| HOME | HELP | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Hepatobiliary |
Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
Key Words. Osteopontin • CD44 • Tissue microarray • Hepatocellular carcinoma • Prognosis
Correspondence: Jian Zhou, M.D., Ph.D., Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 136 Yi Xue Yuan Road, Shanghai 200032, P. R. China. Telephone: 86-21-64037181; Fax: 86-21-64037181; e-mail: zhou.jian{at}zs-hospital.sh.cn
Received May 5, 2008; accepted for publication October 15, 2008; first published online in THE ONCOLOGIST Express on November 7, 2008.
Disclosure: The content of this article has been reviewed by independent peer reviewers to ensure that it is balanced, objective, and free from commercial bias. No financial relationships relevant to the content of this article have been disclosed by the authors, planners, independent peer reviewers, or staff managers.
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods. Tumor tissue microarray was used to detect the expression levels of OPN and CD44 in 302 hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing curative resection between 1997 and 2000 at our institute. Clinicopathologic data for these patients were investigated. The prognostic effects of OPN and CD44 were evaluated using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. The Spearman rank test and Fisher's exact test were applied to demonstrate correlations.
Results. Both OPN and CD44 were independent predictors for overall survival and disease-free survival. When OPN and CD44 were taken into consideration together, the predictive range was extended and the sensitivity was improved, especially for those patients with normal serum
-fetoprotein levels. The 8-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates in OPN+ and/or CD44+ patients were 28.2% and 25.6%, respectively, which were significantly lower than those of OPN–CD44– patients (52.1% and 51.6%, respectively).
Conclusions. OPN combined with CD44 is a promising independent predictor of tumor recurrence and survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients.
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Osteopontin (OPN) and CD44 have been identified as markers for tumor progression [2–8]. Previous studies in our institute have succeeded in identifying OPN as a lead gene and an independent prognostic factor that is overexpressed in metastatic HCC [9, 10]. A growing body of evidence is increasingly lending support to the idea that human cancer can be considered as a stem cell disease [11–13]. CD44 was identified as a tumor stem cell marker in breast cancer [14], prostate cancer [15], colon cancer [16], head and neck cancer [17], and pancreatic cancer [18]. In our previous research, we found OPN and CD44 to be highly expressed in HCC side population (SP) cells that had been confirmed as cancer stem-like cells (submitted data). Recently, clinical and experimental studies suggested that coexpression of OPN and CD44 may stimulate tumor progression and metastasis [19]. In this study, we evaluated the prognostic significance of OPN and CD44 expression in 302 HCC patients following curative resection.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Tumor differentiation was defined according to the Edmondson grading system [22]. Tumor staging was defined according to the sixth edition of the tumor–node–metastasis (TNM) classification of the International Union against Cancer. The clinicopathological characteristics of 302 HCC patients are summarized in Table 1. Ethical approval for human subjects was obtained from the research ethics committee of Zhongshan Hospital, and informed consent was obtained from each patient.
|
-fetoprotein (AFP), abdominal ultrasonography, and chest x-ray every 1–6 months after the surgical procedure. Computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were used to verify tumor recurrence in suspected cases. A diagnosis of recurrence was based on typical imaging appearance on the CT/MRI scan and/or an elevated AFP level. Most deceased patients died from recurrence or metastasis, or associated complications of liver cirrhosis. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the interval between surgery and death or the last observation. The data were censored at the last follow-up for living patients. Disease-free survival (DFS) was measured from the date of resection until the detection of recurrent tumor or the last follow-up assessment. In the DFS analysis, the data were censored for patients without tumor recurrence.
Tissue Microarray Construction
For tissue microarray (TMA) construction, a hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stained slide was made from each block and was reviewed by two experienced pathologists. Representative tumor regions were morphologically identified and marked on the H&E stained slides. Tissue cylinders with a diameter of 0.6 mm were punched from the marked areas of each block and incorporated into a recipient paraffin block using a precision instrument (Beecher Instruments, Silver Spring, MD), as described previously [23]. To overcome the problem of tissue microheterogeneity and to increase the number of evaluable cases, each donor tissue block was punched two times for the construction of the recipient block. Three different TMA blocks were constructed. In addition, we built a TMA containing 100 cases of peritumoral livers that were randomly chosen from 302 cases. Each TMA contained 200 or 204 cylinders. Consecutive sections of 4 µm in thickness were taken on 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane-coated slides (Shanghai Biochip Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China). To validate the concordance between TMAs and whole tumor sections, we further detected OPN and CD44 expression for 50 cases randomly chosen from the 302 patients in comparison with whole tumor sections.
