| Literature DB >> 31572541 |
Yan Qu1, Lin Zhang1, Jianbo Wang1, Pengxiang Chen1, Yibin Jia1, Cong Wang1, Wenjing Yang1, Zhihua Wen1, Qingxu Song1, Bingxu Tan1, Yufeng Cheng1.
Abstract
The impact of yes-associated protein (YAP) on the prognosis of patients with esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) and its mechanism of action has seldom been reported. In the present study, the role of YAP on the prognosis of patients with ESCC and the mechanism of action of YAP in promoting the progression of ESCC was investigated. Tumor tissue samples from patients with ESCC were collected and the level of YAP expression was detected using immunohistochemical staining. In addition, YAP was knocked-down in ESCC cell lines and the effects on cell migration and invasion were examined. The expression levels of vimentin, N-cadherin, and E-cadherin were further investigated to examine the association between YAP and epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Results showed that overexpression of YAP was associated with larger lymph node metastasis and poor disease-free survival and overall survival. Compared with patients in early stage ESCC, the association was more significant in patients with late stage ESCC. Univariate and multivariate analyses further indicated that YAP expression could be an independent prognostic factor for ESCC. Downregulation of YAP inhibited cell migration and invasion. Western blot analysis showed that when YAP was knocked down, expression levels of vimentin and N-cadherin were reduced, whereas that of E-cadherin was increased. In conclusion, the results indicates that YAP expression level could be a novel marker for predicting the prognosis of patients with ESCC, and YAP-promoted tumor migration and invasion might be through EMT in ESCC. Copyright: © Qu et al.Entities:
Keywords: epithelial-mesenchymal transition; esophageal squamous cell cancer; overexpression; prognosis; yes-associated protein
Year: 2019 PMID: 31572541 PMCID: PMC6755466 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2019.7896
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Exp Ther Med ISSN: 1792-0981 Impact factor: 2.447
Baseline characteristics of the 107 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients.
| Characteristics | Value, n (%) |
|---|---|
| Sex | |
| Female | 20 (18.7) |
| Male | 87 (81.3) |
| Age | |
| Mean ± SD | 61.20±9.266 |
| Median, n (range) | 61 (32–84) |
| Smoking | |
| Yes | 54 (50.5) |
| No | 53 (49.5) |
| Drinking | |
| Yes | 49 (45.8) |
| No | 58 (54.2) |
| Differentiation degree | |
| Well | 27 (25.2) |
| Middle | 55 (51.4) |
| Poor | 25 (23.4) |
| T stage | |
| T1 | 4 (3.7) |
| T2 | 42 (39.3) |
| T3 | 56 (52.3) |
| T4 | 5 (4.7) |
| N stage | |
| N0 | 56 (52.3) |
| N1-3 | 51 (47.7) |
| pTNM stage | |
| I | 5 (4.7) |
| III | 56 (52.3) |
| III | 46 (43.0) |
| Follow-up time | |
| Mean ± SD | 43.20±22.83 |
| Median, n (range) | 49.50 |
| (4.40–70.40) | |
| YAP expression | |
| Low | 65 (60.7) |
| Over | 42 (39.3) |
| Adjuvant treatment | |
| None | 63 (58.9) |
| Radiotherapy | 17 (15.9) |
| Chemotherapy | 9 (8.4) |
| CRT | 18 (16.8) |
CRT, radiochemotherapy; T stage, invasion depth; N stage, lymph node metastasis; pTNM, pathological TNM.
Figure 1.Immunohistochemical staining of YAP in esophageal squamous cell cancer tissues and Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test of YAP expression for DFS and OS. (A) Overexpression and (B) low expression levels of YAP. YAP expression was localized to the cytoplasm of the cells. Magnification, ×400. (C and D) Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test of YAP for (C) DFS and (D) OS. YAP overexpression significantly predicted decreased DFS (P=0.004) and decreased OS (P<0.001). DFS, disease-free survival; YAP, yes-associated protein; OS, overall survival.
Association between clinicopathological features of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and YAP expression in tumor tissues.
| YAP expression | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinicopathological features | Low, n=65 | Over, n=42 | P-value[ |
| Age | |||
| <60 | 28 | 22 | 0.428 |
| ≥60 | 37 | 20 | |
| Sex | |||
| Male | 51 | 36 | 0.449 |
| Female | 14 | 6 | |
| Smoking | |||
| No | 34 | 19 | 0.554 |
| Yes | 31 | 23 | |
| Drinking | |||
| No | 35 | 23 | 0.926 |
| Yes | 30 | 19 | |
| Differentiation | |||
| Well | 18 | 9 | 0.146 |
| Moderate | 36 | 19 | |
| Poor | 11 | 14 | |
| T stage | |||
| T1-2 | 31 | 15 | 0.238 |
| T3-4 | 34 | 27 | |
| N stage | |||
| N0 | 40 | 16 | 0.029[ |
| N1-3 | 25 | 26 | |
| pTNM | |||
| I–II | 42 | 19 | 0.071 |
| III | 23 | 23 | |
| Adjuvant treatment | |||
| None | 35 | 28 | 0.417 |
| Radiotherapy | 13 | 4 | |
| Chemotherapy | 5 | 4 | |
| CRT | 12 | 6 | |
χ2 test.
