3.8 Article

The possible role of cell cycle regulators in multistep process of HPV-associated cervical carcinoma

期刊

BMC CLINICAL PATHOLOGY
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6890-7-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. Grant Office of Cairo University, National Cancer Institute, Cairo, Egypt

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 and 18 are associated with cervical carcinogenesis through an interaction between HPV oncogenic proteins and cell cycle regulatory genes. However, the exact pathogenetic mechanisms are not determined yet. Methods: We investigated 43 invasive squamous cell carcinoma (ISCC), 38 CIN III, I I CINII and 18 C INI for cyclin D 1, cyclin E, CDK4, p53, mdm-2, p21(waf), p27, pI6(INK4A), Rb and Ki-6 7 aberrations using immunohistochemistry and molecular techniques. Twenty samples of normal cervical tissues (NCT) were taken as a control. Results: There was a significant increase in the expression of Ki-67, cyclin E, CDK4, p16(INK4A), Rb (p= 0.003, 0.001, 0.001, 0.01) and a significant decrease in p27(KIPI) from NCT to ISCC (p = 0.003). Increased cyclin DI, p2I(waf), p53, mdm-2 expression, homozygous deletion (HZD) and promoter methylation (PM) of the Rb were detected in CINIII and ISCC only. On univariate analysis; tumor size, differentiation, lymph node status, FIGO stage, Ki-67, cyclin D1, p53 and p27KIPI are significantly associated with reduced overall survival (OS) while on multivariate analysis; only FIGO stage, Ki-67, cyclin D 1, p53 and p2 7(KIPI) were significant. Conclusion: I) Aberrations involving p27(KIPI), cyclin E, CDK4, p 16(INK4A) are considered early events in HPV 16 and 18-associated cervical carcinoma, whereas cyclin D1 and p53 pathway abnormalities are considered late events. 2) Immunohistochemical tests for p16(INK4)Aand cyclin E, could help in early diagnosis of cervical carcinoma. 3) Only FIGO stage p53, cyclin DI, p27(KIPI) and Ki-67 are independent prognostic factors that might help in predicting outcome of cervical cancer patients.

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

3.8
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