4.7 Article

Loss of CD59 expression in breast tumours correlates with poor survival

期刊

JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 200, 期 5, 页码 633-639

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/path.1357

关键词

breast cancer; CD59; prognostic factors; survival; tumour grade

向作者/读者索取更多资源

CD59 (protectin), a phosphatidylinositol-anchored glycoprotein, is a member of the cell membrane-bound complement regulatory proteins that inhibits the formation of the terminal membrane attack complex (MAC) of complement. In this study, the expression of CD59 was evaluated in 520 breast carcinomas from patients with a mean follow-up of 87 months. This expression was correlated with clinicopathological features and patient survival. Marked variation in the intensity of CD59 expression, which correlated with histological grade and Nottingham prognostic index (NPI), was found, with higher expression of CD59 found more often in well and moderately differentiated tumours and those of good prognosis (NPI less than or equal to 3.4). In contrast, high grade and poor prognosis (NPI > 5.4) carcinomas significantly demonstrated lack of CD59 expression (p < 0.001). Moreover, it was found that the percentage of CD59-positive cells correlated significantly with patient survival, ie patients with a high percentage of positive cells (>50%) had a better overall survival (P = 0.006). A correlation was also found between the percentage of CD59-positive cells and tumour type and also the development of distant metastases. No association was found between either the intensity or the percentage of cells expressing CD59 and vascular invasion, lymph node stage, tumour size, patient age or menopausal status. In multivariate analysis, CD59 percentage positivity was of independent prognostic significance with grade and lymph node stage. These findings indicate that loss of CD59 may offer a selective advantage for breast cancers, resulting in more aggressive tumours and conferring a poor prognosis for patients. Copyright (C) 2003 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

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