AIM: The aim of the present study is to use immunohisto chemical methods to investigate the clinical implications of tumor markers in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and evaluate their impact on prognosis. METHODS:...AIM: The aim of the present study is to use immunohisto chemical methods to investigate the clinical implications of tumor markers in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and evaluate their impact on prognosis. METHODS: From November 1990 to December 1996, 47 patients were treated with preoperative radiation followed by radical esophagectomy. All patients were confirmed pathologically as suffering from squamous cell carcinoma. Immunohistochemical stain was done for PCNA, cyclinDl protein expression and DNA content analyzed by image cytometry. Kaplan-Meier method for single prognostic factor and log-rank test was used to test the significant difference. Cox stepwise regression model and prognosis index model were used for survival analysis with multiple prognostic factors. RESULTS: Radio-pathological change, T stage and N stage, as the traditional prognostic factors had statistical difference in 3-, 5- and 10-year survival rates. While, tumor cell proliferating marked PCNA, cyclinDl and DNA content served as independent prognostic factors of esophageal carcinoma. There was definitely an identity between the single and multiple factor analyses. PI was more accurate to evaluate the prognosis of esophageal carcinoma. CONCLUSION: It is possible that tumor cell proliferating marked PCNA, cyclinD1 and DNA content would become the endpoints for evaluating the prognosis of esophageal carcinoma.展开更多
基金Supported by the Distinguished Young Teacher Programs Foundation of Ministry of Education of China, No. 2001125
文摘AIM: The aim of the present study is to use immunohisto chemical methods to investigate the clinical implications of tumor markers in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and evaluate their impact on prognosis. METHODS: From November 1990 to December 1996, 47 patients were treated with preoperative radiation followed by radical esophagectomy. All patients were confirmed pathologically as suffering from squamous cell carcinoma. Immunohistochemical stain was done for PCNA, cyclinDl protein expression and DNA content analyzed by image cytometry. Kaplan-Meier method for single prognostic factor and log-rank test was used to test the significant difference. Cox stepwise regression model and prognosis index model were used for survival analysis with multiple prognostic factors. RESULTS: Radio-pathological change, T stage and N stage, as the traditional prognostic factors had statistical difference in 3-, 5- and 10-year survival rates. While, tumor cell proliferating marked PCNA, cyclinDl and DNA content served as independent prognostic factors of esophageal carcinoma. There was definitely an identity between the single and multiple factor analyses. PI was more accurate to evaluate the prognosis of esophageal carcinoma. CONCLUSION: It is possible that tumor cell proliferating marked PCNA, cyclinD1 and DNA content would become the endpoints for evaluating the prognosis of esophageal carcinoma.
