4.2 Article

Detection of Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition Status of Circulating Tumor Cells in Patients with Esophageal Squamous Carcinoma

期刊

BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 2018, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2018/7610154

关键词

-

资金

  1. Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality Medical Guidance Science & Technology Support Project [16411966100]
  2. Shanghai Municipal Education Commission-Gaofeng Clinical Medicine Grant Support [20172005]
  3. Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning Outstanding Academic Leaders Training Program [2017BR055]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose. To investigate the correlation between the status of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Methods. The demographic data and blood samples of 21 patients with ESCC were collected retrospectively. CTCs were enriched by using optimized CanPatrolTM CTC enrichment technique. CTCs were identified and characterized according to the EMT markers (e-CTCs: epithelial CTCs; mix-CTCs: epithelial-mesenchymal-mixed CTCs; m-CTCs: mesenchymal CTCs). The correlation between CTCs and demographic data was analyzed. Results. Total 129 CTCs were detected in all the patients: 11(8.5%) CTCs of them were e-CTCs, 76(58.9%) were mix-CTCs, and 42(32.6%) were m-CTCs. The average number of CTCs from each patient was 6.1 +/- 7.1 which included 0.5 +/- 0.9 of e-CTCs, 3.6 +/- 5.2 of mix-CTCs, and 2.0 +/- 2.7 of m-CTCs; the difference between the three groups was significant (P = 0.017): the number of total CTCs was correlated with the number of mix-CTCs (R2 = 0.883, P < 0.01) and m-CTCs (R2 = 0.639, P < 0.01) but not e-CTCs (R2 = 0.012, P = 0.641) and the number of CTCs was correlated with the N stage and TNM stage in this study (R2 = 0.698 and R2 = 0.359). Conclusions. Mix-CTCs and m-CTCs might play an important role in progression of ESCC; the number of CTCs in ESCC might have the potential to be a predictor of prognosis.

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

4.2
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