4.3 Article

Integrins and their ligands are expressed in non-small cell lung cancer but not correlated with parameters of disease progression

期刊

VIRCHOWS ARCHIV
卷 464, 期 1, 页码 69-78

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00428-013-1506-1

关键词

Integrins; alpha v-Ligands; Immunohistochemistry; NSCLC

资金

  1. Merck KGaA Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to investigate the expression of integrins, their ligands, and integrin signaling-related molecules in a cohort of human primary non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). Formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tissue samples from 215 NSCLC were immunohistochemically stained using antibodies directed against alpha v beta 3, alpha v beta 5, alpha v beta 6, alpha v beta 8, alpha v, osteopontin, fibronectin, vitronectin, epidermal growth factor (EGFR), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), and Ki67. Immunostaining of tumor, stroma, and endothelial cells was evaluated separately by quantity and intensity (tumor cells) or intensity (stroma and endothelial cells) expressed in an immunoreactivity score. We studied correlations between the staining patterns of the different markers and of marker expression with clinicopathological data and patient survival. In the majority of NSCLC, each marker was expressed in at least one tumor component. As expected, alpha v and alpha v integrin heterodimers were significantly co-expressed, as were integrins and EGFR. Vitronectin was expressed significantly more often in smaller (T-category) and in well-differentiated tumors; Ki67 index was higher in larger (T-category) and in poorly differentiated tumors. No significant correlation was found between any marker expression and gender, venous invasion, lymph vessel invasion, lymph node metastasis, or survival. Although integrin expression does not seem to be associated with indicators of progression of NSCLC, the expression of alpha v beta 3 in 89 % and alpha v beta 5 in 100 % of NSCLC is novel and merits to be further investigated.

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

4.3
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