Open Access

Use of NRP1, a novel biomarker, along with VEGF-C, VEGFR-3, CCR7 and SEMA3E, to predict lymph node metastasis in squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue

  • Authors:
    • Hani Al‑Shareef
    • Shin‑Ichiro Hiraoka
    • Noriaki Tanaka
    • Yosuke Shogen
    • Atsushi‑Doksa Lee
    • Sanam Bakhshishayan
    • Mikihiko Kogo
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: September 21, 2016     https://doi.org/10.3892/or.2016.5116
  • Pages: 2444-2454
  • Copyright: © Al‑Shareef et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

Lymph node (LN) metastasis has been suggested as a major prognostic factor for oral cancer. Knockdown of the growth factors and receptors involved in these metastatic mechanisms could significantly reduce LN metastasis and improve the survival of oral cancer patients after treatment. The present study, therefore, aimed to evaluate the expression levels of the following growth factors and receptors in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the tongue: the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)‑C and VEGF‑D, which bind to the cell surface tyrosine kinase receptor VEGF receptor‑3 (VEGFR‑3); C‑C motif chemokine receptor 7 (CCR7); neuropilin (NRP)1 and NRP2; and semaphorin 3E (SEMA3E). Furthermore, we assessed microvessel density (MVD) and lymphatic vessel density (LVD) to demonstrate the correlation between these factors and regional LN metastasis, with respect to the clinicopathological features. Finally, we analyzed the correlation between these proteins and overall or disease‑free survival, in order to demonstrate their prognostic value. Univariate analysis revealed a significant association between LN metastasis and the expression levels of VEGF‑C, VEGFR‑3, CCR7, NRP1, and SEMA3E, as well as LVD, in SCC cells. In contrast, multivariate analysis identified associations between LN metastasis and NRP1 expression, as well as between LN metastasis and LVD; however, no correlation was found between LN metastasis and the expression levels of the other proteins. The expression levels of VEGF‑C, VEGFR‑3, NRP1, and SEMA3E, as well as LVD, were correlated with disease‑free survival time. These results indicate that LN metastasis is associated with poor survival in SCC. This study suggests that NRP1 expression and LVD are independent factors that are likely to predict the risk of LN metastasis in SCC of the tongue, whereas the expression of VEGF‑C, VEGFR‑3, CCR7, and SEMA3E are non‑independent predictive factors.
View Figures
View References

Related Articles

Journal Cover

November-2016
Volume 36 Issue 5

Print ISSN: 1021-335X
Online ISSN:1791-2431

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Al‑Shareef H, Hiraoka SI, Tanaka N, Shogen Y, Lee AD, Bakhshishayan S and Kogo M: Use of NRP1, a novel biomarker, along with VEGF-C, VEGFR-3, CCR7 and SEMA3E, to predict lymph node metastasis in squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue. Oncol Rep 36: 2444-2454, 2016.
APA
Al‑Shareef, H., Hiraoka, S., Tanaka, N., Shogen, Y., Lee, A., Bakhshishayan, S., & Kogo, M. (2016). Use of NRP1, a novel biomarker, along with VEGF-C, VEGFR-3, CCR7 and SEMA3E, to predict lymph node metastasis in squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue. Oncology Reports, 36, 2444-2454. https://doi.org/10.3892/or.2016.5116
MLA
Al‑Shareef, H., Hiraoka, S., Tanaka, N., Shogen, Y., Lee, A., Bakhshishayan, S., Kogo, M."Use of NRP1, a novel biomarker, along with VEGF-C, VEGFR-3, CCR7 and SEMA3E, to predict lymph node metastasis in squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue". Oncology Reports 36.5 (2016): 2444-2454.
Chicago
Al‑Shareef, H., Hiraoka, S., Tanaka, N., Shogen, Y., Lee, A., Bakhshishayan, S., Kogo, M."Use of NRP1, a novel biomarker, along with VEGF-C, VEGFR-3, CCR7 and SEMA3E, to predict lymph node metastasis in squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue". Oncology Reports 36, no. 5 (2016): 2444-2454. https://doi.org/10.3892/or.2016.5116