4.5 Article

Effect of vascular endothelial growth factor polymorphisms on survival in advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer

期刊

CANCER SCIENCE
卷 100, 期 10, 页码 1917-1922

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2009.01253.x

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polymorphisms have been identified in the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) gene that may affect VEGF production. We hypothesized that such polymorphisms may correlate with survival outcomes among advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. We evaluated the association between VEGF polymorphisms and overall survival among patients with advanced NSCLC who were treated with at least one cytotoxic regimen at Kyoto University Hospital between 2003 and 2008. We investigated the following VEGF polymorphisms: -460T > C (rs833061), +405G > C (rs2010963), +936C > T (rs3025039), -1154G > A (rs1570360), and -2578C > A (rs699947). Analyses of genotype associations with survival outcomes were performed using Cox proportional models, Kaplan-Meier methods, and the log-rank test. There were 126 patients and 80 deaths. On a Cox regression analysis of a current and former smoker (hazards ratio [HR], 1.422; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.111-1.859; P = 0.0046), poor performance status (PS) (HR, 2.524; 95% CI, 1.483-3.827; P = 0.0019), the VEGF -460CC genotype (HR, 1.719; 95% CI, 1.166-2.390; P = 0.0084), VEGF -1154AA and AG genotypes (HR, 1.482; 95% CI, 1.144-1.897; P = 0.0034), and VEGF -2578AA genotype (HR, 1.797; 95% CI, 1.219-2.495; P = 0.0047) had a significant prognostic effect on survival based on univariate analysis. Based on multivariate analysis of a current and former smoker (HR, 1.407; 95% CI, 1.095-1.840; P = 0.0070), poor PS (HR, 2.249; 95% CI, 1.309-3.468; P = 0.0058), and the VEGF -1154AA and AG genotypes (HR, 1.419; 95% CI, 1.033-1.901; P = 0.0316) were significant independent prognostic factors for survival. In this study, polymorphisms in VEGF may affect survival in advanced NSCLC. (Cancer Sci 2009; 100: 1917-1922).

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