4.6 Article

Nuclear Expression of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor is a Novel Prognostic Value in Patients With Ovarian Cancer

期刊

MOLECULAR CARCINOGENESIS
卷 48, 期 7, 页码 610-617

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mc.20504

关键词

EGFR; nucleus; receptor tyrosine kinase; cyclin D1

资金

  1. University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
  2. Ovarian SPORE [P50 (CA83639)]
  3. [RO1 (CA109311)]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has previously been detected in the nucleus of cancer cells and primary tumors. We have reported that EGFR translocates from the plasma membrane to the nucleus. Accumulation of nuclear EGFR is linked to increased DNA synthesis and proliferation; however, the pathological significance of nuclear EGFR is not completely understood. Here, we sought to determine the predictive value of EGFR for the survival of ovarian cancer patients, through the examination of 221 cases of ovarian cancer tissues by immunohistochemical analysis to determine nuclear EGFR expression. in addition, we also examined cyclin D1 and Ki-67 through immunohistochemisty. Furthermore, we examined nuclear EGFR levels in ovarian cancer cell lines treated with EGF, and primary ovarian tumor tissue using immunofluorescence analysis. Nuclear fractions extracted from serum-starved cells treated with or without EGF were subjected to SDS-PAGE and Western blot analyses. We found that 28.3% of the cohort had high levels of nuclear EGFR, while 22.5% had low levels of nuclear EGFR, and 49.2% were negative for nuclear EGFR. Importantly, there was an inverse correlation between high nuclear EGFR, cyclin D1, and Ki-67 with overall survival (P<0.01, P<0.09, P<0.041). Additionally, nuclear EGFR correlated positively with increased levels of cyclin D1 and Ki-67, both indicators for cell proliferation. Our findings indicate a pathological significance of nuclear EGFR that might be important for predicting clinical prognosis of ovarian cancer patients. (C) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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