4.5 Article

REGIV as a potential biomarker for peritoneal dissemination in gastric adenocarcinoma

Journal

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 105, Issue 2, Pages 189-194

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jso.22021

Keywords

gastric cancer; REGIV; peritoneal dissemination; TRC; molecular diagnosis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background This study examined the clinical significance of regenerating islet-derived family member 4 (REGIV) in surgically resected gastric tumors. The potential of REGIV as a biomarker in gastric cancer was also assessed including its predictive value for prognosis and recurrence after surgery. Methods: Immunohistochemistry was performed to assess the clinical significance of REGIV expression status in surgically resected specimens. The quantitative genetic diagnostic method, transcription-reverse transcription concerted reaction (TRC) that targeted REGIV mRNA was applied for prediction of peritoneal recurrence in gastric cancer. Results: Positive immunostaining for REGIV was observed in 85 cases (52.5%), and correlated significantly with diffuse type histopathology (P 0.001), advanced T stage (P 0.022), and frequent peritoneal recurrence (P = 0.009). Multivariate analysis identified advanced T stage (P < 0.001) and REGIV expression (P = 0.034) as independent prognostic factors for peritoneal recurrence-free survival. Overexpression of REGIV protein was evident in the majority of peritoneal tumors (93.8%). REGIV mRNA assessed by TRC could be a predictive marker for peritoneal recurrence after curative operation. Conclusions: REGIV overexpression is common in primary gastric tumors and a potentially suitable marker of diffuse type histopathology and peritoneal dissemination. Overexpression of REGIV mRNA, assessed by the TRC method, is a potentially suitable marker of peritoneal recurrence after curative resection. J. Surg. Oncol. 2012; 105: 189-194. (C) 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available