4.2 Article

Expression of CD147 as a significantly unfavorable prognostic factor in hepatocellular carcinoma

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION
卷 16, 期 3, 页码 196-202

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.cej.0000236245.40619.c3

关键词

CD147; hepatocellular carcinoma; prognostic factor

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study is to investigate whether the expression of CD147 could be a prognostic factor for hepatocellular carcinoma. Tissue samples from 111 hepatocellular carcinoma patients were immunohistochemically stained with anti-CD147, anti-matrix metalloproteinases-2 and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies. Tumor microvessel density was evaluated using CD34. The survival curves were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and the prognostic significance of the marker was analyzed using the log-rank test. In addition, the identification of relevant prognostic factors was performed by multivariate Cox regression analysis. CD147 was mainly expressed in cancerous lesions and its expression was positively correlated with metalloproteinases-2 (P < 0.00011), vascular endothelial growth factor (P < 0.0001) and rnicrovessel density CD34 (P < 0.0001). Furthermore, CD147 was significantly associated with the presence of venous invasion (P=0.0013), tumor size (P < 0.0001) and pTNM tumor stages (P=0.0001), as well as serum a-fetoprotein level (P < 0.0001). Patients with positive expression of CD147 had poorer tumor recurrence-free survival than those with negative expression of CD147 (P < 0.0001). Analyzed by a proportional hazard model, strong expression of CD147 had the highest risk ratio of recurrence among these markers (P < 0.0001). The findings suggest that CD147 may be a significant independent predictor of poor survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, and may be involved in tumor growth, invasion and angiogenesis in hepatocellular carcinoma. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 16:196-202 (C) 2007 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

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

4.2
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