| Literature DB >> 35189899 |
Qiu-Yun Luo1,2,3, Tian Di1,2, Miao-Zhen Qiu1,4, Zeng-Fei Xia1,2, Yong Du1,5, Run-Duan Lin1,6, Li-Qiong Yang1,2, Yu-Ting Sun1,4, Da-Jun Yang7,8, Jian Sun9,10, Lin Zhang11,12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is a severe disease with high mortality, and is associated with poor prognosis and frequent lymphatic metastasis. Therefore, prognostic indicators for ESCC are urgently needed. A-kinase anchor-protein 8-like (AKAP8L) is a member of the A kinase anchor-protein (AKAPs) family and is overexpressed in many cancers. However, the role of AKAP8L in ESCC remains unclear. The aim of this study is to investigate the expression patterns and prognostic value of AKAP8L in ESCC.Entities:
Keywords: AKAP8L; Bioinformatic analysis; Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; Prognosis biomarker
Year: 2022 PMID: 35189899 PMCID: PMC8862232 DOI: 10.1186/s12935-022-02492-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Cell Int ISSN: 1475-2867 Impact factor: 5.722
Clinical data of 116 cases of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
| Characteristics | Total patients (n, %) |
|---|---|
| Gender | |
| Female | 20 (17.2%) |
| Male | 96 (82.8%) |
| Age, year | |
| <60 | 70 (60.3%) |
| ≥60 | 46 (39.7%) |
| Differentiation grade | |
| I | 34 (29.3%) |
| II | 52 (44.8%) |
| III | 30 (25.9%) |
| T stage | |
| T1 | 4 (3.4%) |
| T2 | 30 (25.7%) |
| T3 | 78 (67.2%) |
| T4 | 4 (3.4%) |
| N stage | |
| N0 | 58 (50.0%) |
| N1 | 57 (49.1%) |
| N2 | 1 (0.9%) |
| M stage | |
| M0 | 110 (94.8%) |
| M1 | 6 (5.2%) |
| Clinical stage | |
| I | 3 (2.6%) |
| II | 61 (52.6%) |
| III | 46 (39.6%) |
| IV | 6 (5.2%) |
Fig. 1The expression profile of AKAP8L in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. A High or low expression of AKAP8L in different human cancer tissues compared with normal tissues from the TCGA database. B, C The expression level of AKAP8L was higher in ESCC tissue than the adjacent normal tissue in GSE23400 dataset and GSE20347 dataset. D ROC curve indicated that AKAP8L showed high accuracy in predicting normal and tumor outcomes. E. High AKAP8L expression was correlated with poor OS in ESCC using the Kaplan–Meier plotter database (n = 81). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Fig. 2Representative images and statistical analysis of immunohistochemical staining for AKAP8L in ESCC tissues. A Representative images of IHC staining of AKAP8L with negative, weak, moderate, and strong expression. Scale bar: 100 μm. B Statistical analysis of AKAP8L expression in T1/2 and T3/4 stage ESCC samples based on IHC scores. C The expression level of AKAP8L in patients with lymph node metastasis was significantly higher than that in patients without lymph node metastasis. D The expression level of AKAP8L in TNM stage III/IV patients was significantly higher than that in TNM stage I/II patients
Correlation between the expression of AKAP8L and clinicopathologic parameters in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
| Characteristics | Total | AKAP8L expression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low (n = 61) | High (n = 55) | |||
| Gender | ||||
| Female | 20 | 10 | 10 | 0.799 |
| Male | 96 | 51 | 45 | |
| Age at diagnosis | ||||
| < 60 | 70 | 39 | 31 | 0.405 |
| ≥ 60 | 46 | 22 | 24 | |
| Differentiation grade | ||||
| I–II | 86 | 44 | 42 | 0.603 |
| III | 30 | 17 | 13 | |
| Tumor extent | ||||
| T1/T2 | 34 | 17 | 17 | 0.719 |
| T3/T4 | 82 | 44 | 38 | |
| Lymph node stage | ||||
| N0 | 58 | 36 | 22 | 0.041 |
| N1/2 | 58 | 25 | 33 | |
| Distant metastasis | ||||
| M0 | 110 | 60 | 50 | 0.081 |
| M1 | 6 | 1 | 5 | |
| Clinical stage | ||||
| I/II | 64 | 38 | 26 | 0.104 |
| III/IV | 52 | 23 | 29 | |
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis of progression-free survival in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
| Variable | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | |||
| Gender (Female vs. Male) | 1.148 (0.680–1.938) | 0.606 | ||
| Age (< 60 vs. ≥ 60) | 1.936 (1.289–2.908) | 1.737 (1.145–2.633) | ||
| Differentiation grade (III vs. I–II) | 0.851 (0.539–1.344) | 0.490 | ||
| T stage (T3–4 vs. T1–2) | 1.593 (1.013–2.504) | 1.634 (0.920–2.903) | 0.094 | |
| N stage (N1–2 vs. N0) | 2.709 (1.788–4.106) | 2.707 (1.355–5.407) | ||
| M stage (M1 vs. M0) | 1.251 (0.545–2.872) | 0.597 | ||
| Clinical stage (III–IV vs. I–II) | 2.122 (1.413–3.189) | 0.702 (0.324–1.518) | 0.368 | |
| AKAP8L expression (High vs. Low) | 2.192 (1.449–3.317) | 1.943 (1.258–3.000) | ||
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis of overall survival in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
| Variable | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | |||
| Gender (Female vs. Male) | 1.127 (0.665–1.911) | 0.656 | ||
| Age (< 60 vs. ≥ 60) | 1.887 (1.242–2.866) | 1.682 (1.095–2.586) | ||
| Differentiation grade (III vs. I–II) | 0.789 (0.497–1.253) | 0.315 | ||
| T stage (T3–4 vs. T1–2) | 1.461 (0.920–2.320) | 0.108 | ||
| N stage (N1–2 vs. N0) | 2.598 (1.695–3.982) | 2.252 (1.206–4.208) | ||
| M stage (M1 vs. M0) | 1.250 (0.544–2.873) | 0.599 | ||
| Clinical stage (III–IV vs. I–II) | 1.980 (1.304–3.006) | 0.956 (0.524–1.744) | 0.883 | |
| AKAP8L expression (High vs. Low) | 2.588 (1.677–3.992) | 2.208 (1.417–3.440) | ||
Fig. 3Kaplan–Meier survival curves grouped by high and low AKAP8L expression in ESCC patients. A Progression-Free-Survival (PFS) in all patients. B Overall survival (OS) in all patients
Fig. 4Kaplan–Meier survival curves for progress-free survival in ESCC patients with high and low AKAP8L expression stratified by different clinical factors. Kaplan–Meier survival for PFS in subgroups stratified by T1/2 (A), T3/4 (B), N0 (C), N1/2 (D), TNM stage I/II (E) and stage TNM stage III/IV (F) in ESCC patients
Fig. 5Kaplan–Meier survival curves for overall survival in ESCC patients with high and low AKAP8L expression stratified by different clinical factors. Kaplan–Meier survival for OS in subgroups stratified by T1/2 (A), T3/4 (B), N0 (C), N1/2 (D), TNM stage I/II (E) and stage TNM stage III/IV (F) in ESCC patients