4.3 Article

Molecular characterization of clear cell renal cell carcinoma identifies CSNK2A1, SPP1 and DEFB1 as promising novel prognostic markers

Journal

APMIS
Volume 124, Issue 5, Pages 372-383

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apm.12519

Keywords

ccRCC; CSNK2A1; SPP1; DEFB1; prognosis; Taqman Array

Funding

  1. Region of Southern Denmark
  2. Arvid Nielssons Foundation
  3. Knud and Edith Eriksens Memorial Fund
  4. University of Southern Denmark
  5. Odense University Hospital

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The prognosis associated with clear cell renal carcinoma (ccRCC) can vary widely and novel molecular prognostic markers are needed to assess prognosis at an earlier stage. Several gene products have been investigated for this purpose, but none of them have been implemented in clinical practice. Here we hypothesized that we, using TaqMan((R)) Array, could identify superior prognostic messenger RNA (mRNA)s in long-term follow-up. Messenger RNA level of 19 candidate genes was investigated in 97 patients with ccRCC. Three genes impacted significantly on prognosis in both univariate and multivariate analysis. In univariate analysis, CSNK2A1 was a strong indicator of a poor overall survival (OS) (HR = 5.01, p < 0.001), disease specific survival (DSS) (HR = 6.21, p = 0.007) and progression free survival (PFS) (HR = 5.93, p = 0.005). High expression of SPP1 was associated to poor PFS (HR = 4.41, p = 0.04). DEFB1 was associated with a better PFS (HR = 0.24, p = 0.006). In multivariate analysis, CSNK2A1 was associated to a worse OS (HR = 3.56, p = 0.008) and PFS (HR = 3.84, p = 0.005), whereas SPP1 was an independent predictor of a worse PFS (HR = 3.46, p = 0.007) and DEFB1 of a better PFS (HR = 0.37, p = 0.027). These results show that with TaqMan((R)) Array we could identify three superior gene products related to prognosis. Further studies are needed to elucidate the pathways and roles of these genes in renal cancer development.

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