Prognostic significance of expression of cyclooxygenase‐2, vascular endothelial growth factor, and epidermal growth factor receptor in nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Abstract

High expression of COX-2, VEGF, and EGFR were independent adverse prognostic factors for long-term outcomes in nonmetastatic NPC independent of clinical stage.

Prognostic analysis of patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma following intensity modulated radiation therapy

“…Although 1 patient in the radiation-sensitive group revealed increased expression of EGFR, the staining intensity of the tissue derived from the patient was relatively decreased compared with that from the patients of the radiation-resistant group. This result supported studies by Pan et al (34) and Ma et al (35), which demonstrated that EGFR overexpression was associated with radiation resistance in head and neck cancer, and prognostically associated with a decreased local control rate and survival. Multiple studies have revealed that ~80% of primary NPC biopsies demonstrate increased expression of EGFR (36,37).…”

Epidermal growth factor receptor could play a prognostic role to predict the outcome of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A meta-analysis

“…Finally, we enrolled 15 eligible articles containing survival outcomes [11,[15][16][17][18]22,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35], among which two studies were written in Chinese [22,33], whereas the others were English articles. These eligible studies were published from 2002 to 2012.…”

“…Samples from North Asia (China, Korea, Japan, and Singapore) [15][16][17]22,24,25,[27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] were yielded for HRs. The result suggested that EGFR was associated with NPC prognosis, and HR for OS was 2.05 [1.17, 3.60], (I2 = 92%, P = 0.…”

“…Studies applying 10% or 25% as cut-off values were tested separately. A 10% value [17,22,24,25,27,[29][30][31] Table 2). …”

Prognostic Significance of the EGFR Pathway in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…In the European population heterogeneity was also significant (I 2 = 67%). The hazard ratios from Leong et al [16,], Fuji et al [17], Ma et al [18,], Pan et al [19], TaheriKadkhoda et al [20], Cao et al [21], Leong et al [16] and Fang [21] et al were taken with permission from the study by Sun et al [14]. The HR of Krikelis et al [22] was calculated by the authors using IBM SPSS 20.0 statistical software.…”