Immunohistochemistry
The immunohistochemical examination of OPN and CD44 was performed with monoclonal anti-mouse OPN antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA) and CD44s antibody (Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis), respectively. Immunohistochemistry was performed using a two-step immunoperoxidase technique [24, 25]. Briefly, after microwave antigen retrieval, tissues were incubated with primary antibodies for 60 minutes at room temperature. Following half an hour of incubation with secondary antibody, the sections were developed in diaminobenzidine solution under microscopic observation and counterstained with hematoxylin. Negative control slides with the primary antibodies omitted were included in all assays.
Immunohistochemical staining was assessed by three independent investigators without knowledge of the patient characteristics. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Scores were assigned as a percentage of positive staining within each cylinder. The mean percentage value of the two cores was considered representative of one tumor. OPN was considered positive if >5% of tumor cells showed moderate or intense staining [26]. CD44 expression was considered positive if moderate or intense staining was present in
10% of the tumor cells [25].
Statistical Analysis
The statistical analysis was performed using the statistical package SPSS (version 15.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). DFS and OS were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. The Spearman rank test and Fisher's exact test were applied to demonstrate clinicopathological correlations. Univariate and multivariate risk ratios were computed, together with 95% confidence intervals. Differences associated with p-values below 0.05 were considered significant.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
5% positive cells) was seen in the conventional section. This case was treated as CD44– according to the results of the conventional section.
|
To elucidate the biologic significance, we correlated the OPN and CD44 expression levels with the clinicopathologic features of HCC. As shown in Table 2, CD44 expression in HCC was associated with serum AFP elevation (p = .000) and tumor number (p = .013), but not with tumor encapsulation, tumor differentiation, or vascular invasion. OPN expression, however, was not correlated with any clinicopathologic feature (p > .05).
|
OPN was an independent prognostic factor for OS and DFS (p = .044 and p = .030) (Table 3). In the OPN– group, the OS and DFS rates were significantly higher than in the OPN+ group (p = .042 and p = .027) (Fig. 2).
|
|
When OPN and CD44 expression were taken into consideration together, the OS and DFS rates were significantly higher in the OPN–CD44– group than in the CD44+OPN–, CD44–/OPN+, and CD44+/OPN+ groups (p < .05) (supplemental online Fig. S2); there was no significant difference among the latter three groups (p > .05) (supplemental online Fig. S2). The 8-year OS and DFS rates in OPN+ and/or CD44+ patients were 28.2% and 25.2%, respectively, which were significantly lower than those of OPN–CD44– patients (52.1% and 51.6%, respectively; p = .000). When stratified by AFP level, we found that OPN+ and/or CD44+ patients had lower OS and DFS rates than OPN–CD44– patients in both the normal and positive AFP groups (p = .000) (Fig. 3).
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
OPN, a secreted noncollagenous and sialic acid–rich phosphoprotein, was initially discovered as an inducible marker of transformation of epithelial cells, and was later shown to be frequently overexpressed in many human cancers [2], including HCC [3]. Our previous work identified OPN as a lead gene that is overexpressed in metastatic HCC and is able to act as both a diagnostic marker and a potential therapeutic target for metastatic HCC [9]. The level of plasma OPN acted as an independent prognostic factor for both OS and DFS in HCC patients following liver resection [10]. With details pertaining to the exact mechanisms being elucidated, OPN functions through its interaction with the CD44 family of cell surface receptors and integrin. OPN contains a COOH-terminal fragment, which binds directly to CD44. The interaction of OPN, CD44, and β1-integrin was demonstrated to be associated with cell spreading, chemotactic behavior, and metastasis in an experimental model [32]. Clinical and experimental studies suggest that coexpression of OPN and CD44 may stimulate tumor progression and metastasis. Their interaction plays a crucial role in lymph node metastasis of gastric carcinoma [19]. Despite growing evidence for the role of both OPN and CD44 in tumorigenesis/metastasis, how they cooperate to promote tumor progression remains poorly understood. Cancer stem cells for breast, prostate, colon [16], head and neck, and pancreatic [18] cancer have been described, lending support to the 40-year-old idea that cancers may originate from a common progenitor. Thus, evidence is accumulating in support of the view that cancer may actually be a single disease [11, 13, 16]. Several tumors, including HCC, were shown to contain cancer stem cells using the cell surface marker CD44 [33, 34]. Studies in our laboratory also demonstrated that OPN and CD44 were highly expressed in SP cells from HCC cell lines and human HCC specimens, which were confirmed as cancer stem-like cells.
