| Literature DB >> 32344892 |
Yen-Hao Chen1,2,3, Shau-Hsuan Li1, Hung-I Lu4, Chien-Ming Lo4.
Abstract
Stromal cell-derived factor-1α (SDF-1α) is a chemokine that has been reported to be involved in tumor progression in several malignancies. This study aimed to evaluate the crucial role of SDF-1α in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) who underwent esophagectomy. A total of 169 patients with ESCC were identified, including overexpression of SDF-1α in 60 patients and low expression of SDF-1α in 109 patients by immunohistochemical analysis. Two ESCC cell lines, TE1 and KYSE30, were selected to evaluate the tumor cell proliferative effect of SDF-1α. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that high tumor (T) status, positive lymph node metastasis, tumors located in the upper esophagus, and SDF-1α overexpression were significantly related to worse disease-free survival and overall survival. In addition, the two cell lines were treated with SDF-1α, AMD3100 (an SDF-1α-ligand receptor antagonist), and chemotherapeutic agents (cisplatin). Our in vitro study results showed that SDF-1α promoted the proliferation of tumor cells, and blocking the SDF-1α pathway displayed a growth inhibition effect in a dose-dependent manner. SDF-1α plays an important role in the progression of ESCC and is an independent prognostic factor for ESCC patients who underwent esophagectomy.Entities:
Keywords: SDF-1α; esophageal cancer; esophagectomy; squamous cell carcinoma
Year: 2020 PMID: 32344892 PMCID: PMC7281421 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12051067
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Characteristics of 169 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving esophagectomy.
| Characteristics | Patient Numbers (%) |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 55 years old (29–80) |
| Sex | |
| Male | 163 (96.4%) |
| Female | 6 (3.6%) |
| pT status | |
| 1 | 56 (33.1%) |
| 2 | 34 (20.1%) |
| 3 | 63 (37.3%) |
| 4 | 16 (9.5%) |
| pN status | |
| 0 | 116 (68.6%) |
| 1 | 33 (19.6%) |
| 2 | 13 (7.7%) |
| 3 | 7 (4.1%) |
| Tumor stage | |
| I | 51 (30.2%) |
| II | 63 (37.3%) |
| III | 34 (20.1%) |
| IVA | 21 (12.4%) |
| Location | |
| Upper | 28 (16.6%) |
| Middle | 63 (37.3%) |
| Lower | 78 (46.1%) |
| Grade | |
| 1 | 17 (10.1%) |
| 2 | 108 (63.9%) |
| 3 | 44 (26.0%) |
Figure 1Immunohistochemical staining of the SDF-1α in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing esophagectomy.
Comparison of clinicopathological parameters in 169 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving esophagectomy.
| Characteristics | Overexpression of SDF-1α ( | Low Expression of SDF-1α ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | |||
| <60 years | 37 (61.7%) | 69 (63.3%) | 0.87 |
| ≥ 60 years | 23 (38.3%) | 40 (36.7%) | |
| Tumor stage | |||
| I + II | 27 (45.0%) | 87 (79.8%) | <0.001 * |
| III + IVA | 33 (55.0%) | 22 (20.2%) | |
| Location | |||
| Upper | 9 (15.0%) | 19 (17.4%) | 0.83 |
| Middle + Lower | 51 (85.0%) | 90 (82.6%) | |
| Grade | |||
| 1 + 2 | 40 (66.7%) | 85 (78.0%) | 0.14 |
| 3 | 20 (33.3%) | 24 (22.0%) | |
| Adjuvant treatment | |||
| Yes | 49 (81.7%) | 50 (45.9%) | <0.001 * |
| No | 11 (18.3%) | 59 (54.1%) |
* Statistically significant.
Figure 2Comparison of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients who underwent esophagectomy according to the expression of SDF-1α. (A) DFS and (B) OS.
