4.6 Article

Ki-67 expression is superior to mitotic count and novel proliferation markers PHH3, MCM4 and mitosin as a prognostic factor in thick cutaneous melanoma

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-10-140

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. University of Bergen, Norwegian Cancer Society
  2. Norwegian Research Council, Helse Vest HF

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Tumor cell proliferation is a predictor of survival in cutaneous melanoma. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of mitotic count, Ki-67 expression and novel proliferation markers phosphohistone H3 (PHH3), minichromosome maintenance protein 4 (MCM4) and mitosin, and to compare the results with histopathological variables. Methods: 202 consecutive cases of nodular cutaneous melanoma were initially included. Mitotic count (mitosis per mm(2)) was assessed on H&E sections, and Ki-67 expression was estimated by immunohistochemistry on standard sections. PHH3, MCM4 and mitosin were examined by staining of tissue microarrays (TMA) sections. Results: Increased mitotic count and elevated Ki-67 expression were strongly associated with increased tumor thickness, presence of ulceration and tumor necrosis. Furthermore, high mitotic count and elevated Ki-67 expression were also associated with Clark's level of invasion and presence of vascular invasion. High expression of PHH3 and MCM4 was correlated with high mitotic count, elevated Ki-67 expression and tumor ulceration, and increased PHH3 frequencies were associated with tumor thickness and presence of tumor necrosis. Univariate analyses showed a worse outcome in cases with elevated Ki-67 expression and high mitotic count, whereas PHH3, MCM4 and mitosin were not significant. Tumor cell proliferation by Ki-67 had significant prognostic impact by multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Ki-67 was a stronger and more robust prognostic indicator than mitotic count in this series of nodular melanoma. PHH3, MCM4 and mitosin did not predict patient survival.

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