4.5 Article

Expression of breast cancer resistance protein is associated with a poor clinical outcome in patients with small-cell lung cancer

期刊

LUNG CANCER
卷 65, 期 1, 页码 105-111

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2008.10.008

关键词

SCLC; MDR; ABC transporter; DNA excision repair; BCRP

资金

  1. Ministry of Health and Welfare of Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter and DNA excision repair proteins play a pivotal role in the mechanisms of drug resistance. The aim of this study was to investigate the expression of ABC transporter and DNA excision repair proteins, and to elucidate the clinical significance of their expression in biopsy specimens from patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Methods: We investigated expression of the ABC transporter proteins, P-glycoprotein (Pgp), multidrug resistance associated-protein 1 (MRP1), MRP2, MRP3, and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP), and the DNA excision repair proteins, excision repair cross-complementation group 1 (ERCC1) protein and breast cancer susceptibility gene I (BRCA1) protein, in tumor biopsy specimens obtained before chemotherapy from 130 SCLC patients who later received platinum-based combination chemotherapy, and investigated the relationship between their expression and both response and survival. Results: No significant associations were found between expression of Pgp, MRP1, MRP2, MRP3, ERCC1, or BRCA1 and either response or survival. However, there was a significant association between BCRP expression and both response (p = 0.026) and progression-free survival (PFS; p = 0.0103). Conclusions: BCRP expression was significantly predictive of both response and progression-free survival (PFS) in SCLC patients receiving chemotherapy. These findings suggest that BCRP may play a crucial role in drug resistance mechanisms, and that it may serve as an ideal molecular target for the treatment of SCLC. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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