Hypoxia-inducible factor-2α mRNA expression in human renal cell carcinoma

Figures & data

Table I.  Clinical characteristics of the patients with RCC.

Tumour type [16]	cRCC No.	pRCC No.	chRCC No.	Total No.
Total	168	23	11	202
Male	97	16	4	117
Female	71	7	7	85
TNM stage [17]
I–II	76	13	5	94
III	37	5	4	46
IV	55	5	2	62
Nuclear grade [18]
1–2	41	12	2	55
3	90	9	8	107
4	37	2	1	40
Survival
Died from RCC	92	11	3	106
Died from other diseases	29	7	4	40
Alive	47	5	4	56

Table II.  Relative HIF-2α mRNA levels in kidney cortex and tumour tissue from corresponding kidney in different renal cell carcinoma types.

		HIF-2α mRNA (Relative levels)
Tumour type	No.	mean±SD	Median	Min–max	p-value
cRCC
kidney cortex	39	32.9±19.9	28.9	7.5–97.5	0.55
tumour	39	44.6±41.2	31.3	0.21–175
pRCC
kidney cortex	8	24.7±10.3	21.2a*	16.0–44.4	0.016*
tumour	8	11.4±9.4	6.9	3.8–31.2
chRCC
kidney cortex	3	26.4±11.7	20.7	18.6–39.8	0.83
tumour	3	26.2±22.2	25.5	4.4–48.8
All
Kidney cortex	50	31.2±18.4	24.8	7.5–97.5	0.71
Tumours	50	38.2±38.8	25.6	0.2–175

*Mann-Whitney U test.

a) Kidney cortex vs tumour pRCC.

SD standard deviation.

Table III.  Relative HIF-2α mRNA levels comparing levels in tumour tissue from different renal cell carcinoma types.

		HIF-2α mRNA (Relative levels)
Tumour type	No.	mean±SD	Median	Min–max	p-value
cRCC	168	41.9±40.1	29.1	0.05–261	<0.001
pRCC	23	11.3±9.0	9.1a*	1–37.5	0.006
chRCC	11	16.5±13.1	13.6b*	4.3–48.8	0.27
All	202	37.0±38.4	25.7	0.05–261

*Mann-Whitney U test.

a) Tumour cRCC vs tumour pRCC p < 0.001.

b) Tumour cRCC vs tumour chRCC p = 0.006.

SD standard deviation.

Figure 1.  Box-and-whisker plot of relative HIF-2α mRNA levels in relation to TNM stage in 168 cRCC, 23 pRCC, and 11 chRCC (cRCC: TNM I = 46, TNM II = 30, TNM III = 37, TNM IV = 55; pRCC: TNM I = 7, TNM II = 6, TNM III = 5, TNM IV = 5; chRCC: TNM I = 1, TNM II = 4, TNM III = 4, TNM IV = 2). Comparison of Hif-2α mRNA in TNM stage I versus TNM stage II-IV in cRCC (p = 0.01, Mann-Whitney test). Circles and asterisks represent outlying values, >1.5 and >3 box-lengths from the 75^th percentile, respectively.

Figure 2.  Box-and-whisker plot of relative HIF-2α mRNA levels in relation to nuclear grade (NG) in 168 cRCC, 23 pRCC, and 11 chRCC (cRCC: NG1 = 8, NG2 = 33, NG3 = 90, NG4 = 37; pRCC: NG1 = 4, NG2 = 8, NG3 = 9, NG4 = 2; chRCC: NG1 = 0, NG2 = 2, NG3 = 8, NG4 = 1). Trend for HIF-2α mRNA and nuclear grade 1-4 in cRCC (p = 0.006, Kruskal-Wallis test). Circles and asterisks represent outlying values.

Table IV.  Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in 168 patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Factor		Relative risk	95% Confidence Interval Lower–upper	p-value
Age	≤67 years	1.00
	>67 years	0.79	0.52–1.12	0.265
Gender	male	1.00
	female	1.50	0.98–2.30	0.065
Stage	I–II	1.0
	III–IV	8.90	5.00–15.87	<0.001
Grade	1–2	1.0
	3–4	1.47	0.83–2.58	0.188
HIF-2α	≥29.1 U	1.0
mRNA	<29.1 U	1.32	0.87–2.01	0.191

Kovacs G, Akhtar M, Beckwith BJ, Bugert P, Cooper CS, Delahunt B, et al. The Heidelberg classification of renal cell tumours. J Pathol 1997; 183: 131–3

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sobin, L, Wittekind, CH, International Union Against Cancer (UICC) TNM Classification of malignant tumours. 6th ed. 2002. p 193–195.

 Google Scholar

Fuhrman SA, Lasky LC, Limas C. Prognostic significance of morphologic parameters in renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1982; 6: 655–63

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar