4.5 Article

Clinicopathological and prognostic impact of human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) and hormone receptor expression in uterine papillary serous carcinoma

期刊

CANCER SCIENCE
卷 103, 期 5, 页码 926-932

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2012.02240.x

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC) is a rare and aggressive variant of endometrial carcinoma. Little is known about the pathological and biological features of this tumor. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and hormone receptor (HR) expression have an important role in tumor behavior and clinical outcome, but their relevance in UPSC is not clear. In the present study, the immunohistochemical expression of HER2 and HR was assessed in 27 patients with Stage I disease, 13 with Stage II disease, 25 with Stage III disease, and 6 with Stage IV disease. Correlations between HER2 and HR expression and the clinicopathological parameters of UPSC were evaluated using Cox's univariate and multivariate analyses. For all patients, the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 51% and 66%, respectively; in patients with Stage I, II, III and IV disease, the RFS and OS were 67%/81%, 59%/77%, 43%/54% and 0%/0%, respectively. Of all 71 patients, 14% (10/71) were positive for HER2 and 52% (37/71) were positive for HR. Overexpression of HER2 was correlated with lower OS (P similar to=similar to 0.01), whereas HR overexpression was correlated with higher OS (P similar to=similar to 0.008). In multivariate models, HER2, HR, and histologic subtype were identified as independent prognostic indicators for RFS (P similar to=similar to 0.022, P similar to=similar to 0.018, and P similar to=similar to 0.01, respectively), but HR was the only independent factor associated with OS (P similar to=similar to 0.044). Thus, HER2 and HR are prognostic variables in UPSC, with HR an independent prognostic factor for OS. (Cancer Sci 2012; 103: 926932)

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

4.5
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