4.5 Article

Immunohistochemical expression of CXCR4 in thyroid carcinomas and thyroid benign lesions

期刊

PATHOLOGY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
卷 206, 期 10, 页码 712-715

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.prp.2010.05.003

关键词

CXCR4; Thyroid; Carcinoma; Benign lesion; Immunohistochemistry

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30600295]
  2. Shanghai Rising-Star Science and Technology Project [08QA14057]
  3. Shanghai Health Bureau [2008058]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In different tumor entities, expression of the chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4) has been linked to tumor dissemination and poor prognosis. The aim of this study was to examine the immunohistochemical expression of CXCR4 in thyroid carcinomas and thyroid benign lesions. Using monoclonal anti-CXCR4 antibody, we performed immunohistochemical staining on tissue sections from 134 cases obtained from Ruijin Hospital affiliated with Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine (Shanghai, China) between 2000 and 2007. In our study, the CXCR4 expression of the thyroid carcinoma group (including 16 papillary thyroid carcinomas, 18 follicular thyroid carcinomas, 9 poorly differentiated thyroid carcinomas, and 7 medullary thyroid carcinomas) was found to be higher than in the benign lesion group (including 19 cases of Hashimoto's thyroiditis, 15 nodular goiters, and 50 follicular adenomas) (p < 0.0001). Within the carcinoma group, the more malignant thyroid carcinoma group (including 9 poorly differentiated thyroid carcinomas and 7 medullary thyroid carcinomas) showed a higher ratio of CXCR4 positivity compared to the less malignant thyroid carcinoma group (including 16 papillary thyroid carcinomas and 18 follicular thyroid carcinomas) (p < 0.0001). Our study suggests that CXCR4 expression might be a frequent and cancer-specific event in thyroid carcinoma, and it might be involved in malignancy transformation during the progression of thyroid carcinoma. (C) 201 0 Elsevier GmbH. 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

4.5
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