Cargando…
Carboxypeptidase N1 is anticipated to be a synergy metrics for chemotherapy effectiveness and prognostic significance in invasive breast cancer
BACKGROUND: The incidence and mortality of invasive breast cancer (IBC) are increasing annually. Hence, it is urgently needed to determine reliable biomarkers for not only monitoring curative effects, but evaluating prognosis. In present study, we aim to determine the potential role of Carboxypeptid...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8555242/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34711246 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12935-021-02256-5 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: The incidence and mortality of invasive breast cancer (IBC) are increasing annually. Hence, it is urgently needed to determine reliable biomarkers for not only monitoring curative effects, but evaluating prognosis. In present study, we aim to determine the potential role of Carboxypeptidase N1 (CPN1) in IBC tissues on chemotherapeutic efficacy and poor prognosis. METHODS: The expression level of CPN1 in IBC tissue samples (n = 123) was quantified by tissue microarray technique and immunohistochemical staining. Moreover, sera of IBC patients (n = 34) that underwent three to five consecutive chemotherapy sessions were collected. The patients were randomly stratified into a training (n = 15) as well as a validation group (n = 19). The expression of serum CA153 and CPN1 was quantified by electrochemiluminescence and ELISA assay, respectively. RESULTS: By univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis, we show that CPN1 expression in IBC tissues, as an independent risk factor, is related to a poor overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) (P < 0.05). Analysis of the data revealed that CPN1 over-expression could be consistently linked to adverse clinicopathological features such as lymph node metastasis and the pathological stage (pTNM) (P < 0.05). The serum CPN1 level trajectory of individual patients generally decreased during chemotherapy. In line with these findings were changes in the follow-up ultrasonography and a consistent decrease in serum CPN1 levels. The comparison of the area under the receiver operating curves (ROC) revealed that CPN1 has a better surveillance value than CA153 in the training (AUC(CPN1) = 0.834 vs. AUC(CA153 )= 0.724) as well as the validation set (AUC(CPN1) = 0.860 vs. AUC(CA153) = 0.720) when comparing cycle2 versus cycle3. CONCLUSIONS: CPN1 is a suitable potential biomarker for chemotherapeutic surveillance purposes as well as being an appropriate prognostic indicator which would support an improved chemotherapy regimen. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12935-021-02256-5. |
---|