4.6 Article

MUC1 and MUC5AC mucin expression in liver fluke-associated intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 11, 期 32, 页码 4939-4946

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBL GRP CO LTD
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v11.i32.4939

关键词

Cholangiocarcinoma; Mucin; MUC1; MUC5AC; Invasion; Survival; Immunohistochemistry

资金

  1. Thailand Research Fund [BRG/06/2544]
  2. Royal Golden Jubilee PhD Program [PHD/0045/2542]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIM: To investigate the expressions of MUC1 and MUC5AC in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Association of expressions of mucins MUC1 and MUC5AC with clinical findings, metastasis, and survival of the liver fluke-associated ICC patients was determined. METHODS: The expressions of MUC1 and MUC5AC mucins were examined by immunohistochemical staining in 87 cases of histologically-proven ICC. The expressions of mucins in relationship between clinicopathological significance and prognosis of the patients were evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients (60%) exhibited both MUC1 and MUC5AC expressions, whereas 31% expressed either MUC1 or MUC5AC, and 9% expressed neither. High MUC1 immunoreactivity displayed a significant correlation with tumor progression as reflected by vascular invasion (P<0.001), whereas high expression of MUC5AC significantly correlated with neural invasion (P = 0.022) and advanced ICC stage (P = 0.008). Patients with high expression of MUC1 had a significantly shorter survival (P = 0.0002). According to multivariate analyses, MUC1 reactivity (P = 0.026), histological grading and stage of tumor represented the least probability of survival. CONCLUSION: MUC1 is overexpressed in liver fluke-associated cholangiocarcinoma and relates to vascular invasion and poor prognosis, whereas MUC5AC mucin is neoexpressed and relates to neural invasion and advanced ICC stage. High MUC1 expression in tumor may be useful for predicting the poor outcome of ICC patients. (C) 2005 The WJG Press and Elsevier Inc. 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

4.6
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