Comprehensive evaluation of NT5E/CD73 expression and its prognostic significance in distinct types of cancers

Jiang, Tao; Xu, Xiaofeng; Qiao, Meng; Li, Xuefei; Zhao, Chao; Zhou, Fei; Gao, Guanghui; Wu, Fengying; Chen, Xiaoxia; Su, Chunxia; Ren, Shengxiang; Zhai, Changyun; Zhou, Caicun

doi:10.1186/s12885-018-4073-7

BMC Cancer

Table 1 Baseline Characteristics of included studies

From: Comprehensive evaluation of NT5E/CD73 expression and its prognostic significance in distinct types of cancers

Author	Tumor type	Year	No. of cases	CD73+ No.	Positive rate	Test methods	Definition of high expression
Hoon et al.	Ovarian cancer	2012	167	117	70.10%	IHC	using a 4-value grade ( >0 score)*
Anna et al.	Breast cancer	2012	136	101	74.30%	IHC	> median expression levels
Wu et al.	Colorectal Cancer	2012	223	100	44.80%	IHC	using X-tile program to determine the cutoff value
Wu et al.	Colorectal Cancer	2012	135	68	50.40%	IHC	using X-tile program to determine the cutoff value
Lu et al.	Gastric cancer	2013	68	31	45.60%	IHC	semi-quantitative method >5**
Xiong et al.	Gallbladder cancer	2014	108	59	54.60%	IHC	the percent of positively stained cells was >10 %
Martin et al.	Ovarian cancer	2015	208	104	50.00%	IHC	highest 20% CD73 expression was used as a cutoff
Marian et al.	Bladder Cancer	2015	174	46	26.40%	IHC	semi-quantitative 3-scale scoring system: =2***
Yu et al.	Renal cell carcinoma	2015	159	75	47.20%	IHC	using a 4-value intensity score ( >2 score)
Zhang et al.	Rectal adenocarcinoma	2015	90	47	52.20%	IHC	> median expression levels
Bruno et al.	Prostate Cancer	2015	285	NA	NA	IF	> median mean fluorescence intensity
Ren et al.	HNSCC	2016	162	100	61.70%	IHC	> median expression levels
Ren et al.	Oral squamous cell carcinoma	2016	113	66	58.40%	IHC	> 10% positively stained cells
Zhang et al.	Colorectal Cancer	2016	566	283	50.00%	MA	> median expression levels
Yusuke et al.	Non-small-cell lung cancer	2017	642	66	10.30%	IHC	H-scores that met or exceeded the individual cutoffs

*4-value grade: CD73 expression levels were graded on a scale of 0 to 3 based on cytoplasmic and membrane staining intensity and the proportion of positive tumor cells by an expert pathologist who was blinded to the patient’s clinical records. The staining was graded as 0 if no cancer cells were reactive, 1 if staining was weakly positive in <1/3 of cancer cells, 2 if staining was weakly positive in >2/3 of cancer cells, or strongly positive in >1/3 of cancer cells, and 3 if staining was weakly positive in most cancer cells, or strongly positive in >2/3 of cancer cells. Immunohistochemical staining for CD73 in ovarian cancer tissue was classified as negative (grade 0) or positive (grade 1 to 3).
**Semi-quantitative method: The percentage of positive cells was scored 0 for staining of < 1%, 1 for staining of 2%-25%, 2 for staining of 26%-50%, 3 for staining of 51%-75%, and 4 for staining > 75% of the cells examined. Staining intensity was calculated, no coloring, slightly yellow, brown yellow and tan stains were marked as 0, 1, 2 and 3. Finally, we calculated the product of staining intensity and positive cell percentage: ≤ 5 was de ned as negative and ≥ 6 as positive.
***Semi-quantitative 3-scale scoring system, score 0: no staining; score 1+: weak staining; score 2+: strong staining.
H-scores were calculated by multiplying the intensity score (0, absent; 1, weak; 2, moderate; 3, strong) by the percentage of stained cells (0–100%) to yield a value of 0–300.
No., number; IHC, Immunohistochemistry; IF, immunofluoresence; MA, microarray analysis; HNSCC, Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma; NA, not applicable.

Back to article page

ISSN: 1471-2407

Contact us

Submission enquiries: bmccancer@biomedcentral.com
General enquiries: ORSupport@springernature.com