| Literature DB >> 35910854 |
Yunzhen Qian1,2,3,4, Yitao Gong1,2,3,4, Yu Liu1,2,3,4, Yusheng Chen1,2,3,4, Ruijie Wang1,2,3,4, Zhengjie Dai1,2,3,4, Xuan Zou1,2,3,4, Yesiboli Tasiheng1,2,3,4, Guopei Luo1,2,3,4, Xuan Lin1,2,3,4, Xu Wang1,2,3,4, He Cheng1,2,3,4, Xianjun Yu1,2,3,4, Chen Liu1,2,3,4.
Abstract
Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) displays a typical mucin expression pattern which is characterized by MUC1 positive, MUC2 negative, and MUC5AC positive. More and more evidences show that mucins are involved in the development of pancreatic diseases. However, the relationship between mucin expression and prognosis of PDAC patients has been controversial in the past decades; therefore, we aim to figure out the association of mucin expression with survival in PDAC patients who underwent radical resection.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35910854 PMCID: PMC9334048 DOI: 10.1155/2022/7353572
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Immunol Res ISSN: 2314-7156 Impact factor: 4.493
Figure 1The expression patterns of mucins in PDAC tissues. (a) mRNA expression level of mucins in the QCMG PDAC cohort (n = 70). (b–g) Low-power-field images showing the representative positive and negative results of IHC staining mucins' expression in the FUSCC PDAC cohort. Corresponding high-power-field images were displayed in Supplementary Figure 1. (b, c) MUC1-positive expression was only considered when positive coloration located in the apical membrane of PDAC cells; (d, e) MUC2-positive expression was only considered when positive coloration was located in the cytoplasm of PDAC cells. (f, g) MUC5AC-positive expression was only considered when positive coloration was located in the cytoplasm of PDAC cells. Abbreviations: TPM: transcripts per million reads; PDAC: pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Clinicopathological characteristics of FUSCC PDAC patients stratified by MUC1 expression.
| Variables | MUC1 negative | MUC1 positive |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, ( | 0.303 | ||
| <62 | 19 (55.9%) | 183 (46.7%) | |
| ≥62 | 15 (44.1%) | 209 (53.3%) | |
| Sex, ( | 0.110 | ||
| Male | 24 (70.6%) | 218 (56.5%) | |
| Female | 10 (29.4%) | 168 (43.5%) | |
| Tumour grade, ( | 0.534 | ||
| Low | 2 (5.9%) | 17 (4.4%) | |
| Moderate | 23 (67.6%) | 230 (59.7%) | |
| High | 9 (26.5%) | 138 (35.8%) | |
| Tumour stage, ( | 0.011 | ||
| I | 15 (44.1%) | 154 (39.3%) | |
| II | 10 (29.4%) | 195 (49.7%) | |
| III | 9 (26.5%) | 43 (11.0%) | |
| T stage, ( | 0.591 | ||
| T1 | 8 (23.5%) | 67 (17.1%) | |
| T2 | 19 (55.9%) | 225 (57.4%) | |
| T3 | 7 (20.6%) | 100 (25.5%) | |
| N stage, ( | 0.499 | ||
| N0 | 19 (55.9%) | 197 (51.0%) | |
| N1 | 10 (29.4%) | 149 (38.6%) | |
| N2 | 5 (14.7%) | 40 (10.4%) | |
| Tumour location, ( | 0.222 | ||
| Head | 20 (58.8%) | 210 (54.4%) | |
| Body | 13 (38.2%) | 174 (45.1%) | |
| Tail | 1 (2.9%) | 2 (0.5%) | |
| Vascular invasion, ( | 0.681 | ||
| No | 10 (29.4%) | 101 (26.2%) | |
| Yes | 24 (70.6%) | 285 (73.8%) | |
| Perineural infiltration, ( | 0.011 | ||
| No | 25 (73.5%) | 342 (88.6%) | |
| Yes | 9 (26.5%) | 44 (11.4%) | |
| Diabetes mellitus, ( | 0.226 | ||
| No | 26 (76.5%) | 326 (84.5%) | |
| Yes | 8 (23.5%) | 60 (15.5%) |
Clinicopathological characteristics of FUSCC PDAC patients stratified by MUC2 expression.
