4.4 Article

Prognostic role of β-catenin and p53 expression in the metastatic progression of sporadic colorectal cancer

期刊

HUMAN PATHOLOGY
卷 41, 期 6, 页码 867-876

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2009.09.019

关键词

Colorectal cancer; Prognosis, beta-catenin, p53

资金

  1. AIRC (Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

beta-Catenin and p53 play key roles in tumorigenesis. The relationships between these 2 signaling pathways and their contribution to colorectal cancer metastatic progression have not been completely elucidated. We analyzed 141 cases of primary sporadic colorectal cancer, 45 matched metastases, and 80 samples of normal mucosa by immunohistochemistry on paraffin-embedded specimens. The expression profiles were also related to patients' clinicopathologic features and 5-year survival. In primary tumors, beta-catenin immunoreactivity was nuclear (27%), predominantly membrane/cytosolic (46.0%) or negative (27%). This latter subgroup was strongly related to microsatellite instability, in particular to MLH-1 deficiency. Remarkably, beta-catenin membrane/cytosolic expression in primary tumors was reduced in the corresponding matched metastases. p53 showed a significant increase in immunoreactivity in (66.7%), whereas it was negative in (33.3%) of tumors. When we considered the expression of both genes, the combination of negative beta-catenin and positive p53 nuclear staining (21%) was strongly related to a higher frequency of liver metastases. Such an association was significantly related to a worse prognosis than any other combination. In a multivariate analysis, beta-catenin and distant metastases were independent prognostic markers. We suggest that a combination of low beta-catenin and high p53 expression in primary colorectal cancers may be a prognostic factor in predicting the progression of the disease, the occurrence of metastasis, and a more severe outcome. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据