切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2018, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (04) : 447 -452. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2018.04.012

所属专题: 文献

论著

CD133及CD44表达与不同类型上皮性卵巢癌组织
冯丹1, 邹娟2, 方芳3,()   
  1. 1. 610091 成都市妇女儿童中心医院妇产科
    2. 610041 成都,四川大学华西第二医院病理科
    3. 610041 成都,四川大学华西第二医院妇科
  • 收稿日期:2018-05-22 修回日期:2018-07-12 出版日期:2018-08-01
  • 通信作者: 方芳

Expressions of CD133 and CD44 in primary and recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer tissues

Dan Feng1, Juan Zou2, Fang Fang3,()   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chengdu Women′s & Children′s Central Hospital, Chengdu 610091, Sichuan Province, China
    2. Department of Pathology, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
    3. Department of Gynecology, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
  • Received:2018-05-22 Revised:2018-07-12 Published:2018-08-01
  • Corresponding author: Fang Fang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Fang Fang, Email:
  • Supported by:
    Science and Technology Pillar Program of Department of Science and Technology in Sichuan Province(2011SZ0102)
引用本文:

冯丹, 邹娟, 方芳. CD133及CD44表达与不同类型上皮性卵巢癌组织[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2018, 14(04): 447-452.

Dan Feng, Juan Zou, Fang Fang. Expressions of CD133 and CD44 in primary and recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer tissues[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2018, 14(04): 447-452.

目的

探讨卵巢癌干细胞(OCSC)标志物CD133、CD44在不同类型上皮性卵巢癌(EOC)组织表达的差异及其意义。

方法

选择2003年1月1日至2016年12月31日,四川大学华西第二医院收治的15例复发EOC患者,30例术前未接受化疗、30例术前接受新辅助化疗(NACT)的初发晚期EOC患者为研究对象,分别纳入复发组(n=15)、未化疗组(n=30)、NACT组(n=30)。对复发组EOC初发与复发时手术切除组织,以及未化疗组与NACT组手术切除组织,采用免疫组化方法测定其CD133、CD44阳性表达率及光密度值(OD)。复发组EOC初发与复发时手术切除组织CD133、CD44阳性表达率及OD比较,分别采用配对χ2检验和Wilcoxon符号秩和检验。未化疗组与NACT组手术切除EOC组织上述指标比较,分别采用χ2检验和Wilcoxon秩和检验。采用Cramer′s V系数分析EOC组织的CD44与CD133表达相关性。本研究符合2013年修订的《世界医学协会赫尔辛基宣言》的要求。3组患者的年龄、病理分型和分级等一般临床资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结果

①复发组EOC初发与复发时手术切除组织CD133阳性表达率及OD(CD133、CD44)分别比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);复发时手术切除组织CD44阳性表达率为86.7%(13/15),高于初发时的73.3%(11/15),2者比较,差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.922、P=0.027)。②NACT组手术切除组织OD(CD133、CD44)及CD44阳性表达率,均高于未化疗组,差异均有统计学意义(Z=-2.176、P=0.030,χ2=5.455、P=0.020,Z=-4.759、P<0.001)。③EOC组织中CD44与CD133表达具有相关性(Cramer′s V=0.462、P<0.001)。

结论

OCSC标志物CD133与CD44在EOC组织中的表达具有相关性,可能在OCSC表面同时存在。化疗后OCSC残留,可能为导致EOC复发的真正原因。

Objective

To explore the differential expressions of ovarian cancer stem cells (OCSC) markers CD133 and CD44 in primary and recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) tissues and its significances.

Methods

From January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2016, a total of 15 patients with recurrent EOC, 30 primary EOC patients with advanced stage who did not receive chemotherapy before surgery, and 30 primary EOC patients with advanced stage who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) before surgery in West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University were selected as research subjects, and they were included into the recurrent group (n=15), non-chemotherapy group (n=30), and NACT group (n=30). The positive expression rates and optical density (OD) of CD133 and CD44 in different types of EOC tissues were detected by immuohistochemistry. Paired chi-square test and Wilcoxon signed rank sum test were used to compare the positive expression rates and OD of CD133 and CD44 between EOC tissues of primary and recurrent surgery in recurrent group. Chi-square test and Wilcoxon rank sum test were used to compare the positive expression rates and OD of CD133 and CD44 between EOC tissues of non-chemotherapy group and NACT group. Correlation analysis of CD44 and CD133 expressions in EOC tissues was analyzed by Cramer′s V coefficient. This study met the requirements of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki revised in 2013. There were no significant differences in the general clinical data of age, pathological type and grade between the three groups (P>0.05).

