Journals / Ege Tıp Dergisi / 2001 / Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 3

Importance of cathepsin D1 and genetic heterogeneity from prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma

Böbreğin renal hücreli kanserlerinde prognostik faktörlerden cathepsin D1 ekspresyonu ve genetik heterojenitenin önemi

Pages
151–157
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In conclusion, in addition to commonly known prognostic factor, like extend of disease and performance status, we should also consider CD in predicting prognosis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Renal cell carcinomas (RCC) are tumors, which are very different from other human cancers in terms of their de meanor.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In other tumors, the prognostic importance of cathepsin D1 (CD) expression is controversial.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, in addition to commonly known prognostic factor, like extend of disease and performance status, we should also consider CD in predicting prognosis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Genetik · Katepsin D · Karsinom

Abstract

Renal cell carcinomas (RCC) are tumors, which are very different from other human cancers in terms of their de meanor. The most important prognostic factors in the clinical evaluation are tumor stage and nuclear grade. In other tumors, the prognostic importance of cathepsin D1 (CD) expression is controversial. In most studies, though stressed to be bad prognostic factor, CD and genetic heterogeneity (GH) as a prognostic factor in RCC have not been studied. In this study 48 cases under regular control with a diagnosis of RCC by radical nephrectomy were examined. Their median age was 56.5 (31-79); 28 were men (58%). The period of median follow-up is 51 months. When 18 different clinical and laboratory parameters were evaluated as prognostic factor in univariate analysis, CD and advanced stage were found to be significant prognostic factor affecting 5-yr survival rate negatively (p=0. 046, p=;0. 021). Furthermore, in the group in which GH was found in microsatellite D9S157, close to the area coding the enzymes responsible for RNA processing and DNA repairing, the 5- year survival rate, though statistically insignificant, was found to be shorter. In conclusion, in addition to commonly known prognostic factor, like extend of disease and performance status, we should also consider CD in predicting prognosis.

Özet

Renal hücreli kanserler (RHK) davranışları bakımından diğer insan kanserlerinden çok farklı olan tümörlerdir. Klinik gidişi belirlemede en önemli prognostik faktörler (PF) tümörün evresi ve nükleer derecesidir. Diğer tümörlerde cathepsin D1 (CD) ekspresyonunun prognostik önemi tartışmalı olup pek çok çalışmada kötü PF olduğu vurgulanmasına karşın RHK'lerde CD ekspresyonu ve genetik heterojenitenin (GH) prognostik önemi çalışılmamıştır. Bu çalışmada; radikal nefrektomi uygulanarak RHK tanısı alan ve düzenli kontrollere gelen 48 olgu değerlendirilmiştir. Olguların medyan yaşı 56.5 (31-78), 28'i erkek, 20'si kadın ve medyan takip süresi 51 aydır. PF olarak 18 farklı klinik ve laboratuar parametresi değerlendirildiğinde; univariate analizde CD ekspresyonu ve ileri evre, 5 yıllık sağkalım olasılığını belirgin şekilde olumsuz etkileyen önemli birer PF olarak saptanmıştır (p=0.046, p=0.021). Ayrıca mitokondrial RNA işlenmesinde ve DNA tamirinde görevli enzimleri kodlayan bölgeye yakın seçilen mikrosatellit D9S157'de GH saptanan grupta istatiksel olarak anlamlı olmasa da 5 yıllık sağ kalım olasılığı daha kısa bulunmuştur. Hastaların prognozu hakkında tahminde bulunurken hastalığın yaygınlığı, performans durumu gibi bilinen faktörlerin yanı sıra CD'de göz önüne alınmalıdır.

🔖

Cite This Article

KOYUNCUOĞLU, M., PEHLİVAN, M., PEHLİVAN, S., KIRKALI, Z. (2001). Importance of cathepsin D1 and genetic heterogeneity from prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma. Ege Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 3, 151–157. https://ajindex.com/articles/223107

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Peterson RO. Kidney. İn: Urologic Pathology (Ed. Petersen RO) Sec Ed J.B. Lipincott Co 19S2;1 -170
  2. VVeiss L, Gelb A, Medeiros J. Adult renal epithelial neoplasms. Anı J Ciin Pathol 1995; 103:624-635
  3. Bernstein J, Evan A, Gardner K. Epithelial hyperplasia in human polycystic kidney diseases: its role in paîhogenesis and risk ofneoplasia. Am J Pathcl 1987;129:92-102
  4. Gelb AB, Shibuya RB, VVeis LM, Medeiros LJ. Stage 1 renal celi carcinoma: A clinicopathologic study of 82 cases. Am J SugrPathol 1993; 17:275-286
  5. Thraster JB, Paulson DF. Prognostic factors in renal cancer. Urol Clin North Am 1993;20:247-262 6. Lanigan D. Prognostic factors in rena! celi carciinoma. Semin Diagn Pathol 1998;15:68-76
  6. Papadopoulos i, Jacobsen KW, VVacker HH, Sprenger E. Correlation betvveen DNA ploidy, proliferation marker Kİ-67 and earlytumor progression in renal celi carcinoma. Eur Urol 1997;31:49-53
  7. Gelb AB, Sudilovsky D, Wu CD, Weis LM, Medeiros LJ. Appraisal of intratumoral microvessel density, MIB-1 score, DNA con-tent and p53 protein expression as prognostic indicators in patients with locally confined renal celi carcinoma. Cancer1997;80:1768-1775
  8. Aaltoma s, Lipponen P, Ala-Opas M, Eskelinen M, Syrjanen K. Prognostio value of Ki-67 expression in renal celi carcinomas.EurUrol 1997;31:350-355
  9. Werso RP, Librit RL, Deitch D, Koss LG. Variability in DNA measurement in multiple tumor samples of human colonic carci-noma. Cancer 67:106-15,1991
  10. Haraquchi Y, Baba M, Takao S and et al. Flow cytometric analysis of DNA heterogeneity in superficial carcinoma of the esopha-gus. Cancer 75:914-19,1995
  11. Takahaski Y, Takenaka A, Isighuro T, Noda Y. İntratumoral DNA heterogeneity correlated with lymph node involvement andsurgical staining in epithelial ovarian cancer by flow cytometry. Cancer 73:3011-4,1994
  12. Paydaş S, Sarpel S, Gilman-Sachs A, Tuncer I, Pehlivan S, and at al. DNA ploidy, proliferative activity, and Concana-valin A Reactivity in breast cancer. J Surg Oncology. 56:21-24:1994
  13. Lyungberg B, Mekle C, Stenling R, Roos G. Heterogeneity in renal celi carcinoma and its impact on prognosis of flow cytometrystudy. Br J Cancer 74:123-7, 1996
  14. Nakazavva H, Ito F, Okuda H and et al. Flovv cytometric DNA analysis on renal celi carcinoma study of 116 cases on freshsurgical specimens. Nippon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi 85:242-250,1994
  15. Goelz SE., Purification of DNA formaldehyde fixed and paraffin embedded human tissue. Biochem. Biophys. R