4.4 Article

Downregulated SASH1 expression indicates poor clinical prognosis in gastric cancer

Journal

HUMAN PATHOLOGY
Volume 74, Issue -, Pages 83-91

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2018.01.008

Keywords

Gastric cancer; Immunohistochemistry; Prognosis; SASH1; Tissue microarray

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Funds of China [81101615]
  2. Six Talent Peaks Project of Jiangsu, China [WSW-029]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

SASH1 (SAM- and SH3-domain containing 1), a novel candidate tumor suppressor, has attracted attention due to its role in intracellular signal transduction and its tumor prognostic value in diverse cancers. Reports have demonstrated that reduced SASH1 expression correlates with tumor proliferation, invasion, and metastasis. However, the expression and prognostic significance of SASH1 in gastric cancer (GC) remain unclear. In this study, 8 paired fresh-frozen GC tissues and corresponding gastric mucosal tissues were examined by Western blot to analyze the protein expression of SASH1. Seven hundred twenty-six formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) gastric tissue samples were evaluated by immunohistochemical (IHC) to determine the correlations of SASH1 expression with clinicopathological factors and prognosis. Compared with adjacent noncancerous tissues, SASH1 was significantly downregulated in GC specimens. Analysis using the chi(2) test revealed that low SASH1 expression was significantly associated with advanced TNM stage (P < .001) in GC. Cox regression multivariable analyses demonstrated that SASH1 expression (P < .001), TNM stage (P < .001), preoperative CEA level (P = .003) and preoperative CA19-9 level (P = .002) were independent prognostic factors. Our clinical findings suggest that downregulated SASH1 expression could be used as an independent biomarker for poor prognosis in GC. (C) 2018 Published by Elsevier 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

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available