Expression Pattern and Prognostic Utility of PME-1 in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Figures & data

Figure 1 Representative IHC staining of PME-1 in HCC. Representative images of PME-1 immunohistochemical staining from HCC patient samples used for correlation analysis. (A) Negative, (B) weak, (C) moderate, (D), strong. Scale bars = 50 μm.

Table 1 Patient Characteristics

Characteristics	Number	%
Total	95	100
Mean age (y)	49 (20–79)
Gender
Male	75	78.9
Female	20	21.1
Tumor Size
>5cm	53	55.8
≤5cm	42	44.2
Differentiation
Poor	55	57.9
Well	40	42.1
Tumor Number
Multiple	44	46.3
Single	51	53.7
Metastasis
Yes	57	60.0
No	38	40.0
Liver Cirrhosis Status
Present	37	38.9
Absent	58	61.1
Serum AFP Level
>200ng/mL	38	40.0
≤200ng/mL	57	60.0
Serum HBV Level
>1000IU/mL	52	54.7
≤1000IU/mL	43	45.3
Recurrence
Yes	47	49.5
No	48	50.5

Figure 2 Comparison of PME-1 expression between HCC tissues and paired adjacent noncancerous liver tissue. (A) The representative expression patterns of PME-1 in four cases. Scale bars = 50μm. (B) PME-1 protein expression in HCC was significantly higher than that in normal liver tissues (P < 0.0001). (C) PME-1 mRNA expression level was relatively higher in HCC compared with that in normal liver tissues (P < 0.0001). Data were analyzed with 2-related samples Wilcoxon test.

Abbreviations: ANT, adjacent noncancerous tissue; T, cancer tissues.

Table 2 Positive Rate of PME-1 Expression among HCC Cancer Tissues and Paired Adjacent Noncancerous Tissues

	PME-1 Expression		Positive Rate	P value
	Positive	Negative
T	80	15	84.2%	<0.001*
ANT	29	66	30.5%

Note: *P<0.05.

Abbreviations: T, cancer tissues; ANT, adjacent noncancerous tissues; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma.

Table 3 Correlations Between PME-1 Expression and the Clinicopathological Characteristics of Patients with HCC

Characteristics	PME-1 High	PME-1 Low	χ^2	P value
Gender
Male	39	36	3.405	0.065
Female	15	5
Age
>49y	32	21	0.611	0.435
≤49y	22	20
Tumor Size
>5cm	34	19	2.610	0.106
≤5cm	20	22
Differentiation
Poor	36	19	3.950	0.047*
Well	18	22
Tumor Number
Multiple	33	11	11.016	0.001*
Single	21	30
Metastasis
Yes	38	19	5.607	0.018*
No	16	22
Liver Cirrhosis Status
Present	24	13	1.590	0.207
Absent	30	28
Serum AFP Level
>200ng/mL	25	13	2.067	0.151
≤200ng/mL	29	28
Serum HBV Level
>1000IU/mL	31	21	0.360	0.548
≤1000IU/mL	23	20
Recurrence
Yes	35	12	11.780	0.001*
No	19	29

Note: *P<0.05.

Abbreviations: HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; HBV, hepatitis B virus; AFP, α-fetoprotein.

Figure 3 PME-1 expression was correlated with poor survival. Kaplan–Meier analysis and Log rank test showed that patients with high expression of PME-1 had a shorter survival time than that with low PME-1 expression (P < 0.001).

Table 4 Univariate Log Rank Analyses

Parameters		Category	No. of Cases	Overall Survival
			No. of Events	P-value
Age	Male	75	33	0.748
	Female	20	8
Gender	>49y	53	22	0.719
	≤49y	42	19
Tumor size	>5cm	53	29	0.005*
	≤5cm	42	12
Differentiation	Poor	55	30	0.004*
	Well	40	11
Tumor number	Multiple	44	30	<0.001*
	Single	51	11
Metastasis	Yes	57	36	<0.001*
	No	38	5
Liver cirrhosis status	Present	37	16	0.858
	Absent	58	25
Serum AFP level	>200ng/mL	38	17	0.459
	≤200ng/mL	57	24
Serum HBV level	>1000IU/mL	52	30	0.001*
	≤1000IU/mL	43	11
Recurrence	Yes	47	33	<0.001*
	No	48	8
PME-1 expression level	High expression	54	34	<0.001*
	Low expression	41	7

Note: *P<0.05.

Abbreviations: AFP, α-fetoprotein; HBV, hepatitis B virus.

Table 5 Multivariate Survival Analyses

Variables	P value	HR	95% CI
			Lower	Upper
Age	0.830	1.074	0.559	2.064
Gender	0.960	1.023	0.416	2.515
Tumor size	0.644	1.196	0.559	2.562
Differentiation	0.446	1.397	0.591	3.301
Tumor number	0.732	1.209	0.409	3.575
Metastasis	0.004*	5.171	1.691	15.815
Liver cirrhosis status	0.504	1.267	0.632	2.539
Serum AFP level	0.604	1.229	0.563	2.685
Serum HBV level	0.062	2.084	0.965	4.500
Recurrence	0.021*	3.821	1.219	11.977
PME-1 expression level	0.009*	3.429	1.369	8.589

Note: *P<0.05.

Abbreviations: HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; AFP, α-fetoprotein; HBV, hepatitis B virus.