Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Gastroenterol. Mar 21, 2017; 23(11): 2012-2022
Published online Mar 21, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i11.2012
Published online Mar 21, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i11.2012
Table 1 Relationships between CRM1 and CDK5 protein expression (immunohistochemical staining) in gastric cancer tissues and various clinicopathological variables
Variables | Total | CRM1 expression | CDK5 expression | ||||||
Low (n = 149) | High (n = 91) | χ2 | P value | Low (n = 91) | High (n = 149) | χ2 | P value | ||
Gender | |||||||||
Male | 178 | 110 | 68 | 0.024 | 0.877 | 61 | 117 | 3.893 | 0.0481 |
Female | 62 | 39 | 23 | 30 | 32 | ||||
Age at surgery (yr) | |||||||||
≤ 60 | 120 | 78 | 42 | 0.867 | 0.352 | 46 | 74 | 0.018 | 0.894 |
> 60 | 120 | 71 | 49 | 45 | 75 | ||||
Size of primary tumor (cm) | |||||||||
≤ 5 | 99 | 51 | 48 | 7.995 | 0.0051 | 35 | 64 | 0.470 | 0.493 |
> 5 | 141 | 98 | 43 | 56 | 85 | ||||
Location of primary tumor | |||||||||
Upper 1/3 | 56 | 33 | 23 | 5.290 | 0.152 | 22 | 34 | 1.718 | 0.633 |
Middle 1/3 | 59 | 39 | 20 | 21 | 38 | ||||
Lower 1/3 | 103 | 59 | 44 | 37 | 66 | ||||
More than 1/3 | 22 | 18 | 4 | 11 | 11 | ||||
Borrmann type | |||||||||
Early stage | 10 | 4 | 6 | 10.118 | 0.0061 | 5 | 5 | 0.774 | 0.679 |
I + II type | 89 | 46 | 43 | 32 | 57 | ||||
III + IV type | 141 | 99 | 42 | 54 | 87 | ||||
Degree of differentiation | |||||||||
Well/moderate | 96 | 49 | 47 | 8.287 | 0.0041 | 30 | 66 | 3.021 | 0.082 |
Poor and not | 144 | 100 | 44 | 61 | 83 | ||||
Lauren’s classification | |||||||||
Intestinal type | 46 | 33 | 13 | 2.254 | 0.176 | 25 | 21 | 6.527 | 0.0111 |
Diffuse type | 294 | 116 | 78 | 66 | 128 | ||||
Histological type | |||||||||
Papillary | 7 | 4 | 3 | 2.958 | 0.398 | 3 | 4 | 7.052 | 0.070 |
Tubular | 187 | 112 | 75 | 63 | 124 | ||||
Mucinous | 20 | 13 | 7 | 10 | 10 | ||||
Signet-ring cell | 26 | 20 | 6 | 15 | 11 | ||||
Depth of invasion | |||||||||
T1 | 40 | 18 | 22 | 11.908 | 0.0081 | 15 | 25 | 2.145 | 0.543 |
T2 | 27 | 13 | 14 | 8 | 19 | ||||
T3 | 62 | 38 | 24 | 21 | 41 | ||||
T4 | 111 | 80 | 31 | 47 | 64 | ||||
Lymph node metastasis | |||||||||
N0 | 63 | 29 | 34 | 10.781 | 0.0131 | 23 | 40 | 4.868 | 0.182 |
N1 | 40 | 29 | 11 | 11 | 29 | ||||
N2 | 43 | 26 | 17 | 14 | 29 | ||||
N3 | 94 | 65 | 29 | 43 | 51 | ||||
TNM stage | |||||||||
I | 44 | 18 | 26 | 15.074 | 0.0021 | 15 | 29 | 1.058 | 0.787 |
II | 55 | 33 | 22 | 19 | 36 | ||||
III | 123 | 82 | 41 | 49 | 74 | ||||
IV | 18 | 16 | 2 | 8 | 10 | ||||
Vessel invasion | |||||||||
Negative | 230 | 141 | 89 | 1.423 | 0.233 | 88 | 142 | 0.278 | 0.598 |
Positive | 10 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 7 | ||||
Distant metastasis | |||||||||
Negative | 222 | 133 | 89 | 5.940 | 0.0151 | 83 | 139 | 0.352 | 0.553 |
Positive | 18 | 16 | 2 | 8 | 10 |
