4.7 Article

Expression of nuclear FIH independently predicts overall survival of clear cell renal cell carcinoma patients

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 46, 期 18, 页码 3375-3382

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.07.018

关键词

Renal cell carcinoma; Hypoxia; Tissue microarray; Factor-inhibiting HIF; Prognostic marker

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: The hypoxia inducible factor (HIF) pathway plays an important role in sporadic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) by stimulating processes of angiogenesis, cell proliferation, cell survival and metastases formation. Herein, we evaluate the significance of upstream proteins directly regulating the HIF pathway; the prolyl hydroxylases domain proteins (PHD)1, 2 and 3 and factor-inhibiting HIF (FIH), as prognostic markers for ccRCC. Methods: Immunohistochemical marker expression was examined on a tissue microarray containing tumour tissue derived from 100 patients who underwent nephrectomy for ccRCC. Expression levels of HIF, FIH and PHD1, 2 and 3 were correlated with overall survival (OS) and clinicopathological prognostic factors. Results: HIF-1 alpha was positively correlated with HIF-2 alpha (p < 0.0001), PHD1 (p = 0.024), PHD2 (p < 0.0001), PHD3 (p = 0.004), FIH (p < 0.0001) and VHL (p = 0.031). HIF-2 alpha levels were significantly associated with FIH (p < 0.0001) and PHD2 (p = 0.0155). Mutations in the VHL gene, expression variations of HIP-1 alpha, HIF-2 alpha and PHD1, 2, 3 did not show a correlation to OS or clinicopathological prognostic factors. Tumour stage, grade, diameter, metastastic disease and intensity of nuclear FIH were significantly correlated to OS in univariable analysis (p = 0.023). Low nuclear FIH levels remained a strong independent prognostic factor in multivariable analysis (p = 0.009). Conclusion: These results show that low nuclear expression of FIH is a strong independent prognostic factor for a poor overall survival in ccRCC. (C) 2010 Elsevier 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

4.7
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