4.7 Article

Lack of correlation between leptin receptor expression and PI3-K/Akt signaling pathway proteins immunostaining in endometrioid-type endometrial carcinomas

期刊

CANCER LETTERS
卷 238, 期 1, 页码 61-68

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.canlet.2005.06.028

关键词

leptin; leptin receptor; PI3-K/Akt kinase pathway; BMI; endometrial cancer

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A number of studies published recently focused on the putative role of leptin in the pathogenesis of various primary human malignancies. Current study was aimed at investigating ObR, P13-kinase, phospho-Akt kinase and PTEN proteins expression in forty-five primary human endometrioid-type endometrial carcinomas (EC). ObR immunostaining was detected in 21 of 45 (47%) ECs, presented in almost 60% of well- and moderately-differentiated tumors compared to only 17% of poorly-differentiated neoplasms (P < 0.05). Semi-quantitative histological score (H-score) ObR values were inversely correlated with patients' body mass index (R= -0.35; P=0.019). ObR expression was significantly higher in normal weight compared to overweight and obese patients (P=0.024). All slides displayed intense P13-kinase immunoreactivity, whereas phospho-Akt kinase expression was reported in 96% (43 out of 45) cases. Fifteen (33%) ECs were negative for PTEN expression, nine (20%) showed heterogeneous immunostaining pattern, whereas 21 (47%) were PTEN-positive. There was a trend towards a higher phospho-Akt kinase intensity immunostaining in PTEN-negative compared to PTEN-positive cases, but the difference was not significant. There was no significant association between each P13-K/Akt signaling pathway proteins immunostaining in endometrioid-type ECs. In conclusion, ObR expression is associated with histological grading and the weight of women affected by EC. The components of P13-K/Akt kinase signaling pathway are expressed in most of the primary endometrioid-type endometrial neoplasms. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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