Correlation between serum IGFBP1 expression level and clinicopathological features and its diagnostic value in patients with gastric cancer

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-2015.2025.01.003

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the correlation between the expression level of serum insulin-like growth factor binding protein 1 (IGFBP1) and clinicopathological features and its diagnostic value in patients with gastric cancer.

Methods

A total of 192 patients with gastric cancer diagnosed and treated in Affiliated Hospital of Yan'an University from January 2021 to December 2023 were retrospectively selected as the gastric cancer group and 192 patients with benign gastric lesions as the control group. Serum IGFBP1 expression levels of the subjects were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). General data and clinicopathological features of patients were collected and sorted out, differences in serum IGFBP1 expression levels of patients with different data and clinicopathological features were analyzed, and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was drawn to evaluate the diagnostic value of serum IGFBP1 expression levels in gastric cancer.

Results

The proportions of patients with Helicobacter pylori infection, family history of gastric cancer, drinking and high-salt spicy diet in gastric cancer group were significantly higher than those in control group (all P＜0.05). The serum IGFBP1 expression level in gastric cancer group was significantly higher than that in control group (P＜0.001). The serum IGFBP1 expression level in patients with low differentiation, stageⅢ-Ⅳ, depth of invasion stage T4, lymph node metastasis and remote metastasis was significantly higher than that in patients with high/moderate differentiation, stage I-Ⅱ, depth of invasion stage T1-T3, no lymph node metastasis and no remote metastasis (all P＜0.001). The proportion of patients with low differentiation, stage Ⅲ-Ⅳ, T4 stage of infiltration, lymph node metastasis and remote metastasis in serum IGFBP1 high expression group was significantly higher than that in low expression group (all P＜0.001).ROC analysis results showed that the AUC of serum IGFBP1 expression level was 0.800, and when the cut-off value was 40.755, the sensitivity was 0.656 and the specificity was 0.964.

Conclusion

Serum IGFBP1 expression level is significantly increased in patients with gastric cancer, and it is closely related to clinicopathological features, especially in patients with low differentiation, advanced stage, high infiltration depth and metastasis, the expression level is higher, which has potential diagnostic value in gastric cancer.

Key words: Gastric cancer, Gastric benign lesions, Insulin-like growth factor binding protein 1, Clinicopathological features, Diagnosis

Haijing1 Wang, Sirong Mi, Jing Gao. Correlation between serum IGFBP1 expression level and clinicopathological features and its diagnostic value in patients with gastric cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2025, 15(01): 11-15.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhxhbyyxzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-2015.2025.01.003

https://zhxhbyyxzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2025/V15/I01/11

Figures/Tables 5

组别	例数	性别[例(%)]		年龄(岁, $\bar{x}$ ±s)	体重指数(kg/m², $\bar{x}$ ±s)	幽门螺杆菌感染[例(%)]		胃癌家族史[例(%)]
组别	例数	男	女	年龄(岁, $\bar{x}$ ±s)	体重指数(kg/m², $\bar{x}$ ±s)	是	否	有	无
胃癌组	192	92(47.92)	100(52.08)	53.13±5.61	22.75±2.25	74(38.54)	118(61.46)	33(17.19)	159(82.81)
对照组	192	87(45.31)	105(54.69)	52.41±5.39	22.68±2.41	55(28.65)	137(71.35)	18(9.38)	174(90.63)
χ ²/t值		0.262		1.280	0.287	4.214		5.087
P值		0.609		0.201	0.775	0.040		0.024
组别	例数	吸烟[例(%)]		饮酒[例(%)]		高盐辛辣饮食[例(%)]
组别	例数	是	否	是	否	是	否
胃癌组	192	81(42.19)	111(57.81)	88(45.83)	104(54.17)	93(48.44)	99(51.56)
对照组	192	73(38.02)	119(61.98)	69(35.94)	123(64.06)	73(38.02)	119(61.98)
χ ²/t值		0.694		3.890		4.245
P值		0.405		0.049		0.039

组别	例数	性别[例(%)]		年龄(岁, $\bar{x}$ ±s)	体重指数(kg/m², $\bar{x}$ ±s)	幽门螺杆菌感染[例(%)]		胃癌家族史[例(%)]
组别	例数	男	女	年龄(岁, $\bar{x}$ ±s)	体重指数(kg/m², $\bar{x}$ ±s)	是	否	有	无
胃癌组	192	92(47.92)	100(52.08)	53.13±5.61	22.75±2.25	74(38.54)	118(61.46)	33(17.19)	159(82.81)
对照组	192	87(45.31)	105(54.69)	52.41±5.39	22.68±2.41	55(28.65)	137(71.35)	18(9.38)	174(90.63)
χ ²/t值		0.262		1.280	0.287	4.214		5.087
P值		0.609		0.201	0.775	0.040		0.024
组别	例数	吸烟[例(%)]		饮酒[例(%)]		高盐辛辣饮食[例(%)]
组别	例数	是	否	是	否	是	否
胃癌组	192	81(42.19)	111(57.81)	88(45.83)	104(54.17)	93(48.44)	99(51.56)
对照组	192	73(38.02)	119(61.98)	69(35.94)	123(64.06)	73(38.02)	119(61.98)
χ ²/t值		0.694		3.890		4.245
P值		0.405		0.049		0.039

