4.5 Article

The impact of expressions of CD97 and its ligand CD55 at the invasion front on prognosis of rectal adenocarcinoma

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE
卷 25, 期 6, 页码 695-702

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-010-0926-5

关键词

CD97; CD55; Prognosis; Rectal adenocarcinoma; Metastasis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Various evidence show that CD97 plays an important role in tumor differentiation, migration, invasiveness, and metastasis by binding its cellular ligand CD55. CD55 is a complement regulatory protein expressed by cells to protect them from bystander attack by complement, and it has been shown to be an indicator of poor prognostic in several cancers. CD97 and CD55 stains were detected in tumor tissues from 71 cases of rectal adenocarcinomas and their corresponding normal colorectal tissues by immunohistochemistry. The expressions of CD97 and CD55 in rectal tumor tissues were significantly higher than those in normal colorectal tissues (P < 0.05, both). The patients with recurrence and/or metastasis had significantly higher expressions of CD97 at tumor cells and CD55 at stroma (67.8% [21/31] and 63.6% [21/33]) at the invasion front than those patients without recurrence and/or metastasis (25.0% [10/40] and 26.3% [10/38]). The expression of CD97 at tumor cell at the invasion front showed modest correlation with that of CD55 in the stroma at the invasion front(r = 0.392, P < 0.01). Univariate analysis revealed that lymph node metastasis (P = 0.001), stages II-IV (P = 0.026), and strong CD97 expression at tumor invasion front (P = 0.002) were shown to have a significant adverse impact on the postoperative survival rate. Moreover, lymph node metastasis (P = 0.037) and strong CD97 expression (P = 0.015) were associated with poor survival in a multivariate analysis. Elevated expression of CD97 and its ligand CD55 at the invasion front correlate with tumor recurrence and metastasis, and CD95 may be a poor prognostic factor for rectal adenocarcinoma.

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

4.5
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