The prognostic value of S-100 protein and Ki-67 index in olfactory neuroblastoma

被引:1
|
作者
Wang, Jie [1 ]
Wang, Weifang [1 ]
Wang, Li [1 ]
Tang, Tianci [1 ]
Hu, Chunyan [2 ]
Song, Xinmao [1 ]
机构
[1] Fudan Univ, Eye & ENT Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, 83 Fenyang Rd, Shanghai 200021, Peoples R China
[2] Fudan Univ, Eye & ENT Hosp, Dept Pathol, 83 Fenyang Rd, Shanghai 200031, Peoples R China
关键词
olfactory neuroblastoma; prognosis; Ki-67; S-100; MICROVESSEL DENSITY; EXPRESSION;
D O I
10.1093/jjco/hyac094
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Our study evaluated the prognostic value of S-100 protein and Ki-67 labeling index in 85 patients with olfactory neuroblastomas, and our results suggested that they were reliable prognostic factors. Objective To evaluate the prognostic value of S-100 protein and Ki-67 labeling index in olfactory neuroblastomas. Methods A retrospective study was conducted on a cohort of 85 patients with olfactory neuroblastomas. The immunohistochemical expression of S-100 and Ki-67 was assessed, and the predictive value of S-100 and Ki-67 was further evaluated. The optimal cutoff value of Ki-67 labeling index was determined using time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Overall survival and progression-free survival were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results A cut-off Ki-67 labeling index value of 67.5% was determined for prognosis in patients with olfactory neuroblastomas. There was a significant correlation between Ki-67 expression and cervical lymph node metastasis (P = 0.049). Compared with S-100 (+), S-100 (-) was associated with a higher rate of lymph node metastasis and a higher level of Ki-67 (P = 0.007, < 0.001, respectively), as well as an advanced Kadish stage (P = 0.037). Survival analyses showed that patients with S-100 (+) had better 5-year overall survival than those with S-100 (-) (P = 0.028), and patients with both S-100 (+) and Ki-67 (<67.5%) had superior 5-year overall survival compared with all the other patients (P = 0.0225). Conclusion Our findings suggest that S-100 combined with Ki-67 labeling index are reliable prognostic factors in patients with olfactory neuroblastomas.
引用
收藏
页码:1008 / 1013
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Prognostic value of Ki-67 index in primary intracranial tumors of infants
    Tahta, Alican
    Akalan, Nejat
    CHILDS NERVOUS SYSTEM, 2023, 39 (02) : 369 - 377
  • [2] Prognostic value of Ki-67 index in primary intracranial tumors of infants
    Alican Tahta
    Nejat Akalan
    Child's Nervous System, 2023, 39 : 369 - 377
  • [3] Prognostic Value of Ki-67 Proliferative Index in Diffuse Malignant Mesothelioma
    Zhang, W.
    McIntire, M.
    Bueno, R.
    Godleski, J.
    Chirieac, L.
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2011, 91 : 430A - 431A
  • [4] Prognostic Value of Ki-67 Proliferative Index in Diffuse Malignant Mesothelioma
    Zhang, W.
    McIntire, M.
    Bueno, R.
    Godleski, J.
    Chirieac, L.
    MODERN PATHOLOGY, 2011, 24 : 430A - 431A
  • [5] Prognostic value of KI-67 proliferation index in luminal breast cancers
    Dokcu, Seref
    Ali-Caparlar, Mehmet
    Cetindag, Oezhan
    Hakseven, Musluh
    Eroglu, Aydan
    CIRUGIA Y CIRUJANOS, 2023, 91 (01): : 1 - 8
  • [6] Prognostic Value of Ki-67 Index in Patients With Endometrial Stromal Sarcoma
    Meng, Yu
    Quan, Quan
    Zhang, Fenfen
    Liu, Yao
    Ren, Siling
    Mu, Xiaoling
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2022, 8
  • [7] Prognostic Value of Size, Node, and Ki-67 index (SiNK) in Breast Cancer
    Baskota, Swikrity U.
    Bhargava, Rohit
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2020, 100 (SUPPL 1) : 276 - 277
  • [8] Prognostic Value of Size, Node, and Ki-67 index (SiNK) in Breast Cancer
    Baskota, Swikrity U.
    Bhargava, Rohit
    MODERN PATHOLOGY, 2020, 33 (SUPPL 2) : 276 - 277
  • [9] Prognostic value of Ki-67 proliferating index in triple negative breast carcinomas
    Mrklic, Ivana
    Capkun, Vesna
    Pogorelic, Zenon
    Tomic, Snjezana
    PATHOLOGY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2013, 209 (05) : 296 - 301
  • [10] Prognostic value of Ki-67 in patients with ovarian cancer
    Wan, Su
    Su, Chang
    Wang, Yong
    Ding, Jin
    Jiang, Qingya
    Ding, Huafeng
    Ni, Guantai
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GYNAECOLOGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2025, 46 (01) : 76 - 81