| Variables | MUC2 negative | MUC2 positive |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, ( | 0.905 | ||
| <62 | 167 (47.0%) | 33 (47.8%) | |
| ≥62 | 188 (53.0%) | 36 (52.2%) | |
| Sex, ( | 0.760 | ||
| Male | 201 (57.4%) | 41 (59.4%) | |
| Female | 149 (42.6%) | 28 (40.6%) | |
| Tumour grade, ( | 0.171 | ||
| Low | 13 (3.7%) | 6 (8.7%) | |
| Moderate | 214 (61.3%) | 38 (55.1%) | |
| High | 122 (35.0%) | 25 (36.2%) | |
| Tumour stage, ( | 0.699 | ||
| I | 143 (40.3%) | 26 (37.7%) | |
| II | 167 (47.0%) | 36 (52.2%) | |
| III | 45 (12.7%) | 7 (10.1%) | |
| T stage, ( | 0.730 | ||
| T1 | 64 (18.0%) | 10 (14.5%) | |
| T2 | 204 (57.5%) | 40 (58.0%) | |
| T3 | 87 (24.5%) | 19 (27.5%) | |
| N stage, ( | 0.746 | ||
| N0 | 182 (52.0%) | 33 (47.8%) | |
| N1 | 130 (37.1%) | 29 (42.0%) | |
| N2 | 38 (10.9%) | 7 (10.1%) | |
| Tumour location, ( | 0.407 | ||
| Head | 191 (54.6%) | 39 (56.5%) | |
| Body | 158 (45.1%) | 29 (42.0%) | |
| Tail | 1 (0.3%) | 1 (1.4%) | |
| Vascular invasion, ( | 0.830 | ||
| No | 92 (26.3%) | 19 (27.5%) | |
| Yes | 258 (73.7%) | 50 (72.5%) | |
| Perineural infiltration, ( | 0.030 | ||
| No | 312 (89.1%) | 55 (79.7%) | |
| Yes | 38 (10.9%) | 14 (20.3%) | |
| Diabetes mellitus, ( | 0.174 | ||
| No | 297 (84.9%) | 54 (78.3%) | |
| Yes | 53 (15.1%) | 15 (21.7%) |
Clinicopathological characteristics of FUSCC PDAC patients stratified by MUC5AC expression.
| Variables | MUC5AC negative | MUC5AC positive |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, ( | 0.486 | ||
| <62 | 20 (42.6%) | 175 (47.9%) | |
| ≥62 | 27 (57.4%) | 190 (52.1%) | |
| Sex, ( | 0.145 | ||
| Male | 32 (68.1%) | 205 (56.9%) | |
| Female | 15 (31.9%) | 155 (43.1%) | |
| Tumour grade, ( | 0.120 | ||
| Low | 0 (0.0%) | 19 (5.3%) | |
| Moderate | 26 (55.3%) | 220 (61.3%) | |
| High | 21 (44.7%) | 120 (33.4%) | |
| Tumour stage, ( | 0.067 | ||
| I | 19 (40.4%) | 146 (40.0%) | |
| II | 27 (57.4%) | 170 (46.6%) | |
| III | 1 (2.1%) | 49 (13.4%) | |
| T stage, ( | 0.958 | ||
| T1 | 8 (17.0%) | 63 (17.3%) | |
| T2 | 28 (59.6%) | 210 (57.5%) | |
| T3 | 11 (23.4%) | 92 (25.2%) | |
| N stage, ( | 0.084 | ||
| N0 | 21 (44.7%) | 189 (52.5%) | |
| N1 | 24 (51.1%) | 130 (36.1%) | |
| N2 | 2 (4.3%) | 41 (11.4%) | |
| Tumour location, ( | 0.058 | ||
| Head | 20 (42.6%) | 203 (55.6%) | |
| Body | 26 (55.3%) | 156 (43.3%) | |
| Tail | 1 (2.1%) | 1 (0.3%) | |
| Vascular invasion, ( | 0.345 | ||
| No | 10 (21.3%) | 100 (27.8%) | |
| Yes | 37 (78.7%) | 260 (72.2%) | |
| Perineural infiltration, ( | 0.354 | ||
| No | 39 (83.0%) | 316 (87.8%) | |
| Yes | 8 (17.0%) | 44 (12.2%) | |
| Diabetes mellitus, ( | 0.097 | ||
| No | 36 (76.6%) | 309 (85.8%) | |
| Yes | 11 (23.4%) | 51 (14.2%) |
Figure 2Survival curves of PDAC patients in relevant to mucin expression. The survival plots were plotted by Kaplan-Meier's method, and Mantel-Cox tests were used to compare the curves. (a–c) FUSCC cohort was stratified by mucins' IHC staining results. (a) MUC1-negative patients (n = 34) had worse survival compared to MUC1-positive patients (n = 392). (b) MUC2-positive patients (n = 69) tended to survive a shorter time compared to MUC2-negative patients (n = 355). (c) There was no statistical significance of overall survival between the subgroups stratified by MUC5AC expression (n = 365 and n = 47, respectively). (d) The cut-off value of 77.90 TPM stratified the QCMG cohort into the high MUC1 expression subgroup (n = 63) and the low MUC1 expression subgroup (n = 7) with a significant difference in OS. (e) The cut-off value of 0.682 TPM stratified the QCMG cohort into the high MUC2 expression subgroup (n = 47) and the low MUC2 expression subgroup (n = 23) with a marginally significant difference in OS. (f) The cut-off value of 17.83 TPM stratified the QCMG cohort into the high MUC5AC expression subgroup (n = 52) and the low MUC5AC expression subgroup (n = 18); although the survival curves had a separating tendency in the early stage, there was no statistical OS difference. Abbreviations: PDAC: pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Figure 3Multivariate analyses of mucin expression and clinicopathological characteristics on overall survival. The univariate analysis results of the FUSCC cohort are displayed in Supplementary Table 2, and risk factors with a p value less than 0.1 in the univariate analysis were integrated to make multivariate logistic regression. The X-axis of this forest plot stands for HR, which was calculated by logistic Cox regression, enter method. The median of CA19-9 was 188.6 U/ml. Abbreviations: HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 4Previous studies on mucins' prognostic values in PDAC. Five investigations with reported HR values were included in this forest plot. The X-axis stands for HR. Abbreviations: HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval.