MDM2 is a useful prognostic biomarker for resectable gastric cancer
Article first published online: 5 MAR 2013
© 2013 Japanese Cancer Association
Volume 104, Issue 5, pages 590–598, May 2013
How to Cite
(Cancer Sci 2013; 104: 590–598)
- Issue published online: 15 APR 2013
- Article first published online: 5 MAR 2013
- Accepted manuscript online: 24 JAN 2013 11:55PM EST
- Manuscript Accepted: 20 JAN 2013
- Manuscript Revised: 12 JAN 2013
- Manuscript Received: 20 NOV 2012
- Priority Academic Program Development (PAPD) of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions
- National Natural Science Foundation of China. Grant Numbers: 30930080, 81161120537/H16
|cas12111-sup-0001-DataS1.doc||Word document||53K||Data S1. Details of: patients and specimens; tissue microarray construction and immunohistochemistry; cell culture; apoptosis assay; Western blot analysis; Transwell migration assay; scratch migration assay; and statistical analysis.|
|cas12111-sup-0002-FigS1.tif||image/tif||2356K||Fig. S1. Schematic representation of this study.|
|cas12111-sup-0003-FigS2.tif||image/tif||3103K||Fig. S2. Representative images of MDM2 immunohistochemical staining in gastric cancer. (A) Negative staining; (B) weak positive staining; (C) moderate positive staining; (D) strong positive staining. Scale line = 25 μm.|
|cas12111-sup-0004-FigS3.tif||image/tif||1991K||Fig. S3. Receiver operating characteristic curves were obtained to show the relation between areas under the curves (AUC) at different cut-off values of MDM2 immunoreactivity scores (IRS) for 1, 3, and 5 years of overall survival time.|
|cas12111-sup-0005-FigS4.tif||image/tif||2028K||Fig. S4. Kaplan–Meier curves depicting overall survival according to MDM2 expression patterns in non-tumors in the training cohort of gastric cancer patients. P-values were calculated using the log–rank test. Cum., cumulative.|
|cas12111-sup-0006-FigS5.tif||image/tif||2862K||Fig. S5. Kaplan–Meier curves depicting overall survival according to MDM2 expression patterns in gastric cancer patients in the validation cohort treated with or without fluorouracil–leucovorin–platinol (FLP). P-values were calculated using the log–rank test. S, surgery alone.|
|cas12111-sup-0007-FigS6.tif||image/tif||2492K||Fig. S6. Immunoreactivity score (IRS) comparison of the absolute value of ΔIRS (tumor tissue [T] – non-cancerous gastric tissue [N]) of MDM2 staining in different absolute values of ΔIRS of JWA staining subgroups.|
|cas12111-sup-0008-FigS7.tif||image/tif||2429K||Fig. S7. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic analyses for the clinical risk score (TNM stage, histological type, and tumor diameter), the combined MDM2 or MDM2 plus JWA, and clinical risk score in the validation cohort of gastric cancer patients. AUC, area under the curve.|
Table S1. Distributions of demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics of gastric cancer patients treated with or without chemotherapy.
Table S2. Univariate Cox regression analysis of MDM2 or MDM2/JWA expression and clinicopathologic variables predicting survival in three cohorts of patients with gastric cancer treated with surgery alone.
Table S3. Multivariate Cox regression analysis assessing the predictive significance of MDM2 expression in radical gastrectomy patients treated with or without fluorouracil–leucovorin–oxaliplatin (FLO).
Table S4. Multivariate Cox regression analysis assessing the predictive significance of MDM2 expression in radical gastrectomy patients treated with or without fluorouracil–leucovorin–platinol (FLP).
Please note: Wiley-Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.