In this study, we found that both OPN and CD44 were independent predictors of OS and DFS in HCC patients. The rates of OPN and CD44 expression were 24.2% and 30.1%, respectively, and 10.3% of patients expressed both OPN and CD44. Interestingly, we found that the predictive range was extended and the sensitivity was improved when both OPN and CD44 were taken into consideration together. More than 40% of patients in this study expressed OPN or CD44, and were more prone to recurrence of HCC following curative resection. On multivariate analysis, the coindex CD44/OPN was found to be an independent prognostic factor for both OS and DFS. The OS and DFS rates in OPN–CD44– patients were significantly higher than those in OPN+ and/or CD44+ patients.
Furthermore, OPN+ and/or CD44+ patients had unfavorable OS and DFS times in both the normal and positive serum AFP groups, when compared with OPN–CD44– patients. Serum AFP remains the most widely used tumor marker in the diagnosis and management of HCC [35]. It has a sensitivity of 39%–65%, a specificity of 76%–94%, and a positive predictive value of 9%–50% [36]. Nevertheless, there is no ideal factor to demonstrate its prognostic value in the 30%–40% of HCC patients with normal serum AFP levels. In our study, CD44 tended to be highly expressed in patients with negative AFP. OPN positivity and/or CD44 positivity, endowed with a sensitivity of 68.7% and a specificity of 61.9%, showed significant value in predicting tumor recurrence for the HCC patients with normal serum AFP levels.
It has been suggested that HCC has two patterns of recurrence—multicentric occurrence and intrahepatic metastasis. Multicentric HCCs also show synchronous and metachronous occurrence [37, 38], and the latter is thought to be clinically more important. In terms of tumor differentiation, an Edmondson grade I or II tumor has a low incidence of intrahepatic metastasis before curative resection. Furthermore, long-term recurrence (>2 years) has different meanings than short-term recurrence (
2 years); the former is always thought to be associated with multicentric occurrence. In this study, tumor recurrence was found in 40.5% (70 of 173) of patients 2 years postoperatively. Fifty-one patients with Edmondson grade I or II tumors recurred after 2 years (44.0%, 51 of 116); to our surprise, OPN and CD44 were positive in 80.4% (41 of 51) of these patients. That is to say, OPN plus CD44 may be very sensitive in predicting metachronous occurrence of HCC after curative resection.
In conclusion, OPN combined with CD44 might serve as an unfavorable prognostic factor for HCC patients undergoing curative tumor resection. Thus, undertaking adjuvant treatment early in OPN+ and/or CD44+ patients after operation may reduce tumor recurrence and prolong survival. The underlying mechanism, which might involve cancer stem cells, still needs to be further investigated.
| AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Financial support: Yang Xu, Jian Zhou
Administrative support: Jia Fan, Yin-Kun Liu, Zhao-You Tang
Provision of study materials: Yang Xu, Jia Fan, Shuang-Jian Qiu, Bing Wu, Zhi Dai, Yin-Kun Liu, Zhao-You Tang, Jian Zhou
Collection/assembly of data: Guo-Huan Yang, Xin-Rong Yang, Guo-Ming Shi
Data analysis: Guo-Huan Yang, Xin-Rong Yang, Guo-Ming Shi
Manuscript writing: Guo-Huan Yang, Yang Xu, Jian Zhou
Final approval of manuscript: Jian Zhou
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Guo-Huan Yang, Jia Fan, and Yang Xu contributed equally to this work
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| THE ONCOLOGIST | STEM CELLS | CME | ALPHAMED PRESS JOURNALS |