P<0.05. CRT, radiochemotherapy; T stage, invasion depth; N stage, lymph node metastasis; pTNM, pathological TNM.
Figure 2.Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test of YAP in subgroups of pTNM stage. (A and B) Kaplan-Meier curves for DFS stratified according to pTNM stage. YAP overexpression was associated with DFS in patients with stage III ESCC (P=0.003), but not associated with stage I and II (P>0.05). (C and D) Kaplan-Meier curves for OS stratified by pTNM stage. YAP overexpression was associated with worse OS in ESCC patients with stage III ESCC (P=0.011), and not in stage I and II (P>0.05). YAP, yes-associated protein; ESCC, esophageal squamous cell cancer; pTNM, pathological TNM.
Univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic variables for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
| Overall survival | Disease-free survival | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
| Variable | P-value | HR (95% CI) | P-value | P-value | HR (95% CI) | P-value |
| Sex | 1.528 | 0.699 | ||||
| Male vs. female | 0.598 | (0.670–3.484) | 0.313 | 0.999 | (0.303–1.613) | 0.402 |
| Age | 0.559 | 0.941 | ||||
| <60 vs. ≥60 | 0.030[ | (0.318–0.981) | 0.043[ | 0.585 | (0.533–1.662) | 0.835 |
| Smoking | 0.931 | 0.639 | ||||
| Yes vs. no | 0.921 | (0.469–1.847) | 0.838 | 0.212 | (0.335–1.218) | 0.174 |
| Drinking | 1.910 | 0.951 | ||||
| Yes vs. no | 0.282 | (0.957–3.812) | 0.067 | 0.762 | (0.488–1.851) | 0.882 |
| T stage | 0.872 | 0.785 | ||||
| T1-2 vs. T3 −4 | 0.445 | (0.466–1.631) | 0.668 | 0.452 | (0.422–1.458) | 0.443 |
| N stage | 1.530 | 1.035 | ||||
| N0 vs. N1-3 | <0.001[ | (0.533–4.395) | 0.430 | 0.001[ | (0.365–2,937) | 0.948 |
| Differentiation | 0.783 | 0.885 | ||||
| Well vs. moderate vs. poor | 0.658 | (0.526–1.165) | 0.227 | 0.915 | (0.595–1.316) | 0.545 |
| pTNM | 1.805 | 3.108 | ||||
| I–II vs. III | <0.001[ | (0.608–5.357) | 0.287 | <0.001[ | (1.038–9.310) | 0.043[ |
| YAP expression | 2.727 | 2.161 | ||||
| Low vs. over | 0.001[ | (1.556–4.780) | <0.001[ | 0.005[ | (1.223–3.818) | 0.008[ |
| CRT | 0.974 | 0.907 | ||||
| None vs. RT vs. | 0.785 | (0.768–1.237) | 0.831 | 0.620 | (0.708–1.163) | 0.443 |
| CT vs. RT+CT | ||||||
P<0.05. HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; RT, radiotherapy; CT, chemotherapy; CRT, Radiochemotherapy; T stage, invasion depth; N stage, lymph node metastasis; pTNM, pathological TNM.
Figure 3.YAP is associated with the expression of epithelial-mesenchymal transition markers in esophageal squamous cell cancer cell lines. (A) Representative immunoblots and quantitative analysis of the expression levels of vimentin, N-cadherin, E-cadherin and YAP after siYAP transfection in (B) Eca109 and (C) Kyse150 cells. Data are presented as the mean ± standard error of the mean, and this procedure was performed in triplicate. **P<0.01 vs. control group. YAP, yes-associated protein; si, small interfering; NC, negative control; Con, control.
Figure 4.YAP regulates cell migration and invasion in vitro. Cell images of migration for (A) Eca109 and (C) Kyse150 cells and of invasion for (B) Eca109 and (D) Kyse150 cells stained with crystal violet (magnification, ×100). (E-H) The number of migrated and invasive cells in the YAP knockdown group was significantly less compared with those in the control, in both Eca109 and Kyse150 cells. ***P<0.001 vs. control group.