4.6 Article

Expression of anion exchanger 1 is associated with tumor progress in human gastric cancer

期刊

JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 135, 期 10, 页码 1323-1330

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00432-009-0573-9

关键词

Anion exchanger 1; Gastric carcinomas; Immunohistochemistry; Clinicopathological parameters

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Anion exchanger 1 (AE1) is a transmembrane glycoprotein which is abundantly expressed in erythrocyte plasma membrane and mediates the electroneutral exchange of Cl- and HCO3 (-). We previously reported that the AE1 protein was unexpectedly expressed in the gastric and colonic cancer and take part in the carcinogenesis of the cancer cells. The aim of the present study is to determine the potential clinical implications of AE1 expression in gastric carcinoma. Immunohistochemistry assay was used to determine the expression of AE1 protein. The expression of AE1 in normal and malignant tissues from 286 patients with early and advanced gastric carcinoma was examined. The correlations of AE1 expression with clinicopathological parameters, including age, tumor size, location and subtypes, expression frequency, survival period and lymph metastasis were assessed by Chi-squared test and t test analysis. AE1 immunoreactivity was negative in normal gastric tissue. Positive immunostaining of AE1 was detected in gastric carcinoma regardless of the location. AE1 was most frequently expressed in the gastric antrum carcinoma compared with gastric body cancer (P = 0.034). Expression of AE1 was significantly associated with bigger tumor size, deeper invasion, shorter survival period, and non-lymph metastasis. In para-cancer tissues of intestinal-type gastric cancer, the expression frequency of AE1 was higher than that in diffuse-type (P = 0.011). The results showed a strong association of AE1 expression with the onset and progression of the gastric cancer and that may be helpful for improving the tumor classification and the treatment of cancer.

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

4.6
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