4.7 Article

Expression of EZH2 and Ki-67 in colorectal cancer and associations with treatment response and prognosis

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 101, 期 8, 页码 1282-1289

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605333

关键词

colorectal cancer; adjuvant chemotherapy; prediction of outcome; EZH2; ki-76; immunehistochemistry

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Enhancer of zeste homologue 2 (EZH2) is a member of the Polycomb group of genes that is involved in epigenetic silencing and cell cycle regulation. METHODS: We studied EZH2 expression in 409 patients with colorectal cancer stages II and III. The patients were included in a randomised study, and treated with surgery alone or surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: EZH2 expression was significantly related to increased tumour cell proliferation, as assessed by Ki-67 expression. In colon cancer, strong EZH2 expression (P = 0.041) and high proliferation (>= 40%; P = 0.001) were both associated with better relapse-free survival (RFS). In contrast, no such associations were found among rectal cancers. High Ki-67 staining was associated with improved RFS in colon cancer patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (P 0.001), but not among those who were treated by surgery alone (P = 0.087). In colon cancers stage III, a significant association between RFS and randomisation group was found in patients with high proliferation (P = 0.046), but not in patients with low proliferation (P = 0.26). Multivariate analyses of colon cancers showed that stage III (hazard ratio (HR) 4.00) and high histological grade (HR 1.80) were independent predictors of reduced RFS, whereas high proliferation indicated improved RFS (HR 0.55). CONCLUSION: Strong EZH2 expression and high proliferation are associated features and both indicate improved RFS in colon cancer, but not so in rectal cancer. British Journal of Cancer ( 2009) 101, 1282-1289. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605333 www.bjcancer.com Published online 22 September 2009 (C) 2009 Cancer Research UK

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