Zhao XH, Wang ZR, Chen CL, Di L, Bi ZF, Li ZH, Liu YM. Molecular detection of epithelial-mesenchymal transition markers in circulating tumor cells from pancreatic cancer patients: Potential role in clinical practice. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25(1): 138-150 [PMID: 30643364 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i1.138]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Yi-Min Liu, MA, Associate Specialist, Professor, Department of Radiotherapy, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, 107 Yan-Jiang Xi Road, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong Province, China. liuyimin1995@sina.com
Research Domain of This Article
Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Article-Type of This Article
Clinical Trials 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. Jan 7, 2019; 25(1): 138-150 Published online Jan 7, 2019. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i1.138
Table 1 Baseline circulating tumor cell characteristics of treatment-naïve patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma according to circulating tumor cell status
Group
Patients n (%)
Number of patients with no CTC
23/107 (21.5)
Number of patients with ≥ 1 CTC
84/107 (78.5)
Number of patients with ≥ 6 CTC
55/107 (51.4)
Number of patients with E-CTCs
65/107(60.7)
Number of patients with E/M-CTCs
39/107 (36.4)
Number of patients with M-CTCs
49/107 (45.8)
CTC dynamic range
Total CTC
0-26
Median
6
E-CTC
1-11
E/M-CTC
0-26
M-CTC
0-9
Table 2 Correlation between total circulating tumor cell status and clinicopathological factors of patients with pancreatic cancer
Total CTC-negative patients (%)
Total CTC-positive patients (%)
P-value
Age, yr (median: 63, IQR: 52-76)
< 60
8/23 (34.8)
32/84 (38.1)
0.769
≥ 60
15/23 (65.2)
52/84 (61.9)
Gender
Male
16/23 (69.6)
47/84 (56.0)
0.313
Female
7/23 (30.4)
37/84 (44.0)
Ethnic group
Han ethnic group
14/23 (60.9)
59/84 (70.2)
0.346
Zhuang ethnic group
5/23 (21.7)
16/84 (19.1)
Li ethnic group
4/23 (17.4)
9/84 (10.7)
Differentiation
Well
3/23 (13.0)
7/84 (8.3)
0.435
Moderate
13/23 (56.5)
54/84 (64.3)
Poor
7/23 (30.5)
23/84 (27.4)
TNM stage
I
6/23 (26.1)
4/84 (4.8)
< 0.001
II
7/23 (30.4)
13/84 (15.5)
III
10/23 (43.5)
39/84 (46.4)
IV
0/23 (0)
28/84 (33.3)
Lymph node metastasis
Negative
13/23 (56.5)
34/84 (40.5)
0.023
Positive
10/23 (43.5)
50/84 (59.5)
Neural invasion
Negative
10/23 (43.5)
29/84 (34.5)
0.247
Positive
13/23 (56.5)
55/84 (65.5)
Distant metastasis
Negative
23/23 (100)
56/84 (66.7)
< 0.001
Positive
0/23 (0)
28/84 (33.3)
Table 3 Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses of prognostic factors for overall survival in pancreatic cancer
Predictor
Univariate analysis
Multivariate analysis
HR
95%CI
P-value
HR
95%CI
P-value
Age, < 60 vs ≥ 60
0.818
0.798-1.017
0.792
Gender (female vs male)
0.928
0.781-1.130
0.952
Differentiation (well vs moderate vs poor)
1.045
