[Expression and clinical significance of LRFN4 in colorectal cancer tissue]

Objective: To investigate the expression and clinical significance of LRFN4 in colorectal cancer. Methods: A total of 210 cases of colorectal cancer tissues and 228 cases of corresponding surgical margin tissues were collected. Immunohistochemistry was employed to evaluate the expression of LRFN4 in colorectal cancer.The correlation between LRFN4 expression and clinicopathological features of colorectal cancer as well as patient outcome were analyzed. Results: The positive rate of LRFN4 in colorectal cancer and in non-cancer was 55.24%(116/210), and 37.28% (85/228) , respectively.The expression of LRFN4 in colorectal cancer tissues was higher than that in non-cancer tissues(χ(2)=14.196, P<0.001). High expression of LRFN4 was significantly correlated with tumor location(χ(2)=4.133,P=0.042), T staging(χ(2)=6.494,P=0.039), N staging(χ(2)=11.715,P=0.008), TNM staging(χ(2)=13.398,P=0.004), CEA (χ(2)=6.017, P=0.049), but without gender, age, degree of differentiation, M staging(P>0.05).The Kaplan-Meier survival curves indicated that high LRFN4 expression was associated with good survival (P<0.05). In addition, Cox proportional hazards model showed that the high expression of LRFN4(HR=0.585, P=0.018)was an independent risk factor for prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer. Conclusions: The expression of LRFN4 is up-regulated in colorectal cancer, which is significantly correlated with the clinicopathological features and prognosis. High expression of LRFN4 reduced the risk of death in patients with colorectal cancer.

Comparison of continuous and split-course radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma--an analysis of 1446 cases with squamous cell carcinoma grade 3

PURPOSE

An analysis of 1446 cases with squamous cell nasopharyngeal carcinoma Grade 3 was made for the comparison of treatment results of continuous (CG) and split-course (SG) radiotherapy regimens.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The patients were given their first definitive radiotherapy at our department from July 1977 to December 1980, 1093 cases by continuous treatment regimen, and 353 cases by split-course regimen. The interval of the split was 10-45 days, mean 28.6 days. Trials were nonrandomized, but the treatment conditions for both groups were the same.

RESULTS

The 5-year survival rate was 33.6% for CG, and 26.9% for SG. For Stage III and IV patients, the 5-year survival rate was 31% (290/933) for CG, and 21.5% (36/107) and 18.8% (17/90) for those with a split of 21-30 and 31-45 days, respectively (both p < 0.05); the 5-year local control rate was 27.4% (256/933) for CG, and 15.5% (26/167) (p < 0.01), and 15.5% (14/90) (p < 0.05) for those with a split of 21-30 and 31-45 days, respectively. The metastatic rate in 5-years was 21.59% vs. 27.48% for CG to SG (p < 0.01), but not different statistically for any subgroup. No relation was confirmed between local control rate and radiation dose.

CONCLUSION

According to the data obtained in this series, we believe that the treatment results of CG were superior to those of SG, especially for Stage III and IV patients, and those with a split of 21 days or more.