Kwon D, Yun JY, Keam B, Kim YT, Jeon YK. Prognostic implications of FGFR1 and MYC status in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22(44): 9803-9812 [PMID: 27956804 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i44.9803]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Yoon Kyung Jeon, MD, PhD, Department of Pathology, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 03080, South Korea. junarplus@chol.com
Research Domain of This Article
Oncology
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Gastroenterol. Nov 28, 2016; 22(44): 9803-9812 Published online Nov 28, 2016. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i44.9803
Table 1 Clinicopathological characteristics of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Variables
n (%)
Age (yr)
≤ 60
46 (25.6)
> 60
134 (74.4)
Sex
Male
169 (93.9)
Female
11 (6.1)
Smoking
No
28 (15.6)
Yes
151 (84.4)
Histological grade
WD
35 (19.4)
MD
119 (66.1)
PD and basaloid
26 (14.4)
Localization
Upper
7 (3.9)
Middle
44 (24.9)
Lower
116 (65.5)
EGJ
10 (5.6)
T
1a
16 (8.9)
1b
65 (36.1)
2
17 (9.4)
3
78 (43.3)
4
4 (2.2)
N
0
92 (51.1)
1
52 (28.9)
2
29 (16.1)
3
7 (3.9)
Stage
IA
14 (7.8)
IB
49 (27.2)
IIA
21 (11.7)
IIB
32 (17.8)
IIIA
37 (20.6)
IIIB
19 (10.6)
IIIC
8 (4.4)
Adjuvant therapy
No
112 (67.8)
Yes
58 (32.2)
FGFR1 amplification
No amplification
136 (78.6)
Low amplification
3 (1.7)
High amplification
34 (19.7)
MYC amplification
No amplification
77 (45.9)
Low amplification
20 (11.9)
High amplification
71 (42.3)
MYC expression
0 (none)
74 (41.1)
1 (weak)
54 (30.0)
2 (moderate)
41 (22.8)
3 (strong)
11 (6.1)
Table 2 Correlation among fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 amplification, MYC expression and clinicopathological features1
Variables
FGFR1, n (%)
MYC, n (%)
No amplification
Amplification
P value
No expression
Expression
P value
Age (yr)
≤ 60
30/44 (68.2)
14/44 (31.8)
0.058
18/46 (39.1)
28/46 (60.9)
0.862
> 60
106/129 (82.2)
23/129 (17.8)
56/134 (41.8)
78/134 (58.2)
Smoking
No
21/28 (75)
7/28 (25)
0.619
12/28 (42.9)
6/28 (57.1)
0.836
Yes
115/145 (79.3)
30/145 (20.7)
61/151 (40.4)
90/151 (59.6)
Histological grade
WD
29/34 (85.3)
5/34 (14.7)
0.350
17/35 (48.6)
18/35 (51.4)
0.267
MD
90/117 (76.9)
27/117 (23.1)
43/119 (36.1)
76/119 (63.9)
PD
11/16 (68.8)
5/16 (31.2)
10/18 (55.6)
8/18 (44.4)
Others
6/6 (100)
0/6 (0)
4/8 (50)
4/8 (50)
Localization
Upper
6/7 (85.7)
1/7 (14.3)
0.981
4/7 (57.1)
3/7 (42.9)
0.688
Middle
34/42 (81)
8/42 (19)
20/44 (45.5)
24/44 (54.5)
Lower
86/111 (77.5)
25/111 (22.5)
45/116 (38.8)
71/116 (61.2)
EGJ
8/10 (80)
2/10 (20)
4/10 (40)
6/10 (60)
T
1
66/80 (82.5)
14/80 (17.5)
0.602
22/81 (27.2)
59/81 (72.8)
< 0.001
2
12/16 (75)
4/16 (25)
6/17 (35.3)
11/17 (64.7)
3
55/73 (75.3)
18/73 (24.7)
43/78 (55.1)
35/78 (44.9)
4
3/4 (75)
1/4 (25)
3/4 (75)
1/4 (24)
N
0
73/90 (81.1)
17/90 (18.9)
0.460
30/92 (32.6)
62/92 (67.4)
0.023
1-3
63/83 (75.9)
20/83 (24.1)
44/88 (50)
44/88 (50)
Stage
I
51/62 (82.3)
11/62 (17.7)
0.694
18/63 (28.6)
45/64 (71.4)
< 0.001
II
40/52 (76.9)
12/52 (23.1)
17/53 (32.1)
36/53 (67.9)
III
45/59 (76.3)
14/59 (23.7)
39/64 (60.9)
25/64 (39.1)
Table 3 Correlation of fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 and MYC amplification status between the tumors of the primary and the metastatic lymph nodes, n (%)
Metastatic lymph nodes
Total
P value
No amplification
Amplification
FGFR1 Primary tumor
No amplification
42 (91.3)
3 (6.7)
45 (100)
< 0.001
Amplification
4 (36.4)
7 (63.6)
11 (100)
Total
46 (82.1)
10 (17.9)
56 (100)
MYC Primary tumor
No amplification
17 (63.0)
10 (37.0)
27 (100)
1.000
Amplification
12 (60.0)
8 (40.0)
20 (100)
Total
29 (61.7)
18 (38.3)
47 (100)
Table 4 Multivariate analysis for overall survival in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Variables
Category
Whole cohort
No adjuvant chemo- and/or radiotherapy
Adjuvant chemo- and/or radiotherapy
HR (95%CI)
P value
HR (95%CI)
P value
HR (95%CI)
P value
Age (yr)
≤ 60 vs > 60
1.805 (1.102-2.955)
0.019
2.371 (1.088- 5.167)
0.030
1.81 (0.896-3.656)
0.098
T
1, 2, 3, 4
-
0.005
-
0.091
-
0.009
1 vs 2
1.204 (0.523-2.773)
0.663
1.589 (0.591-4.269)
0.358
1.260 (0.251-6.324)
0.779
1 vs 3
2.373 (1.454-3.872)
0.001
2.115 (1.126-3.973)
0.020
4.136 (1.691-10.119)
0.002
1 vs 4
1.902 (0.550-6.575)
0.310
0.632 (0.078-5.130)
0.667
4.256 (0.820-22.092)
0.085
N
0 vs 1-3
1.981 (1.275-3.077)
0.002
2.351 (1.338-4.133)
0.003
0.319 (0.125-0.814)
0.017
FGFR1 amplification
None vs Amplification
0.532 (0.302-0.937)
0.029
0.301 (0.117-0.774)
0.013
0.830 (0.386-1.783)
0.633
MYC expression
None vs Expression
0.993 (0.636-1.550)
0.975
0.873 (0.478-1.595)
0.659
1.566 (0.811-3.024)
0.181
Citation: Kwon D, Yun JY, Keam B, Kim YT, Jeon YK. Prognostic implications of FGFR1 and MYC status in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22(44): 9803-9812