| Literature DB >> 32952891 |
Xijiao Zheng1, Xia Tian2, Qiao Zhang3,4, Ping Shi5, Shu Li6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/Entities:
Keywords: Biomarker; Oral squamous cell carcinoma; SAMMSON
Year: 2020 PMID: 32952891 PMCID: PMC7486504 DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2019.11.008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Dent Sci ISSN: 1991-7902 Impact factor: 2.080
Clinicopathological features and SAMMON expression in OSCC patients.
| Chinicopathological characteristics | Total | high expression | low expression | X2 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | |||||
| male | 56 | 32 | 24 | 3.025 | 0.127 |
| female | 34 | 13 | 21 | ||
| Age | |||||
| ≤60 | 52 | 21 | 31 | 4.555 | 0.054 |
| >60 | 38 | 24 | 14 | ||
| Tumor size | |||||
| T1 | 36 | 16 | 20 | 2.352 | 0.503 |
| T2 | 26 | 15 | 11 | ||
| T3 | 15 | 6 | 9 | ||
| T4 | 13 | 8 | 5 | ||
| Distant metastasis | |||||
| Positive | 42 | 30 | 12 | 11.576 | 0.001 |
| Negative | 48 | 15 | 33 | ||
| Differentiation | |||||
| high | 17 | 12 | 5 | 14.472 | 0.001 |
| moderate | 25 | 18 | 7 | ||
| poor | 48 | 15 | 33 | ||
| Lymph node metastasis | |||||
| Positive | 46 | 31 | 15 | 11.383 | 0.001 |
| Negative | 44 | 14 | 30 | ||
| TMN stages | |||||
| I | 26 | 8 | 18 | 16.716 | 0.001 |
| II | 23 | 7 | 16 | ||
| III | 18 | 12 | 6 | ||
| IV | 23 | 18 | 5 | ||
| Cancer invasion depth | |||||
| ≤8 mm | 42 | 15 | 27 | 6.429 | 0.02 |
| >8 mm | 48 | 30 | 18 | ||
| Tumor location | |||||
| cheek | 34 | 18 | 16 | 1.487 | 0.685 |
| gangiva | 32 | 12 | 20 | ||
| Tonuge | 16 | 7 | 9 | ||
| Mouth floor | 8 | 5 | 3 | ||
Figure 1SAMMSON is significantly up-regulated in OSCC tissues and cell lines. A. Relative SAMMSON expression levels in a cohort of 90 OSCC patient samples and adjacent normal healthy tissues (n = 90 per group; mean ± s.e.m.; paired Student's t-test, ∗∗∗∗P < 0.001). B. Relative SAMMSON expression levels in OSCC cell lines and NHOK cell line (n = 3 per group; mean ± s.e.m.; unpaired Student's t-test, ∗P < 0.05).
Figure. 2High SAMMSON expression predicts poor prognosis in OSCC. A:Kaplan–Meier curves for the overall survival in patients with OSCC. Patients with high SAMMON expression had significantly poorer overall survival than those with low SAMMON expression (p < 0.001, log-rank test). B:Kaplan–Meier curves for disease-free survival in patients with OSCC which are grouped based on SAMMON expression level (p < 0.001, log-rank test).
Cox regression analysis for prognosis in OSCC patients.
| Overall survival | B | SE | Wald | df | P value | Exp(B) | 95%Exp(B) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| upper limit | Lower limit | |||||||
| SAMMSON | 1.277 | 0.629 | 4.117 | 1 | 0.042 | 3.586 | 1.044 | 12.315 |
| Tumor differentiation | 0.21 | 0.412 | 0.259 | 1 | 0.0351 | 1.254 | 0.55 | 2.854 |
| TMN stage | −1.473 | 0.489 | 9.08 | 1 | 0.003 | 0.229 | 0.088 | 0.598 |
| Lymphatic metastasis | −1.237 | 0.459 | 8.72 | 1 | 0.035 | 1.984 | 0.605 | 0.998 |
| Distant metastasis | −0.797 | 0.392 | 4.133 | 1 | 0.042 | 0.451 | 0.209 | 0.972 |
| Cancer invasion depth (8 mm) | −0.998 | 0.542 | 7.33 | 1 | 0.027 | 0.179 | 0.025 | 0.993 |
| Tumor location | 0.11 | 0.17 | 0.42 | 1 | 0.517 | 1.116 | 0.8 | 1.557 |
| Tumor size | −0.115 | 0.182 | 0.398 | 1 | 0.528 | 0.897 | 0.624 | 1.274 |
| Sex | −0.002 | 0.016 | 0.017 | 1 | 0.895 | 0.998 | 0.967 | 1.03 |
| Age | −0.275 | 0.51 | 0.292 | 1 | 0.589 | 0.759 | 0.28 | 2.062 |
Cox regression analysis for disease-free survival in OSCC patients.
| Free diseases survival | B | SE | Wald | df | P value | Exp(B) | 95%Exp(B) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| upper limit | Lower limit | |||||||
| SAMMSON | 1.15 | 0.578 | 3.955 | 1 | 0.047 | 3.157 | 1.017 | 9.804 |
| Tumor differentiation | −0.895 | 0.435 | 0.3893 | 1 | 0.048 | 0.423 | 0.18 | 0.994 |
| TMN stages | −1.308 | 0.471 | 7.716 | 1 | 0.005 | 0.27 | 0.107 | 0.68 |
| Lymphatic metastasis | −1.114 | 0.422 | 0.119 | 1 | 0.021 | 1.723 | 0.622 | 0.784 |
| Distant metastasis | −1.13 | 0.392 | 0.693 | 1 | 0.048 | 0.638 | 0.783 | 0.998 |
| Cancer invasion depth (8 mm) | −1.193 | 0.369 | 0.272 | 1 | 0.602 | 0.825 | 0.4 | 1.701 |
| Tumor location | −0.011 | 0.169 | 0.004 | 1 | 0.948 | 0.989 | 0.771 | 1.367 |
| Tumor size | −0.003 | 0.188 | 0 | 1 | 0.988 | 0.997 | 0.96 | 1.44 |
| Sex | 0.004 | 0.016 | 0.074 | 1 | 0.785 | 1.004 | 0.973 | 1.0307 |
| Age | 0.455 | 0.382 | 1.415 | 1 | 0.234 | 1.576 | 0.745 | 3.332 |
Figure 3Upregulated serum SAMMSON is tumor derived and acts as a potential diagnostic biomarker for OSCC. A. Relative SAMMSON expression levels in OSCC patient serum samples and healthy serum controls (p < 0.001). B. Pearson correlation coefficient analysis on SAMMSON expression level in tumor and serum samples from OSCC patients (p < 0.001). C. Relative SAMMSON expression in serum samples from 30 matched pre- and post-surgery serum samples (n = 30 per group; mean ± s.e.m.; paired Student's t-test, ∗p < 0.001). D. The ROC curve analysis of SAMMSON, CEA, SCCA, and TSGF (n = 30 per group; bivariate regression analysis, p < 0.001). E. The correlation among seral SAMMSON, SCCA, CEA and TSGF levels (n = 30 per group; mean ± s.e.m.; paired Student's t-test, ∗p < 0.001). F. The ROC curve analysis of synergistic diagnosis (n = 30 per group; bivariate regression analysis, p < 0.001).