|
Objective: To detect osteopontin (osteopontin, OPN) and matrix metalloproteinase -2 (the matrix metalloporteinases-2, MMP-2) expression in epithelial ovarian cancer, the relationship between their expression and clinicopathological parameters discussed OPN and MMP-2 in epithelial ovarian cancer, the role of the development, invasion and metastasis, possible mechanisms. Methods: 77 cases of ovarian paraffin specimens (10 normal ovaries, 10 patients with benign ovarian tumors, 7 cases with borderline ovarian tumors, 50 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer) using immunohistochemical SP method OPN and MMP-2 expression, and analysis of the patients with pathological stage, clinical stage, histological type and lymph node metastasis relations. Results: OPN, MMP-2 in 10 cases of normal ovarian tissue did not express OPN, MMP-2 expression, respectively, in 10 patients with benign ovarian tumors, 0/10, 2/10, in seven cases with borderline ovarian tumors the number of positive expression, respectively, 6/7, 5/7, the expression in 50 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer, 45/50, 42/50. Respectively, for comparison, OPN, MMP-2 in the expression of the ovarian cancer group were higher than normal group, benign and borderline tumor group, the difference was significant (p <0.05). 50 cases of epithelial ovarian cancer tissues, OPN and MMP-2 positive expression in histological grade distribution were: G 1 : 10/12, 10/12; G 2 < / sub>: 16/18, 14/18; G 3 : 19/20, 18/20; OPN positive expression rate increased with the histological grade increased at all levels of OPN expression The difference was statistically significant (P <0.05), OPN expression with histological grade was positively correlated (rS = 0.349, P = 0006 <0.05); MMP-2 expression and histologic grade was no significant difference (P> 0.05). . OPN and MMP-2 in the distribution of positive expression of tissue typing were: serous 25/27, 24/27; the mucous: 16/18, 15/18; endometrioid carcinoma: 4/5, 3/5 . Different histological type OPN was no significant difference between the expression of MMP-2. OPN and MMP-2 positive expression in the clinical stage distribution were: I - Ⅱ: 30/34, 27/34; Ⅲ - Ⅳ: 15/16, 15/16; with higher clinical stage, OPN, MMP -2 positive expression rate increased the respective periods OPN, MMP-2 expression difference was statistically significant (P <0.05), OPN, MMP-2 expression and clinical stage were positively correlated (rS = 0.401, rS = 0.383 , P <0.05). OPN, MMP-2 in the distribution without lymph node metastasis were: 28/32, 26/32; distribution of lymph node metastasis group were as follows: 17/18; 16/18. The two groups within the difference was significant (P <0.05), OPN, MMP-2 expression and lymph node metastasis were positively correlated (rS = 0.401,0.317, P <0.05). OPN, MMP-2 protein expression in epithelial ovarian cancer showed a positive correlation (r = 0.650 P = 0.000). Conclusion: OPN as a marker of epithelial ovarian cancer. OPN expression in epithelial ovarian cancer with clinical stage, histological grade, lymph node metastasis was positively related with histological type was no correlation; MMP-2 expression in epithelial ovarian cancer and clinical stage, lymph node metastasis was positively off, histological grade, histological type correlation. OPN, was positively correlated with the expression of MMP-2 protein in epithelial ovarian cancer, OPN and MMP-2 synergistically promote the development of ovarian cancer. By suppressing OPN, MMP-2 pathway may provide a new approach for the treatment of ovarian cancer.
|