 152 (84.0) | ||||
| pT stage | 0.258 | 0.611 | 2.575 | 0.109 | ||||||
| T1 - T2 | 35 (44.9) | 27 (46.6) | 8 (40.0) | 195(39.0) | 116(36.4) | 79(43.6) | ||||
| T3 - T4 | 43 (55.1) | 31 (53.4) | 12 (60.0) | 305(61.0) | 203(63.6) | 102(56.4) | ||||
| pN stage | 0.729 | 0.393 | 0.043 | 0.836 | ||||||
| N0 | 61 (78.2) | 44 (75.9) | 17 (85.0) | 348 (69.9) | 221 (69.3) | 127 (70.2) | ||||
| N1 | 17 (21.8) | 14 (24.1) | 3 (15.0) | 152 (30.4) | 98 (30.7) | 54 (29.8) | ||||
| pM stage | - | - | 1.401 | 0.237 | ||||||
| M0 | 78 (100.0) | 58 (100.0) | 20 (100.0) | 457 (91.4) | 288 (90.3) | 169 (93.4) | ||||
| M1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 43 (8.6) | 31 (9.7) | 12 (6.6) | ||||
| AJCC stage † | 0.215 | 0.643 | - | - | ||||||
| I - II | 65 (83.3) | 49 (84.5) | 16 (80.0) | - | - | - | ||||
| III - IV | 13 (16.7) | 9 (15.5) | 4 (20.0) | - | - | - | ||||
| Gleason score | 4.312 | 0.116 | 9.586 | |||||||
| < 7 | 21 (26.9) | 13 (22.4) | 8 (40.0) | 45 (9.0) | 23 (7.2) | 22 (12.2) | ||||
| = 7 | 37 (26.9) | 27 (46.6) | 10 (50.0) | 250 (50.0) | 150 (47.0) | 100 (55.2) | ||||
| ≥ 8 | 20 (25.6) | 18 (31.0) | 2 (10.0) | 205 (14.0) | 146 (45.8) | 59 (32.6) | ||||
† The AJCC staging system is a classification system developed by the American Joint Committee on Cancer for describing the extent of disease progression in cancer patients. It utilizes in part the TNM scoring system: Tumor size, Lymph Nodes affected, Metastases.
Multivariate Cox logistic regression analysis of DFS in FUSCC and TCGA cohorts (DFS: disease-free survival; FUSCC: Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center; TCGA: the Cancer Genome Atlas)
| Covariates | FUSCC | TCGA | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI | ||||
| Age (ref. <65 years) | 1.756 | 0.433-7.125 | 0.431 | 1.005 | 0.972-1.038 | 0.780 | |
| pT stage (ref. T1 - T2) | 18.506 | 2.706-126.551 | 2.026 | 1.101-3.728 | |||
| pN stage (ref. N0) | 0.256 | 0.034-1.933 | 0.186 | 0.929 | 0.592-1.458 | 0.929 | |
| pM stage (ref. M0) | - | - | - | 0.475 | 0.149-1.514 | 0.208 | |
| AJCC stage (ref. I - II) | 0.724 | 0.137-4.124 | 0.724 | - | - | - | |
| Gleason score (ref. <7) | 2.518 | 0.797-7.959 | 0.116 | 3.202 | 3.202-2.013 | ||
| MRE11 expression (ref. negative) | 8.588 | 1.015-72.667 | 1.071 | 0.687-1.669 | 0.763 | ||
Univariate and multivariate Cox logistic regression analysis of OS in TCGA cohort (OS: overall survival; TCGA: the Cancer Genome Atlas)
| Covariates | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI | ||||
| Age (ref. <65 years) | 1.053 | 0.955-1.160 | 0.300 | 1.064 | 0.952-1.188 | 0.276 | |
| pT stage (ref. T1 - T2) | 3.228 | 0.598-17.426 | 0.173 | 0.739 | 0.077-7.078 | 0.793 | |
| pN stage (ref. N0) | 2.408 | 0.629-9.226 | 0.200 | 1.775 | 0.365-8.636 | 0.477 | |
| pM stage (ref. M0) | 1.958 | 0.241-15.934 | 0.530 | - | - | 0.989 | |
| Gleason score (ref. <7) | 6.139 | 1.341-28.100 | 5.333 | 0.574-49.553 | 0.141 | ||
| MRE11 expression (ref. negative) | 8.318 | 1.031-67.131 | 9.933 | 1.042-94.665 | |||
Figure 3Datasets from TCGA database were implemented with GSEA method. For each separate analysis, Student's-t-test statistical score was performed in consistent pathways and the mean of the differential expression genes was calculated. A permutation test with 1000 times was used to identify the significantly changed pathways. The adjusted P values (adj. P) using Benjamini and Hochberg (BH) false discovery rate (FDR) method by default were applied to correct for the occurrence of false positive results. The significant related genes were defined with an adj. P less than 0.01 and a FDR less than 0.25.