4.6 Article

Prognostic significance of the wnt signalling pathway molecules APC, β-catenin and E-cadherin in colorectal cancer -: a tissue microarray-based analysis

期刊

HISTOPATHOLOGY
卷 50, 期 4, 页码 453-464

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2007.02620.x

关键词

colorectal cancer; immunohistochemistry; prognosis; tissue microarray; wnt signalling pathway

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: To investigate dysregulation of the wnt signalling pathway by assessing beta-catenin expression/increasing expression and loss of cytoplasmic adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) and membranous E-cadherin in colorectal cancer (CRC) and determining the prognostic significance of these variables. Methods and results: Unselected, non-consecutive CRC resections (n = 1420) were subdivided into three groups: mismatch repair (MMR)-proficient, MLH1- and presumed hereditary non-polyposis colonic cancer (HNPCC). Immunohistochemical analysis of beta-catenin expression (0% versus > 0%) and increasing expression (increasing percentage-positivity) and loss of APC and E-cadherin was performed using the tissue microarray technique. In MMR-proficient CRC, increased nuclear beta-catenin expression and loss of membranous E-cadherin were independently associated with higher N stage (P = 0.03 and < 0.0001), vascular invasion (P < 0.01 and < 0.001) and worse survival (P < 0.01 and < 0.001). Additionally, there was an association between loss of membranous E-cadherin and higher T stage (P = 0.03). In MLH1- CRC, loss of membranous E-cadherin was associated with higher N stage (P = 0.05) and worse survival (P = 0.03). In presumed HNPCC CRC nuclear beta-catenin and membranous E-cadherin were not associated with tumour progression or worse survival. In all CRC subsets loss of cytoplasmic APC was not associated with clinicopathological features. Conclusions: Increasing nuclear beta-catenin expression and loss of membranous E-cadherin are independent, adverse prognostic factors in MMR-proficient and MLH1- CRC.

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

4.6
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