scholarly journals Detection of cathepsin B, cathepsin L, cystatin C, urokinase plasminogen activator and urokinase plasminogen activator receptor in the sera of lung cancer patients

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 693-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
QINGYONG CHEN ◽  
JUN FEI ◽  
LIJUN WU ◽  
ZHONGYONG JIANG ◽  
YUQUAN WU ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Plasminogen Activator ◽  
Cystatin C ◽  
Cathepsin B ◽  
Cathepsin L ◽  
Urokinase Plasminogen Activator ◽  
Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients ◽  
Plasminogen Activator Receptor

Preoperative Plasma Soluble Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor as a Prognostic Marker in Rectal Cancer Patients. An Eortc-Receptor and Biomarker Group Collaboration

2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Riisbro ◽  
I.J. Christensen ◽  
H.J. Nielsen ◽  
N. Brünner ◽  
M. Nilbert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Plasminogen Activator ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Urokinase Plasminogen Activator ◽  
Early Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor ◽  
Plasminogen Activator Receptor

Background and aims Since approximately 30% of patients with Dukes’ stage B colorectal cancer will experience disease recurrence within five years of primary treatment, current staging of patients with early colorectal cancer apparently fails to adequately predict patient outcome. It has previously been shown that the preoperative plasma concentration of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) is associated with the survival of patients with early colorectal cancer. In this study we sought to confirm the independent prognostic value of suPAR in rectal cancer. Methods suPAR was retrospectively determined by two different versions of a suPAR ELISA in preoperatively collected plasma samples from a Swedish (n=354) and a Danish (n=255) cohort of rectal cancer patients. Results In both cohorts the suPAR concentration was significantly higher in Dukes’ stage D patients than in Dukes’ stage A-C patients (p<0.0001). Among Dukes’ stage A-C patients, no differences in median suPAR values were seen. In univariate analysis, continuous suPAR was found to be associated with survival (p<0.0001 in both cohorts). Of particular interest was that similar results were obtained for Dukes’ stage A and B patients when analyzed separately. In multivariate analysis, continuous suPAR was found in both cohorts to be independent of Dukes’ stage. Conclusions This study confirms that the preoperative concentration of plasma suPAR contains independent prognostic information on patients with rectal cancer. This result was independent of the two different versions of an in-house suPAR ELISA used to perform the analyses. The next step in the evaluation of suPAR as a prognostic parameter in rectal cancer will be to launch an appropriately dimensioned prospective study where the benefit of applying preoperative plasma suPAR measurement to clinical decision-making regarding adjuvant therapy is assessed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document