Helios Expression in Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes Correlates with Overall Survival of Advanced Gastric Cancer Patients

Chen, Wei-Ming; Liu, Jinglan; Chuang, Huei‐Chieh; Chang, Yong-Lin; Yeh, Chia‐Ming; Wu, Cheng‐Shyong; Wu, Shu-Fen

doi:10.3390/life10090189

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The treatment effect for poorly differentiated GC remains poor ( 33 , 61 ) and it has been demonstrated that poorly differentiated GC is a hotspot in clinical treatment research ( 35 ). GC is divided into early GC (stage I and II) and advanced GC (stage III or higher tumors) ( 36 – 38 ), and there are differences in treatment and surgical methods between early and advanced GC ( 39 , 40 ). Uzun et al ( 41 ) revealed that T1-T2 and T3-T4 classifications of patients with GC showed differences in their clinicopathological characteristics and survival status.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to WHO's fifth edition of gastric cancer differentiation standard (32), the clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients with GC with well-moderately differentiated and patients with GC with poorly-signet differentiated were different (33-35), patients with GC with regards to histological grade were divided into the well-moderately group and poorly-signet group. According to the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System (8 th edition) (31), and the differences in treatment and surgical methods between early gastric cancer group (stage Ⅰ and Ⅱ) and advanced gastric cancer group (stage Ⅲ or higher tumors) (36)(37)(38)(39)(40), patients with GC with regards to pathological stage were divided into the early GC group (stage Ⅰ and Ⅱ) and advanced GC group (stage Ⅲ or higher tumors). According to the United States Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System (8 th edition) (31) and the differences between T3-T4 group and T1-T2 classification group with GC in chemotherapy and surgery (41)(42)(43), patients with GC in tumor (T) classification were divided into the T1-T2 and T3-T4 groups.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

hsa_circ_0060975 is highly expressed and predicts a poor prognosis in gastric cancer

Zhang

et al. 2021

Oncol Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth most common cancer and GC has a high mortality rate worldwide. Circular (circ) RNAs serve an important role in cancer. The present study aimed to investigate the expression level of hsa_circ_0060975 in gastric cancer (GC) and to determine the clinical pathological significance of hsa_circ_0060975 in patients with GC. Reverse transcription-quantitative PCR was used to detect expression level of hsa_circ_0060975 in 192 GC and adjacent non-cancerous gastric tissues, in GC cell lines (MKN-45, HGC27 and AGS) and a human gastric epithelium cell line (GES-1), as well as in plasma samples from 126 patients with GC and 92 healthy volunteers. All plasma and tissue samples of were obtained from The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University (Hefei, China). The relationship between hsa_circ_0060975 expression and clinical pathological factors was analyzed using the χ 2 test. The diagnostic value of hsa_circ_0060975 was analyzed using the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC curve), while the Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the relationship of hsa_circ_0060975 expression with the survival of patients with GC as determined by log-rank tests. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to identify the prognostic factors, including hsa_circ_0060975 expression and clinical pathological factors. In addition, the potential function of hsa_circ_0060975 was evaluated via bioinformatics analysis. The expression level of hsa_circ_0060975 was higher in GC tissues compared with adjacent non-cancerous gastric tissues, GC cell lines compared with GES-1 and plasma samples from patients with GC compared with plasma samples from healthy volunteers. In addition, higher hsa_circ_0060975 expression was associated with histological grade, pathological stage and tumor (T) classification in GC tissues and plasma samples (P<0.05). The area under the ROC curves of hsa_circ_0060975, the combination with hsa_circ_0060975 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) or CEA alone were 0.804 (sensitivity, 0.746; specificity, 0.783; P<0.001); 0.931 (sensitivity, 0.937; specificity, 0.870; P<0.001) and 0.924 (sensitivity, 0.937; sspecificity, 0.804; P<0.001) respectively. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed that the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) time of patients with higher hsa_circ_0060975 expression were shorter compared with those in patients with lower hsa_circ_0060975 expression. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses in OS and DFS time determined that the expression level of hsa_circ_0060975, histological grade and pathological stage were independent prognostic factors for patients with GC. In addition, the bioinformatics analysis results suggested that the abnormal expression of hsa_circ_0060975 may serve an important role in tumorigenesis. Hence, hsa_circ_0060975 expression may be an independent prognostic factor for patients with GC and may be a potential marker for biological malignancy.

show abstract