4.4 Article

Upregulation of sphingosine kinase 1 is associated with recurrence and poor prognosis in papillary thyroid carcinoma

期刊

ONCOLOGY LETTERS
卷 18, 期 5, 页码 5374-5382

出版社

SPANDIDOS PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.3892/ol.2019.10910

关键词

sphingosine kinase 1; papillary thyroid carcinoma; prognosis; survival

类别

资金

  1. Hebei Cangzhou Science and Technology Plan Project of China [131302136]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sphingosine kinase 1 (SPHK1), an ATP-dependent protein, has previously been demonstrated to be upregulated in several types of human cancer and to play an important role in tumor development and progression. However, the role of SPHK1 in predicting long-term prognosis in patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) remains unclear. The purpose of the present study was to assess the significance of SPHK1 expression and its associations with clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic outcome in patients with PTC. Immunohistochemistry staining was retrospectively performed to investigate the expression levels of SPHK1 in 92 PTC tumors. Statistical analyses revealed that high levels of SPHK1 expression were associated with tumor size, lymph node metastasis and the Tumor-Node-Metastasis stage. The disease-free survival (DFS) time of patients that exhibited high levels of SPHK1 expression was shorter, whereas patients with lower levels of SPHK1 expression survived longer. Furthermore, multivariate analysis suggested that upregulated SPHK1 was an independent prognostic factor for predicting DFS of patients with PTC. The results of the Cell Counting Kit-8 and invasion assays demonstrated that SPHK1 overexpression significantly enhanced the proliferation and invasion of a PTC cell line, consistent with clinical findings. The results from the present study provide evidence that elevated expression levels of SPHK1 may be involved in the development and progression of PTC, indicating that this protein may act as a potential prognostic marker for patients with this disease.

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

4.4
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