4.7 Article

Immunohistochemical analysis of tumor biological factors in hepatocellular carcinoma: relationship to clinicopathological factors and prognosis after hepatic resection

Journal

JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 39, Issue 2, Pages 148-154

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s00535-003-1265-x

Keywords

hepatocellular carcinoma; hepatic resection; p53; microvessel count; PCNA; nm23

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. The relationship between patient prognosis and various tumor biological factors has been reported previously, and prognostic factors of tumor biology may improve predictions of prognosis after hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and may contribute to a new staging classification. This study was designed to provide an immunohistochemical analysis of tumor biological factors in patients who underwent hepatectomy for HCC. Methods. Factors analyzed included p53 overexpression, microvessel counts, proliferating cell nuclear antigen, and expression of nm23. We examined 81 HCCs from patients with chronic liver diseases. Results. In patients who underwent chemoembolization before surgery, or those a who had confluent multinodular tumor, p53 expression tended to be higher than in patients without chemoembolization (33% vs 11%) or those with a simple nodular tumor (28% vs 10%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.051 and P = 0.092, respectively). A lower tumor microvessel count and negative nm23 expression were significantly associated with poor disease-free survival by univariate analysis (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively). A lower tumor microvessel count was found to be a significant prognostic factor for disease-free and overall survivals (risk ratios, 2.44 and 3.13, respectively; P < 0.05), in addition to tumor size, vascular invasion, and longterm ascites, by Cox's multivariate analysis. Conclusions. Tumor microvessel count appears to be a useful prognostic marker for predicting HCC recurrence and patient survival.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available