Univariate and multivariate analysis of disease-free survival (DFS) in 169 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving esophagectomy.
| Parameters | Number of Patients | DFS (Months) | Univariate Analysis | Multivariate Analysis | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | |||||
| Age | 0.007 * | ||||
| <60 years | 63 (37.3%) | 39.4 | |||
| ≥60 years | 106 (62.7%) | 14.8 | |||
| Sex | 0.14 | ||||
| Male | 163 (96.4%) | 21.5 | |||
| Female | 6 (3.6%) | NR | |||
| pT status | <0.001 * | ||||
| 1 + 2 | 90 (53.3%) | 56.4 | 0.50 (0.34–0.73) | <0.001 * | |
| 3 + 4 | 79 (46.7%) | 9.8 | |||
| pN status | <0.001 * | ||||
| 0 | 116 (68.6%) | 45.7 | 0.53 (0.36–0.79) | 0.002 * | |
| 1 + 2 + 3 | 53 (31.4%) | 7.1 | |||
| Tumor stage | <0.001 * | ||||
| I + II | 114 (67.5%) | 45.7 | |||
| III + IVA | 55 (32.5%) | 6.8 | |||
| Location | 0.1 | ||||
| Upper | 28 (16.6%) | 13.7 | 0.51 (0.31–0.82) | 0.006 * | |
| Middle + Lower | 141 (83.4%) | 33.8 | |||
| Grade | 0.16 | ||||
| 1 + 2 | 125 (74.0%) | 31.1 | |||
| 3 | 44 (26.0%) | 13.1 | |||
| Adjuvant treatment | <0.001 * | ||||
| Yes | 99 (58.6%) | 10.3 | |||
| No | 70 (41.4%) | 65.9 | |||
| SDF-1α expression | <0.001 * | ||||
| High | 60 (35.5%) | 6.9 | |||
| Low | 109 (64.5%) | 50 | 0.49 (0.33–0.72) | <0.001 * | |
NR: not reach; HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval * Statistically significant.
Univariate and multivariate analysis of overall survival (OS) in 169 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who received esophagectomy.
| Parameters | Number of Patients | Univariate Analysis | Multivariate Analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS (Months) | HR (95% CI) | ||||
| Age | 0.009 * | ||||
| <60 years | 63 (37.3%) | 64.2 | |||
| ≥60 years | 106 (62.7%) | 23.7 | |||
| Sex | 0.2 | ||||
| Male | 163 (96.4%) | 32.8 | |||
| Female | 6 (3.6%) | NR | |||
| pT status | <0.001 * | ||||
| 1 + 2 | 90 (53.3%) | 67.2 | 0.50 (0.34−0.75) | 0.001 * | |
| 3 + 4 | 79 (46.7%) | 15.1 | |||
| pN status | <0.001 * | ||||
| 0 | 116 (68.6%) | 65.6 | 0.51 (0.34−0.76) | 0.001 * | |
| 1 + 2 + 3 | 53 (31.4%) | 13 | |||
| Tumor stage | <0.001 * | ||||
| I + II | 114 (67.5%) | 65.8 | |||
| III + IVA | 55 (32.5%) | 12 | |||
| Location | 0.035 * | ||||
| Upper | 28 (16.6%) | 16.7 | 0.46 (0.29−0.75) | 0.002 * | |
| Middle + Lower | 141 (83.4%) | 45 | |||
| Grade | 0.07 | ||||
| 1 + 2 | 125 (74.0%) | 48.7 | |||
| 3 | 44 (26.0%) | 22.4 | |||
| Adjuvant treatment | <0.001 * | ||||
| Yes | 99 (58.6%) | 15.5 | |||
| No | 70 (41.4%) | 69.3 | |||
| SDF-1α expression | <0.001 * | ||||
| High | 60 (35.5%) | 10 | |||
| Low | 109 (64.5%) | 67.5 | 0.40 (0.27-0.60) | <0.001 * | |
NR: not reach; HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval * Statistically significant.
Figure 3The effect of tumor cell proliferation of SDF-1α, AMD3100, and chemotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cell lines, TE1, and KYSE30.
Figure 4SDF-1α/CXCR4 axis inhibits tumor cell proliferation in a dose-dependent reduction on the two esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cell lines, TE1 and KYSE30. (A) 48 h. (B) 72 h. Columns, mean; bars, standard deviation. Significant difference from the indicated comparisons: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, and *** p < 0.001.