Table 2 Relationships between different CRM1 and CDK5 protein expression status in gastric cancer tissues and various clinicopathological variables
Variables | Total | CRM1 and CDK5 High expression | CRM1 or CDK5 Low expression | CRM1 and CDK5 Low expression | χ2 | P value |
Gender | ||||||
Male | 178 | 42 | 87 | 49 | 2.553 | 0.279 |
Female | 62 | 21 | 27 | 14 | ||
Age at surgery(yr) | ||||||
≤ 60 | 120 | 35 | 54 | 31 | 1.109 | 0.574 |
> 60 | 120 | 28 | 60 | 32 | ||
Size of primary tumor (cm) | ||||||
≤ 5 | 99 | 22 | 42 | 35 | 7.275 | 0.0261 |
> 5 | 141 | 41 | 72 | 28 | ||
Location of primary tumor | ||||||
Lower 1/3 | 56 | 18 | 19 | 19 | 10.848 | 0.093 |
Middle 1/3 | 59 | 14 | 32 | 13 | ||
Upper 1/3 | 103 | 22 | 52 | 29 | ||
More than 1/3 | 22 | 9 | 11 | 2 | ||
Borrmann type | ||||||
Early stage | 10 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 6.035 | 0.197 |
I + II type | 89 | 20 | 38 | 31 | ||
III + IV type | 141 | 41 | 71 | 29 | ||
Degree of differentiation | ||||||
Well/moderate | 96 | 18 | 43 | 35 | 10.027 | 0.0071 |
Poor and not | 144 | 45 | 71 | 28 | ||
Lauren’s classification | ||||||
Intestinal type | 46 | 17 | 24 | 5 | 7.875 | 0.0191 |
Diffuse type | 194 | 46 | 90 | 58 | ||
Histological type | ||||||
Papillary | 7 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 11.127 | 0.850 |
Tubular | 187 | 44 | 87 | 56 | ||
Mucinous | 20 | 5 | 13 | 2 | ||
Signet-ring cell | 26 | 12 | 11 | 3 | ||
Depth of invasion | ||||||
T1 | 40 | 8 | 17 | 15 | 10.996 | 0.088 |
T2 | 27 | 4 | 13 | 10 | ||
T3 | 62 | 16 | 27 | 19 | ||
T4 | 111 | 35 | 57 | 19 | ||
Lymph node metastasis | ||||||
N0 | 63 | 15 | 22 | 26 | 15.845 | 0.0151 |
N1 | 40 | 9 | 22 | 9 | ||
N2 | 43 | 7 | 26 | 10 | ||
N3 | 94 | 32 | 44 | 18 | ||
TNM stage | ||||||
I | 44 | 8 | 17 | 19 | 13.543 | 0.0351 |
II | 55 | 14 | 24 | 17 | ||
III | 123 | 33 | 65 | 25 | ||
IV | 18 | 8 | 8 | 2 | ||
Vessel invasion | ||||||
Negative | 230 | 62 | 105 | 63 | 7.757 | 0.0211 |
Positive | 10 | 1 | 9 | 0 | ||
Distant metastasis | ||||||
Negative | 222 | 55 | 106 | 61 | 4.191 | 0.123 |
Positive | 18 | 8 | 8 | 2 |
Table 3 Univariate analysis of the correlation between clinicopathological parameters and survival of patients with gastric cancer
Clinicopathological parameters | Cumulative survival rates (%) | Mean survival time (mo) | Log-rank test | P value | |
3 yr | 5 yr | ||||
Gender | |||||
Male | 66.1 | 48.3 | 49.022 | 0.092 | 0.762 |
Female | 56.6 | 48.0 | 49.324 | ||
Age at surgery (yr) | |||||
≤ 60 | 60.8 | 48.1 | 49.510 | 0.022 | 0.882 |
> 60 | 57.2 | 47.9 | 49.285 | ||
Size of primary tumor (cm) | |||||
≤ 5 | 84.8 | 73.4 | 66.451 | 44.251 | 0.0001 |
> 5 | 41.1 | 30.4 | 37.516 | ||
Location of primary tumor | |||||
Upper 1/3 | 51.8 | 38.7 | 44.354 | 28.888 | 0.0001 |
Middle 1/3 | 42.4 | 33.9 | 39.508 | ||
Lower 1/3 | 76.5 | 66.7 | 61.597 | ||
More than 1/3 | 31.8 | 22.7 | 30.500 | ||
Borrmann type | |||||