0.873-1.186
0.134
Ethnic group (Han/Zhuang/Li)
0.917
0.834-1.048
0.866
TNM stage (I/II vs III/IV)
1.452
1.215-1.475
< 0.001
1.148
1.031-1.268
0.011
Lymph node metastasis (negative vs positive)
1.287
1.048-1.364
0.007
1.198
1.036-1.380
0.017
Neural invasion (negative vs positive)
1.008
0.781-1.155
0.949
Distant metastasis (negative vs positive)
1.426
1.236-1.710
< 0.001
1.521
1.256-1.887
< 0.001
CTC, < 6 vs ≥ 6
1.849
1.717-2.238
< 0.001
1.851
1.637-2.173
< 0.001
Table 4 Correlation between total circulating tumor cell status and clinicopathological factors of patients with pancreatic cancer
Epithelia CTC (%)
Hybrid CTC (%)
Mesenchymal CTC (%)
Positive
Negative
P-value
Positive
Negative
P-value
Positive
Negative
P-value
Age (yr)
< 60
24/65
16/42
> 0.9
12/39
28/68
0.18
21/49
19/58
0.19
(36.9)
(38.1)
(30.8)
(41.2)
(42.9)
(32.8)
≥ 60
41/65
26/42
27/39
40/68
28/49
39/58
(63.1)
(61.9)
(69.2)
(58.8)
(57.1)
(67.2)
Gender
Male
37/65
26/42
0.56
24/39
39/68
0.56
28/49
35/58
0.77
(56.9)
(61.9)
(61.5)
(57.4)
(57.1)
(60.3)
Female
28/65
16/42
15/39
29/68
21/49
23/58
(43.1)
(38.1)
(38.5)
(42.6)
(42.9)
(39.7)
Differentiation
Well
6/65
4/42
0.21
4/39
6/68
0.97
5/49
5/58
0.84
(9.2)
(9.5)
(10.3)
(8.8)
(8.1)
(9.3)
Moderate
38/65
29/42
24/39
43/68
31/49
36/58
(58.5)
(69.1)
(61.5)
(63.2)
(64.9)
(60.5)
Poor
21/65
9/42
11/39
19/68
13/49
17/58
(32.3)
(21.4)
(28.2)
(28)
(27)
(30.2)
TNM stage
I
4/65
6/42
0.29
3/39
7/68
0.59
1/49
9/58
< 0.01
(6.1)
(14.3)
(7.7)
(10.3)
(2)
(15.5)
II
13/65
7/42
9/39
11/68
5/49
15/58
(20)
(16.7)
(23.1)
(16.2)
(10.2)
(25.9)
III
30/65
19/42
17/39
32/68
22/49
27/58
(46.2)
(45.2)
(43.6)
(47.1)
(44.9)
(46.6)
IV
18/65
10/42
10/39
18/68
21/49
7/58
(27.7)
(23.8)
(25.6)
(26.4)
(42.9)
(12)
Lymph node metastasis
Negative
25/65
22/42
0.08
18/39
29/68
0.78
24/49(49.0)
23/58
0.26
(38.5)
(52.4)
(46.2)
(42.6)
(39.7)
Positive
40/65
20/42
21/39
39/68
25/49
35/58
(61.5)
(47.6)
(53.8)
(57.4)
(51)
(60.3)
Neural invasion
Negative
22/65
17/42
0.38
18/39
21/68
0.78
17/49
22/58
0.77
(33.8)
(40.5)
(46.2)
(42.6)
(34.7)
(37.9)
Positive
43/65
25/42
21/39
39/68
32/49
36/58
(66.2)
(59.5)
(53.8)
(57.4)
(65.3)
(62.1)
Distant metastasis
Negative
46/65
33/42
0.25
27/39
52/68
0.26
25/49
54/58
< 0.01
(70.8)
(78.6)
(69.2)
(76.5)
(51)
(93.1)
Positive
19/65
9/42
12/39
16/68
24/49
4/58
(29.2)
(21.4)
(30.8)
(23.5)
(49)
(6.9)
Ethnic group
Li ethnic group
8/65
5/42
0.98
5/39
8/68
0.52
5/49
8/58
0.24
(12.3)
(11.9)
(12.8)
(11.8)
(10.2)
(13.8)
Han ethnic group
44/65
29/42
25/39
48/68
32/49
41/58
(67.7)
(69.1)
(64.1)
(70.6)
(65.3)
(70.7)
Zhuang ethnic group
13/65
8/42
9/39
12/68
12/49
9/58
(20)
(19)
(23.1)
(17.6)
(24.5)
(15.5)
Citation: Zhao XH, Wang ZR, Chen CL, Di L, Bi ZF, Li ZH, Liu YM. Molecular detection of epithelial-mesenchymal transition markers in circulating tumor cells from pancreatic cancer patients: Potential role in clinical practice. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25(1): 138-150