Association of EGFR 1 Gene Alteration and their Association with Lung Adenocarcinoma Patients
Adenocarcinoma of Lung
/ genetics
Adult
Aged
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ genetics
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung
/ genetics
Case-Control Studies
ErbB Receptors
/ genetics
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic
Humans
Lung Neoplasms
/ genetics
Male
Middle Aged
Mutation
Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide
Prognosis
Promoter Regions, Genetic
ROC Curve
Risk Factors
Survival Rate
Lung adenocarcinoma
EGFR1 (-191C/A) genotype
overall and progression free survival
prognosis
Journal
Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP
ISSN: 2476-762X
Titre abrégé: Asian Pac J Cancer Prev
Pays: Thailand
ID NLM: 101130625
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 03 2019
26 03 2019
Historique:
entrez:
27
3
2019
pubmed:
27
3
2019
medline:
31
7
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Background: The epidermal growth factor receptor 1 (EGFR1) plays a significant role in cell proliferation and
development. Its regulation in humans is very critical and incompletely understood in Non small cell lung cancer
(NSCLC). Methods: 100 newly diagnosed NSCLC (lung adenocarcinoma) patients and 100 healthy controls were
included and allele specific (AS) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used to genotype and expression was analyzed
by quantitative real time PCR. Overall survival of patients was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method and for prognostic
significance ROC curve was plotted. Results: A statistically significant difference (p<0.0001) in CC, AA and CA
genotypes distribution among patients and healthy controls was observed. Compared to the CC genotype as reference,
OR was 30.40 (95%CI 1.75- 524.9, p=0.0002) and 3.97 (95%CI 1.49-10.52, p=0.003) for the homozygous AA and
heterozygous CA genotypes respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was also performed to analyze the relationship
of EGFR1 (-191C/A) genotypes with progression free median survival of NSCLC patients and the difference was
found to be significantly (p=0.0002) associated with different genotypes. In the ROC curve with respect to TNM stage
at optimal cut-off value of 9.88 fold increase in EGFR1 mRNA expression, sensitivity and specificity were 92.9%,
83.3% respectively (AUC=0.95, p<0.0001). ROC curve w.r.t. distant metastases at optimal cut-off value of 13.5 fold
change EGFR1 mRNA expression, sensitivity and specificity were 68.2%, 71.4% respectively (AUC=0.81, p<0.0001).
In ROC curve w.r.t to presence/ absence of pleural effusion at optimal cut-off value of 14.8 fold change EGFR1
mRNA expression sensitivity and specificity were 66.7%, 68.2% respectively (AUC=0.71, p=0.009). Conclusions:
Study concluded EGFR1 promoter polymorphism could be a risk factor associated with disease and may be used as
prognostic marker for patients’ survival and predictor for disease worseness.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30912007
doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.3.825
pmc: PMC6825767
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
EGFR protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
ErbB Receptors
EC 2.7.10.1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
825-830Informations de copyright
Creative Commons Attribution License
Références
Oncologist. 2002;7 Suppl 4:31-9
pubmed: 12202786
Anticancer Res. 1997 Jan-Feb;17(1B):613-9
pubmed: 9066588
Clin Cancer Res. 2004 Jun 15;10(12 Pt 2):4227s-4232s
pubmed: 15217963
N Engl J Med. 2005 Feb 24;352(8):830-2
pubmed: 15728818
Cancer Res. 2005 Jan 1;65(1):46-53
pubmed: 15665278
Cancer Res. 2003 Apr 1;63(7):1589-95
pubmed: 12670909
Clin Cancer Res. 2002 Mar;8(3):734-44
pubmed: 11895903
N Engl J Med. 2005 Feb 24;352(8):786-92
pubmed: 15728811
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1985 Aug;82(15):4920-4
pubmed: 2991899
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1994 Oct 11;91(21):10217-21
pubmed: 7937865
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16(15):6445-9
pubmed: 26434857
Clin Cancer Res. 2001 Jul;7(7):1850-5
pubmed: 11448895
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2011 Dec;20(12):2610-7
pubmed: 21960689
Fertil Steril. 2005 Mar;83(3):796-9
pubmed: 15749523
Biomark Cancer. 2010 Apr 08;2:57-63
pubmed: 24179385
Hum Mol Genet. 2006 Jun 15;15(12):1963-71
pubmed: 16687442
J Biomed Sci. 2009 Sep 12;16:82
pubmed: 19747398
Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 1999 Jun;31(6):637-43
pubmed: 10404636
Hum Mol Genet. 2011 Jul 15;20(14):2897-904
pubmed: 21531791