4.5 Article

c-Kit Expression is Rate-Limiting for Stem Cell Factor-Mediated Disease Progression in Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma of the Salivary Glands

期刊

Translational Oncology
卷 7, 期 5, 页码 537-545

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.tranon.2014.07.006

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Joan and Irwin Jacobs Fund of the Jewish Community Foundation
  2. Cancer League Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) is an aggressive malignant neoplasm of the salivary glands in which c-Kit is overexpressed and activated, although the mechanism for this is as yet unclear. We analyzed 27 sporadic ACC tumor specimens to examine the biologic and clinical significance of c-Kit activation. Mutational analysis revealed expression of wild-type c-Kit in all, eliminating gene mutation as a cause of activation. Because stem cell factor (SCF) is c-Kit's sole ligand, we analyzed its expression in the tumor cells and their environment. Immunohistochemistry revealed its presence in c-Kit-positive tumor cells, suggesting an activation of autocrine signaling. We observed a significant induction of ERK1/2 in the cells. SCF staining was also found in other types of non-cancerous cells adjacent to tumors within salivary glands, including stromal fibroblasts, neutrophils, peripheral nerve, skeletal muscle, vascular endothelial cells, mucous acinar cells, and intercalated ducts. Quantitative PCR showed that the top quartile of c-Kit mRNA expression distinguished ACCs from normal salivary tissues and was cross-correlated with short-term poor prognosis. Expression levels of SCF and c-Kit were highly correlated in the cases with perineural invasion. These observations suggest that c-Kit is potentially activated by receptor dimerization upon stimulation by SCF in ACC, and that the highest quartile of c-Kit mRNA expression could be a predictor of poor prognosis. Our findings may support an avenue for c-Kit-targeted therapy to improve disease control in ACC patients harboring the top quartile of c-Kit mRNA expression.

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