4.3 Article

Evaluation of the Clinical Significance of Focal Adhesion Kinase and Src Expression in Human Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Journal

PANCREAS
Volume 39, Issue 6, Pages 930-936

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0b013e3181d7abcc

Keywords

FAK; Src; pancreatic cancer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) and Src, 2 protein tyrosine kinases, have been suggested to regulate several fundamental cellular activities that promote the malignant phenotype in various human tumors, including pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Even though research has already turned in laboratory investigations and clinical trials on the possible use of agents blocking the 2 enzymes in cancer management, the data on the clinical significance of FAK and Src in pancreatic adenocarcinoma are still scarce. Methods: The FAK and Src protein expression was assessed immunohistochemically in tumor specimens of 65 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and was statistically analyzed in relation to various clinicopathological characteristics, tumor proliferative capacity, and patients' survival. Results: The FAK expression correlated significantly with the T stage of the tumor (P = 0.037), whereas FAK staining intensity with patients' age (P = 0.030), tumors' histopathological grade of differentiation (P = 0.041), and M stage (P = 0.029). The Src expression correlated significantly with the stage of the tumor (P = 0.013) and patients' survival (log-rank test, P = 0.027), being also identified as an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis (P = 0.047). Furthermore, trends that did not reach statistical significance were noted between FAK and Src expression and staining intensity and several clinicopathological parameters. Conclusions: The FAK and Src immunohistochemical expression was associated with certain clinicopathological parameters that are crucial for the patients' management.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available