肿瘤研究与临床
腫瘤研究與臨床
종류연구여림상
CANCER RESEARCH AND CLINIC
2014年
12期
805-807,815
,共4页
崔晋峰%娄蕾%曹力勇%王媛%李丹%崔爱荣%吴文新%李月红%张祥宏
崔晉峰%婁蕾%曹力勇%王媛%李丹%崔愛榮%吳文新%李月紅%張祥宏
최진봉%루뢰%조력용%왕원%리단%최애영%오문신%리월홍%장상굉
食管胃交界腺癌%远端胃癌%错配修复基因%hMLH1%hMSH2
食管胃交界腺癌%遠耑胃癌%錯配脩複基因%hMLH1%hMSH2
식관위교계선암%원단위암%착배수복기인%hMLH1%hMSH2
Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastic junction%Distal gastric adenocarcinoma%Mismatch repair gene%hMLH1%hMSH2
目的 分析hMLH1和hMSH2在食管胃交界腺癌和远端胃癌中的表达情况,探讨其在不同部位胃癌发生发展中的可能意义.方法 采用免疫组织化学染色法,对比检测52例食管胃交界腺癌和17例远端胃癌hMLH1和hMSH2在蛋白水平上的表达情况,分析表达差异及其临床病理意义.结果 食管胃交界腺癌组织中,hMLH1和hMSH2蛋白表达率分别为55.8％(29/52)和63.5％(33/52),远端胃癌中hMLH1和hMSH2蛋白的表达率分别为41.2％(7/17)和70.6％(12/17),两者的阳性表达率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).食管胃交界腺癌和远端胃癌hMLH1和hMSH2的表达与肿瘤的分化程度以及淋巴结转移均无明显相关性(P＞0.05).结论 hMLH1和hMSH2并不是食管胃交界腺癌和远端胃癌发生机制差异性的关键分子.
目的 分析hMLH1和hMSH2在食管胃交界腺癌和遠耑胃癌中的錶達情況,探討其在不同部位胃癌髮生髮展中的可能意義.方法 採用免疫組織化學染色法,對比檢測52例食管胃交界腺癌和17例遠耑胃癌hMLH1和hMSH2在蛋白水平上的錶達情況,分析錶達差異及其臨床病理意義.結果 食管胃交界腺癌組織中,hMLH1和hMSH2蛋白錶達率分彆為55.8％(29/52)和63.5％(33/52),遠耑胃癌中hMLH1和hMSH2蛋白的錶達率分彆為41.2％(7/17)和70.6％(12/17),兩者的暘性錶達率差異無統計學意義(P＞0.05).食管胃交界腺癌和遠耑胃癌hMLH1和hMSH2的錶達與腫瘤的分化程度以及淋巴結轉移均無明顯相關性(P＞0.05).結論 hMLH1和hMSH2併不是食管胃交界腺癌和遠耑胃癌髮生機製差異性的關鍵分子.
목적 분석hMLH1화hMSH2재식관위교계선암화원단위암중적표체정황,탐토기재불동부위위암발생발전중적가능의의.방법 채용면역조직화학염색법,대비검측52례식관위교계선암화17례원단위암hMLH1화hMSH2재단백수평상적표체정황,분석표체차이급기림상병리의의.결과 식관위교계선암조직중,hMLH1화hMSH2단백표체솔분별위55.8％(29/52)화63.5％(33/52),원단위암중hMLH1화hMSH2단백적표체솔분별위41.2％(7/17)화70.6％(12/17),량자적양성표체솔차이무통계학의의(P＞0.05).식관위교계선암화원단위암hMLH1화hMSH2적표체여종류적분화정도이급림파결전이균무명현상관성(P＞0.05).결론 hMLH1화hMSH2병불시식관위교계선암화원단위암발생궤제차이성적관건분자.
Objective To evaluate the difference of the expression of hMLH1 and hMSH2 between in adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG) and in distal gastric carcinoma (DGC).Methods Immunohistochemical staining was used to comparatively examine the expression of hMLHland hMSH2 at protein level in paraffin-embedded tissues of AEG (52 cases) and DGC (17 cases),and their clinicopathological significances were explored.Results In AEG,the positive expression rates of hMLH1 and hMSH2 were 55.8 ％ (29/52) and 63.5 ％ (33/52),respectively,and in DGC,those was 41.2 ％ (7/17) and 70.6 ％ (12/17),respectively.No difference in hMLH1 and hMSH2 expression was found between the two groups (P ＞ 0.05).There was no relationship between the expression of the two proteins and the clinical pathological features including tumor differentiation and lymph node metastasis (P ＞ 0.05).Conclusion hMLH1 and hMSH2 may not be the key factors in the different tumorigenic mechanisms of AEG and DGC.