Results

①In recurrent group, there were no statistical differences between EOC tissues of primary and recurrent surgery in positive expression rates of CD133, and OD of CD133 and CD44 (P>0.05). The positive expression rate of CD44 in EOC tissues of recurrent surgery was 86.7% (13/15), which was higher than that in primary surgery [73.3% (11/15)], and the difference was statistically significant (χ2=4.922, P=0.027). ②The OD of CD133 and CD44, and the positive expression rate of CD44 in EOC tissues of NACT group all were higher than those of non-chemotherapy group, and all the differences were statistically significant (Z=—2.176, P=0.030; χ2=5.455, P=0.020; Z=—4.759, P<0.001). ③There was correlation between the expressions of CD133 and CD44 in EOC tissues (Cramer′s V=0.462, P<0.001).

Conclusions

The OCSC markers CD133 and CD44 are co-expressed in EOC tissues and may co-exist on the surface of OCSC. The residue of OCSC after chemotherapy may be the real cause of EOC recurrence.

图2 3组不同类型EOC组织CD44表达情况(图2A:复发组EOC组织CD44表达情况;图2B:未化疗组EOC组织CD44表达情况;图2C:NACT组EOC组织CD44表达情况)(SP染色,高倍)
表1 复发组EOC初发与复发时手术切除组织的CD133、CD44阳性率及OD(CD133、CD44)比较
表2 未化疗组与NACT组EOC患者手术切除组织的CD133、CD44阳性率及OD(CD133、CD44)比较
表3 CD44与CD133在EOC患者手术切除组织中表达的相关性分析
[1]
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2016, 66(1): 7-30.
[2]
陈颖,昌晓红,崔恒. 卵巢上皮性癌生物治疗的研究进展[J]. 中华妇产科杂志,2017, 52(8): 573-576.
[3]
Chen W, Zheng R, Baade PD, et al. Cancer statistics in China, 2015[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2016, 66(2): 115-132.
[4]
徐行丽,贾庆兰,颜晓华,等. 上皮性卵巢癌组织中黏着斑激酶的表达及临床意义[J/CD] . 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2010, 6(2): 115-118.
[5]
Cannistra SA. Cancer of the ovary[J]. N Engl J Med, 2004, 351(24): 2519-2529.
[6]
Sugiyama T, Konishi I. Emerging drugs for ovarian cancer[J]. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs, 2008, 13(3): 523-536.
[7]
苏节,李力. 卵巢上皮性癌干细胞及其靶向治疗的研究进展[J]. 中华妇产科杂志,2016, 51(5): 394-396.
[8]
Dean M, Fojo T, Bates S. Tumour stem cells and drug resistance[J]. Nat Rev Cancer, 2005, 5(4): 275-284.
[9]
Donnenberg VS, Donnenberg AD. Multiple drug resistance in cancer revisited: the cancer stem cell hypothesis[J]. J Clin Pharmacol, 2005, 45(8): 872-877.
[10]
Liu FS. Mechanisms of chemotherapeutic drug resistance in cancer therapy: a quick review[J]. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 48(3): 239-244.
[11]
Fong MY, Kakar SS. The role of cancer stem cells and the side population in epithelial ovarian cancer[J]. Histol Histopathol, 2010, 25(1): 113-120.
[12]
Alvero AB, Chen R, Fu HH, et al. Molecular phenotyping of human ovarian cancer stem cells unravels the mechanisms for repair and chemoresistance[J]. Cell Cycle, 2009, 8(1): 158-166.
[13]
Bapat SA. Human ovarian cancer stem cells[J]. Reproduction, 2010, 140(1): 33-41.
[14]
Shi MF, Jiao J, Lu WG, et al. Identification of cancer stem cell-like cells from human epithelial ovarian carcinoma cell line[J]. Cell Mol Life Sci, 2010, 67(22): 3915-3925.
[15]
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Ovarian cancer including fallopian tube cancer and primary peritoneal cancer[EB/OL]. (2018-03-09) [2018-05-17].

