Clinical Implication of Cyclooxygenase-2 Expression for Rectal Cancer Patients with Lymph Node Involvement.
10.3857/jkstro.2009.27.4.210
- Author:
Hyung Sik LEE
1
;
Youngmin CHOI
;
Won Joo HUR
;
Su Jin KIM
;
Dae Cheol KIM
;
Mee Sook ROH
;
Young Seoub HONG
;
Ki Jae PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Dong-A University School of Medicine, Busan, Korea. cymin00@dau.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Rectal cancer;
COX-2;
Survival rate;
Lymph node
- MeSH:
Cyclooxygenase 2;
Disease-Free Survival;
Disulfiram;
Humans;
Immunohistochemistry;
Liver;
Lung Neoplasms;
Lymph Nodes;
Melanoma;
Neoplasm Metastasis;
Rectal Neoplasms;
Retrospective Studies;
Sample Size;
Stomach Neoplasms;
Survival Rate
- From:The Journal of the Korean Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
2009;27(4):210-217
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To assess the influence of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) expression on the survival of patients with a combination of rectal cancer and lymph node metastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included rectal cancer patients treated by radical surgery and postoperative radiotherapy at the Dong-A university hospital from 1998 to 2004. A retrospective analysis was performed on a subset of patients that also had lymph node metastasis. After excluding eight of 86 patients, due to missing tissue samples in three, malignant melanoma in one, treatment of gastric cancer around one year before diagnosis in one, detection of lung cancer after one year of diagnosis in one, liver metastasis in one, and refusal of radiotherapy after 720 cGy in one, 78 patients were analyzed. The immunohistochemistry for COX-2 was conducted with an autostainer (BenchMark; Ventana, Tucson, AZ, USA). An image analyzer (TissueMine; Bioimagene, Cupertino, CA, USA) was used for analysis after scanning (ScanScope; Aperio, Vista, CA, USA). A survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan Meier method and significance was evaluated using the log rank test. RESULTS: COX-2 was stained positively in 62 patients (79.5%) and negatively in 16 (20.5%). A total of 6 (7.7%), 15 (19.2%), and 41 (52.6%) patients were of grades 1, 2, and 3, respectively for COX-2 expression. No correlation was found between being positive of COX-2 patient characteristics, which include age (<60-year old vs. > or =60), sex, operation methods (abdominoperineal resection vs. lower anterior resection), degrees of differentiation, tumor size (<5 cm vs. > or =5 cm), T stages, N stages, and stages (IIIa, IIIb, IIIc). The 5-year overall and 5-year disease free survival rates for the entire patient population were 57.0% and 51.6%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival rates for the COX-2 positive and negative patients were 53.0% and 72.9%, respectively (p=0.146). Further, the 5-year disease free survival rates for the COX-2 positive and negative patients were 46.3% and 72.7%, respectively (p=0.118). The 5-year overall survival rates were significantly different (p<0.05) for the degree of differentiation, N stage, and stage, whereas the 5-year disease free survival rates were significant for N stage and stage. CONCLUSION: Being positive for and the degree of COX-2 expression did not have a significant influence on the survival of rectal cancer patients with lymph node metastasis. However, N stage and stage did significantly influence the rateof survival. Further analysis of a greater sample size is necessary for the verification of the effect of COX-2 expression on the survival of rectal cancer patients with lymph node involvement.
