| Literature DB >> 33241001 |
Xi Chen1, Hui Wei1,2, Dong Qian3, Yuwen Wang4, Yong Guan1, Puchun Er1, Yongchun Song1, Ningbo Liu1, Jun Wang1, Lujun Zhao1, Zhiyong Yuan1, Ping Wang1, Qingsong Pang1, Wencheng Zhang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) plays a central role in the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, no effective biomarkers have been identified for predict CRT sensitivity and prognosis of patients with ESCC. The aim of this study was to investigate cytokine profiles of epidermal growth factor (EGF) and urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) in 68 ESCC patients, and to evaluate the clinical utility of these markers.Entities:
Keywords: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC); chemoradiotherapy (CRT); epidermal growth factor (EGF); prognosis; urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR)
Year: 2020 PMID: 33241001 PMCID: PMC7576018 DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-4503
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transl Med ISSN: 2305-5839
Clinical characteristics of 68 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
| Characteristic | N (%) or median range |
|---|---|
| Sex | |
| Male | 60 (88.2) |
| Female | 8 (11.8) |
| Age [years] | 60 [47–79] |
| KPS | |
| >80 | 56 (82.4) |
| ≤80 | 12 (17.6) |
| Smoke | |
| Ever | 54 (79.4) |
| Never | 14 (20.6) |
| Stage | |
| II | 12 (17.7) |
| III | 43 (63.2) |
| IVa | 13 (29.1) |
| Tumor location | |
| Upper | 20 (29.4) |
| Middle | 37 (54.4) |
| Lower | 11 (16.2) |
| Weight Loss | |
| Yes | 26 (38.2) |
| No | 42 (61.8) |
| Treatment | |
| Radical CRT | 50 (73.5) |
| Neo-CRT + surgery | 18 (26.5) |
KPS, Karnofsky performance status; CRT, chemoradiotherapy.
Figure 1Cytokine antibody microarray screening for significant cytokines. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering was performed based on the alterations of 120 human cytokines before and after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) from 8 patients. G1-4 represents 4 patients with CRT sensitivity and B1-4 represents 4 patients with CRT resistance. Changes in the expression of these cytokines before and after treatment were shown in color. After CRT, increased cytokine levels are in green, no changes in black and decreased cytokine levels in red.
Figure 2Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Progression-free survival curves for patients by uPAR ratio (A) and EGF ratio (B). Overall survival curves for patients by EGF ratio (C) and uPAR ratio (D).
Univariate and multivariate analysis of progression-free survival
| Characteristics | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | P | HR | 95% CI | P | ||
| Gender | |||||||
| Male | 0.679 | 0.240–1.916 | 0.464 | ||||
| Age | |||||||
| ≤60 | 0.478 | 0.252–0.909 | 0.024 | 0.369 | 0.183–0.747 | 0.006 | |
| Smoke | |||||||
| Never | 1.345 | 0.593–3.051 | 0.478 | ||||
| Weight loss | |||||||
| Yes | 0.917 | 0.484–1.737 | 0.791 | ||||
| Treatment | |||||||
| CRT | 0.746 | 0.363–1.532 | 0.424 | ||||
| KPS score | |||||||
| ≤80 | 0.765 | 0.351–1.666 | 0.499 | ||||
| TNM | |||||||
| II | Ref. | Ref. | |||||
| III | 1.158 | 0.576–3.996 | 0.399 | 1.438 | 0.478–4.319 | 0.518 | |
| IVa | 5.303 | 1.777–15.822 | 0.003 | 8.340 | 2.452–28.369 | 0.001 | |
| Tumor location | |||||||
| Upper | Ref. | ||||||
| Middle | 1.842 | 0.845–4.015 | 0.124 | ||||
| Lower | 2.478 | 0.951–6.457 | 0.063 | ||||
| uPAR ratio | |||||||
| Low | 2.742 | 1.063–7.073 | 0.037 | 3.999 | 1.503–10.639 | 0.006 | |
| EGF ratio | |||||||
| Low | 1.810 | 0.936–3.500 | 0.078 | ||||
KPS, Karnofsky performance status; HR, hazards ratio; CI, confidence interval; Ref, reference; EGF, epidermal growth factor; uPAR, urokinase plasminogen activator receptor.
Univariate and multivariate analysis of overall survival
| Characteristics | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | P | HR | 95% CI | P | ||
| Gender | |||||||
| Male | 1.227 | 0.395–3.805 | 0.724 | ||||
| Age | |||||||
| ≤60 | 0.466 | 0.201–1.079 | 0.075 | ||||
| Smoke | |||||||
| Never | 1.938 | 0.575–6.535 | 0.286 | ||||
| Weight loss | |||||||
| Yes | 0.798 | 0.350–1.823 | 0.593 | ||||
| Treatment | |||||||
| CRT | 0.307 | 0.091–1.035 | 0.057 | ||||
| KPS score | |||||||
| ≤80 | 0.570 | 0.223–1.459 | 0.241 | ||||
| TNM | |||||||
| II | Ref. | Ref. | |||||
| III | 2.088 | 0.466–9.356 | 0.336 | 1.649 | 0.359–7.566 | 0.520 | |
| IVa | 10.497 | 2.154–51.142 | 0.004 | 9.698 | 1.961–47.971 | 0.005 | |
| Tumor location | |||||||
| Upper | Ref. | ||||||
| Middle | 3.014 | 0.855–10.620 | 0.086 | ||||
| Lower | 4.895 | 1.222–19.611 | 0.025 | ||||
| uPAR ratio | |||||||
| Low | 2.594 | 0.763–8.815 | 0.127 | ||||
| EGF ratio | |||||||
| Low | 2.445 | 1.006–5.945 | 0.047 | 2.574 | 1.046–6.335 | 0.040 | |
KPS, Karnofsky performance status; HR, hazards ratio; CI, confidence interval; Ref, reference; uPAR, urokinase plasminogen activator receptor; EGF, epidermal growth factor.
Figure 3Kaplan-Meier survival curves for overall survival and progression-free survival based on both high epidermal growth factor (EGF) and urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) ratios compared to all others. (A) Progression-free survival curves for patients by combined EGF and uPAR ratios; (B) Overall survival curves for patients by combined EGF and uPAR ratios.
Figure 4Correlations between the expression levels of epidermal growth factor (EGF) and urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR). (A) A significant positive correlation was found between the levels of EGF and uPAR before treatment. (B) A significant positive correlation was found between the levels of EGF and uPAR after chemoradiotherapy (CRT).