3.8 Article

Correlation between Claudins Expression and Prognostic Factors in Prostate Cancer

Journal

KOREAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Volume 51, Issue 4, Pages 239-244

Publisher

KOREAN UROLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.4111/kju.2010.51.4.239

Keywords

Claudin 1; CLDN5 protein; Prostate-specific antigen; Prostatic neoplasms

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the expression of claudins and prognostic factors in patients with prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: The subjects of this study were 48 patients who had undergone surgery for prostate cancer. The Gleason score (6 or lower, 7 or higher), prostate- specific antigen (PSA) level, T stage, biochemical recurrence, local recurrence, and distant metastasis were compared according to the expression of claudin-1 and claudin-5 in prostate cancer. Results: In the group with a low expression of claudin-1, the Gleason score was 7 points or higher in 18 cases (82%) and 6 points or lower in 4 cases (18%). In the group with a high expression of claudin-1, the Gleason score was 7 points or higher in 13 cases (50%) and 6 points or lower in 13 cases (50%). Thus, the low-expression group had more cases with a Gleason score of 7 or higher (p=0.022). The group with a low expression of claudin-5 also had more cases with a Gleason score of 7 or higher (p=0.011). The mean PSA values in the groups with a low and high expression of claudin-1 were 9.6 ng/ml and 5.6 ng/ml, respectively (p=0.007). A low expression of claudin-5 was also associated with a high PSA value (p=0.002). There was no statistical difference in the expression of claudin-1 and claudin-5 by T stage, biochemical recurrence, local recurrence, or distant metastasis. Conclusions: The low expression of claudin-1, claudin-5 was associated with a Gleason score of 7 or higher and a high PSA value in prostate cancer.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available