URL    
[16]
敬宏,牛晓宇. 卵巢癌肿瘤干细胞及其标志物在卵巢癌诊疗中作用的研究进展[J/CD]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2017, 13(2): 226-230.
[17]
魏振彤,王医术,于晓伟,等. 腹水来源卵巢上皮性癌细胞系中侧群细胞的分离、鉴定及耐药性分析[J]. 中华妇产科杂志,2015, 50(6): 452-457.
[18]
黄丽萍,刘辉. 肿瘤标志物在卵巢癌的研究现状[J/CD]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2017, 13(3): 265-269.
[19]
杨军,康安静,苏宝山,等.免疫组织化学检测结果判读进展[J/CD].中华临床医师杂志(电子版),2014,8(20):3699-3703.
[20]
钱皓,凌沛学,王凤山,等. 黏附分子CD44与恶性肿瘤关系的研究进展[J]. 中国生化药物杂志,2007, 28(3): 207-210.
[21]
武加利,纪新强,刘佳,等. 人卵巢癌干细胞的分离培养和初步鉴定[J]. 现代妇产科进展,2010, 19(12): 893-896.
[22]
Zhang S, Balch C, Chan MW, et al. Identification and characterization of ovarian cancer-initiating cells from primary human tumors[J]. Cancer Res, 2008, 68(11): 4311-4320.
[23]
Baba T, Convery PA, Matsumura N, et al. Epigenetic regulation of CD133 and tumorigenicity of CD133+ ovarian cancer cells[J]. Oncogene, 2009, 28(2): 209-2l8.
[24]
Vergote IB, De Wever I, Decloedt J, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus primary debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer[J]. Semin Oncol, 2000, 27(3 Suppl 7): 31-36.
[1] 武壮壮, 张晓娟, 史泽洪, 史瑶, 原韶玲. 超声联合乳腺X线摄影及PR、Her-2预测高级别与中低级别乳腺导管原位癌的价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(06): 631-635.
[2] 罗丹, 孔为民, 陈姝宁, 赵小玲, 谢云凯. 子宫内膜异位症患者在位及异位内膜上皮细胞-间充质转化相关生物标志物的变化[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 530-539.
[3] 韩春颖, 王婷婷, 李艳艳, 朴金霞. 子宫内膜癌患者淋巴管间隙浸润预测因素研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(04): 403-409.
[4] 刘星辰, 刘娟, 魏宝宝, 刘洁, 刘辉. XIAP与XAF1异常表达与卵巢癌的相关性分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(04): 419-427.
[5] 杨一君, 董雯, 刘晓平, 石灿, 张磊, 谷琎, 龚咪, 华馥. 腹腔镜折叠对接缝合联合宫腔镜憩室开渠法治疗剖宫产瘢痕憩室的疗效[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(03): 330-337.
[6] 邹佳桐, 王颂扬, 徐薇, 余婷婷, 叶红霞, 谯小勇. 自然流产女性精神健康问题的相关危险因素分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(01): 77-84.
[7] 董双, 李晓莹, 孙立涛, 田家玮. 影像学技术在宫颈癌术前临床分期中的应用进展[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(01): 113-119.
[8] 戴佑任, 张悦, 李扬, 王聪, 陈婷, 程文俊, 罗成燕. 未分化/去分化子宫内膜癌的临床病理学特征及治疗研究[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(06): 660-668.
[9] 唐冬梅, 周胜兰, 胡正昌, 邱小明, 宿宓, 熊雯, 魏璐, 范从红, 魏素梅, 罗丹. 妊娠合并恶性间皮瘤1例并文献复习[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(06): 722-730.
[10] 郭伟林, 李运涛, 尚培中, 李晓武, 李伟. 胰腺癌S100A4和Midkine表达研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 149-152.
[11] 甘开梅, 黄剑. 肺癌干细胞对EGFR-TKI耐药影响的研究进展[J]. 中华细胞与干细胞杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(01): 36-44.
[12] 李峻峰, 李军, 孙勤丰, 孙建光, 孔祥兴. 九例结肠髓样癌的临床病理特征分析[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 248-252.
[13] 岳瑞雪, 孔令欣, 郝鑫, 杨进强, 韩猛, 崔国忠, 王建军, 张志生, 孔凡庭, 张维, 何文博, 李现桥, 周新平, 徐东宏, 胡崇珠. 乳腺癌HER2蛋白表达水平预测新辅助治疗疗效的真实世界研究[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(07): 765-770.
[14] 毛高才, 张建波, 袁一方, 毛小波, 戴慧勇, 王哲. 耳后淋巴结内涎腺透明细胞型嗜酸性腺瘤的诊断学特征[J]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2023, 11(04): 261-265.
[15] 刘迎, 尹嫚, 杨林青, 王云飞. 子宫颈浸润性复层产黏液的癌的诊断学特征并文献复习[J]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 173-177.
阅读次数
全文


摘要