Early stage | 90.0 | 90.0 | 72.186 | 41.770 | 0.0001 |
I + II type | 81.9 | 71.5 | 64.835 | ||
III + IV type | 42.6 | 30.4 | 38.102 | ||
Degree of differentiation | |||||
Well/moderate | 70.8 | 60.3 | 57.397 | 8.644 | 0.0031 |
Poor and not | 49.8 | 39.9 | 44.056 | ||
Lauren’s classification | |||||
Intestinal type | 66.8 | 50.7 | 53.287 | 0.649 | 0.420 |
Diffuse type | 56.2 | 47.4 | 48.471 | ||
Histological type | |||||
Papillary | 57.1 | 57.1 | 50.857 | 1.026 | 0.752 |
Tubular | 57.2 | 47.0 | 48.339 | ||
Mucinous | 75.0 | 53.6 | 53.850 | ||
Signet-ring cell | 60.2 | 48.2 | 51.110 | ||
Depth of invasion | |||||
T1 | 97.5 | 94.9 | 78.311 | 64.970 | 0.0001 |
T2 | 88.9 | 74.1 | 67.889 | ||
T3 | 59.2 | 46.0 | 48.764 | ||
T4 | 37.8 | 25.2 | 34.461 | ||
Lymph node metastasis | |||||
N0 | 88.9 | 80.8 | 70.120 | 59.862 | 0.0001 |
N1 | 69.5 | 69.5 | 61.079 | ||
N2 | 58.1 | 34.9 | 43.674 | ||
N3 | 33.0 | 23.3 | 32.911 | ||
TNM stage | |||||
I | 97.7 | 95.4 | 78.211 | 71.616 | 0.0001 |
II | 76.1 | 61.3 | 60.241 | ||
III | 40.7 | 29.2 | 38.186 | ||
IV | 27.8 | 16.7 | 22.518 | ||
Vessel invasion | |||||
Negative | 60.8 | 49.3 | 50.492 | 8.264 | 0.0041 |
Positive | 20.0 | 20.0 | 23.400 | ||
Distant metastasis | |||||
Negative | 60.7 | 50.6 | 51.544 | 20.223 | 0.0001 |
Positive | 16.7 | 16.7 | 22.518 | ||
CRM1 expression | |||||
Low | 54.1 | 39.7 | 44.590 | 7.707 | 0.0051 |
High | 67.0 | 61.5 | 56.540 | ||
CDK5 expression | |||||
Low | 49.5 | 39.3 | 53.058 | 6.234 | 0.0131 |
High | 63.6 | 53.4 | 43.438 | ||
CRM1/CDK5 expression | |||||
CRM1 and CDK5 Low | 47.6 | 34.3 | 41.487 | 13.683 | 0.0011 |
CRM1 or CDK5 Low | 55.9 | 45.2 | 46.873 | ||
CRM1 and CDK5 High | 73.0 | 66.7 | 61.069 |
Table 4 Multivariate analysis of the correlation between clinicopathological parameters and survival time of patients with gastric cancer
Covariates | Coefficient | Standard error | HR | 95% CI for HR | P value |
Tumor location (cardia vs others) | 0.451 | 0.202 | 1.570 | 1.057-2.333 | 0.0261 |
Tumor size (≥ 5 vs < 5 cm) | 0.723 | 0.232 | 2.060 | 1.309-3.243 | 0.0021 |
Vessel invasion (positive vs negative) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
TNM stage (stage III and IV vs I and II) | 1.086 | 0.243 | 1.961 | 1.839-4.768 | 0.0001 |
CDK5 and CRM1 expression | |||||
(low/high vs high/high) | 0.568 | 0.254 | 1.765 | 1.074-2.903 | 0.0251 |
(low/low vs high/high) | 0.769 | 0.269 | 2.158 | 1.274-3.657 | 0.0041 |
Borrmann type (type early, I, II vs III, IV) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
- Citation: Sun YQ, Xie JW, Xie HT, Chen PC, Zhang XL, Zheng CH, Li P, Wang JB, Lin JX, Cao LL, Huang CM, Lin Y. Expression of CRM1 and CDK5 shows high prognostic accuracy for gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23(11): 2012-2022
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v23/i11/2012.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v23.i11.2012