Contrasting The Protein Abundance Of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Between Primary And Corresponding Metastatic Lymph Nodes In Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

BackgroundPrimary bronchial lung cancer is one of the most common malignant tumor, themortality rate of malignant tumors in the first place. Its treatment has become thefocus of attention, but the effect is not ideal. Although some patients with clinicalstage, but the same treatment the effect difference between; and primary tumors andcorresponding metastatic foci in response to treatment is often have very different.There is a close relationship between the molecular biological characteristics and thetumor of these differences, it is necessary to study the characteristics of lung cancergene, molecular biological characters, to the greatest extent optimize individualizedtreatment plan, improve the curative effect, survival, reduce adverse reaction oftreatment. At present, the molecular biology research on non small cell lung cancer(non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC) in primary foci of different molecularbiomarkers in expression, and the relationship between the expression of state ofprimary and metastatic cancer molecular markers of less. The purpose of this studywas to the expression of EGFR protein interactions and the comparison betweenNSCLC patients with primary and metastatic lymph node, and provide the basis forthe reasonable treatment of NSCLC. Objective1.To investigate the abundance of EGFR NSCLC expression in primary tumors andcorresponding metastatic lymph node status.2. Comparison of correlation between primary tumors and corresponding lymph nodemetastasis of EGFR expression abundance.3.Comparison of primary foci and corresponding metastatic lymph nodes relationshipbetween EGFR expression abundanc and clinical pathological factors.MethodsWe selected20cases of pathologically diagnosed NSCLC patients, as the object ofstudy. Including10cases of adenocarcinoma,6cases of squamous cell carcinoma,2cases of adenosquamous carcinoma,2cases of large cell carcinoma. Application ofgeneral type two step immunohistochemical staining, the specimen by serial sectionsof4μm, conventional dewaxing and hydration, blocking of3%H2O2by pepsindigestion, plus EGFR, monoclonal antibody (anti)4℃overnight;37℃rewarming,joined the general IgG antibody-HRP multimers (PV-6000),37℃isothermal reaction(each step with PBS wash), finally DAB color, microscopy, termination of color.Haematoxylin slightly counterstained, dehydration and transparent sheet, andobserved with light microscope. Positive, negative control group, and blank control:the positive expression of known tissue as positive control, resistance as a blankcontrol to PBS instead.Packet processing data using SPSS13statistical software, Kruskal-Wallis Hmethod for analysis of EGFR protein expression and gender, age, TNM staging andpathological type, use Spearman method to compare primary tumors and metastaticlymph nodes of the expression of EGFR protein abundance correlation, usingMcNemar methods don’t compare primary foci and metastatic lymph node positiveexpression rate of EGFR and the high rate of differential expression. All statisticaltests were two-sided. The test level α=0.05. Results1. EGFR abundance in primary foci and metastatic lymph nodes is not the same.Primary tumors was70%, the high expression rate was60%(++~+++), includingweak positive (+) in2cases, moderate positive (++)8cases, strong positive (+++) in4patients. Metastatic tumors was55%, the high expression rate was40%(++~+++),including weak positive (+) in3cases, moderate positive (++)4cases, strong positive(+++)4cases. Primary foci and metastatic lymph nodes were not statisticallysignificant positive expression rate of EGFR and high expression rate difference (P=0.508and0.289).2. Expression of primary EGFR abundance and pathological types are related(P=0.018), adenocarcinoma EGFR expression abundance and squamous cellcarcinoma was statistically significant differences in P=0.003, abundance and lymphnode metastasis; EGFR expression abundance and pathological type, P=0.720. Theprimary tumor, metastasis of lymph node in the EGFR expression was not associatedwith gender, age and TNM staging. Primary foci and metastatic foci were positive/negative/positive, negative, positive/negative, negative/positive, not associatedwith sex, age, pathological type and clinical stage (P>0.05).3. Primary foci and metastatic lymph nodes in the expression of EGFR proteinabundance is not relevant, P=0.194.Conclusions1.NSCLC primary foci and metastatic lymph nodes had higher EGFR expression rate.Primary foci and metastatic lymph node positive expression rate of EGFR and highexpression rate showed no significant difference (70%vs55%,60%vs40%).2. NSCLC primary foci and metastatic lymph node positive expression of EGFR wasnot associated with abundance, so the expression of EGFR protein can not be used toreplace the primary foci of metastatic lymph nodes. 3.The primary EGFR expression abundance related to pathological type (P <0.05),shows that the expression abundance of EGFR is affected by pathological types.