4.5 Article

Low MST1/2 and negative LATS1/2 expressions are associated with poor prognosis of colorectal cancers

期刊

PATHOLOGY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
卷 248, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.prp.2023.154608

关键词

Colorectal cancer; MST1/2; LATS1/2; Hippo; Prognosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In colorectal cancer patients, low expression of MST1/2 and negative expression of LATS1/2 are associated with poor differentiation, large tumor size, and worse overall survival. These findings suggest that MST1/2 and LATS1/2 may serve as prognostic indicators for colorectal cancer patients.
Mammalian STe20-like protein kinase 1/2 (MST1/2) and large tumor suppressor homolog 1/2 (LATS1/2) are the core components of the tumor-suppressive Hippo pathway. Dysregulation of this pathway is associated with the progression and metastasis of various cancers. However, MST1/2 and LATS1/2 expressions have not been systematically evaluated in colorectal cancers. We evaluated the clinicopathologic correlation and prognostic significance of MST1/2 and LATS1/2 immunohistochemical expressions in 327 colorectal cancer patients. Low MST1/2 expression, identified in 235 (71.9 %) cases, was significantly associated with poor differentiation (P = 0.018) and large size (P < 0.001) of the tumor. Negative LATS1/2 expression, identified in 226 (69.1 %) cases, was significantly correlated with low MST1/2 expression (P = 0.044). Low MST1/2 and negative LATS1/2 expressions were significantly associated with poor overall survivals (P = 0.015 and P = 0.038, respectively). Furthermore, the combined MST1/2lowLATS1/2negative expression group showed significantly worse overall survival than other groups (P = 0.003), and considered as an independent poor prognostic factor for colorectal cancer patients (hazard ratio = 1.720; 95 % confidence interval, 1.143-2.588; P = 0.009). Low MST1/2 and negative LATS1/2 expressions may serve as prognostic indicators in patients with colorectal cancer.

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