4.5 Article

Prevalence of DLL3, CTLA-4 and MSTN Expression in Patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer

期刊

ONCOTARGETS AND THERAPY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 10043-10055

出版社

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S216362

关键词

small cell lung cancer; DLL3; CTLA-4; MSTN; prognosis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81773207, 81372306]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Tianjin [17YFZCSY00840, 18PTZWHZ00240, 19YFZCSY00040]
  3. Special Support Program for High Tech Leader & Team of Tianjin [TJTZJH-GCCCXCYTD-2-6]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction. Immune-based and antibody-drug conjugate therapies have shown promise in the treatment of patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). However, better predictive biomarkers are needed for selection of the appropriate SCLC patients for these advanced therapies and also for evaluation of the efficacy of these treatments. Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the expression of delta-like protein 3 (DLL3), cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), and mesothelin (MSTN) in patients with SCLC and compare them with those patients' clinical characteristics. Methods. Immunohistochemical analyses of DLL3, CTLA-4 and MSTN expression were performed in 38 samples from patients with SCLC. Results: We found that positive expression in patients of the biomarkers was as follows: for DLL3, 100% (38/38), for CTLA-4, 89.5% (36/38) and for MSTN 81.5% (31/38). The median survival time was 17.9 months in the DLL3 high expression group and 23 months in the DLL3 low expression group. Patients with a high expression of DLL3 showed a poorer prognosis than those with a low expression of DLL3 (HR=3.4; 95% CI, 1.34-8.6; p=0.01). Conclusion: The expression of DLL3, CTLA-4 and MSTN was not correlated with patients' age, sex, smoking status, stage, and tumor metastasis. The fact that there was a higher expression of DLL3, CTLA-4, and MSTN in SCLC suggested that these molecules could be used as predictive biomarkers for SCLC.

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