项目	类别	例数	IGFBP1(ng/mL)	F/t值	P值
病变部位	胃窦	48	51.57±21.74	0.601	0.549
	胃体	70	47.28±22.30
	胃贲门	74	50.86±26.17
病灶大小	＜5cm	88	48.54±23.00	-0.640	0.523
	≥5cm	104	50.74±24.32
分化程度	高/中分化	108	32.82±14.24	-19.147	0.000
	低分化	84	71.48±13.40
TNM分期	I～Ⅱ期	82	33.25±14.17	-10.400	0.000
	Ⅲ～Ⅳ期	110	62.02±21.85
浸润深度	T1～T3期	91	33.48±13.96	-11.877	0.000
	T4期	101	64.37±20.97
淋巴结转移	有	80	71.35±13.77	16.798	0.000
	无	112	34.30±15.92
远端转移	有	93	68.96±14.26	17.679	0.000
	无	99	31.67±14.92

组别	例数	病变部位			病灶大小		分化程度
组别	例数	胃窦(n=48)	胃体(n=70)	胃贲门(n=74)	＜5cm(n=88)	≥5cm(n=104)	高/中分化(n=108)	低分化(n=84)
IGFBP1高表达组	95	23(24.21)	29(30.53)	43(45.26)	41(43.16)	54(56.84)	14(14.74)	81(85.26)
IGFBP1低表达组	97	25(25.77)	41(42.27)	31(31.96)	47(48.45)	50(51.55)	94(96.91)	3(3.09)
χ ²值		4.066			0.542		131.681
P值		0.131			0.462		0.000
组别	例数	TNM分期		浸润深度		淋巴结转移		远端转移
组别	例数	I～Ⅱ(n=82)	Ⅲ～Ⅳ(n=110)	T1～T3(n=91)	T4(n=101)	有(n=80)	无(n=112)	有(n=93)	无(n=99)
IGFBP1高表达组	95	8(8.42)	87(91.58)	9(9.47)	86(90.53)	78(82.11)	17(17.89)	90(94.74)	5(5.26)
IGFBP1低表达组	97	74(76.29)	23(23.71)	82(84.54)	15(15.46)	2(2.06)	95(97.94)	3(3.09)	94(96.91)
χ ²值		90.347		108.462		126.514		161.394
P值		0.000		0.000		0.000		0.000

检验结果变量	AUC	SE	P值	95%CI	cut-off值	约登指数	敏感度	特异度
IGFBP1	0.800	0.025	0.000	0.752～0.849	40.755	0.620	0.656	0.964

References 25

[1]	王佩显, 单彪, 张倩倩, 等. 血清COL10A1、TK1、MIP-3α水平与胃癌患者病理特征的关系及其对腹膜转移的诊断价值研究[J].检验医学与临床, 2024, 21(12): 1727-1730, 1738.
[2]	朱炎焱, 古骏, 邹俊伟, 等. MutL蛋白同系物1/MutS蛋白同系物2表达缺失与弥漫浸润型胃癌临床病理特征及预后关系[J]. 中国医药导报, 2024, 21(16): 97-99, 106.
[3]	Meng F, Yang Y, Wang X, et al. Imaging lymph node regression can predict the pathological tumor regression grade in gastric cancer after neoadjuvant treatment[J]. Surgery, 2023, 174(4): 836-843.
[4]	Krautschneider SL, Troschel FM, Vadillo E, et al. Enzymatic Digestion of Cell-surface Heparan Sulfate Alters the Radiation Response in Triple-negative Breast Cancer Cells[J]. Arch Med Res, 2022, 53(8):826-839.
[5]	唐青, 王苏美, 龙顺钦, 等. 重楼皂苷I激活IGFBP1信号通路抑制肝癌细胞生长和增殖的作用机制[J]. 中华中医药杂志, 2022,37(2): 1091-1095.
[6]	熊珊, 申洪. IGFBP1在胃癌组织中的表达特点及其预后作用与机制的生物信息学分析[J]. 中国医学物理学杂志, 2024, 41(5):628-639.
[7]	Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene FL, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual[M]. 8th Ed. NewYork: Springer, 2016: 203-220.
[8]	韩艳丽, 邹俊伟, 汪俊茹. MMR及PD-L1在胃癌中的病理学表达特征及相关性研究[J]. 皖南医学院学报, 2023, 42(3): 236-239.
[9]	卢顺利, 李洪涛, 于建平, 等. 血清甲胎蛋白阳性胃癌患者临床病理特征与预后关系的研究[J]. 中国肿瘤临床, 2023, 50(1): 30-36.
[10]	张杰东, 刘兰侠, 刘杜先, 等. 胃癌组织CDK12、SIRT6蛋白表达变化及其与临床病理特征和预后的关系[J]. 山东医药, 2023,63(1): 55-58.
[11]	袁冬冬, 温艳艳, 何慧丽, 等. 胃癌组织中LC3、ATG5和SATB2-AS1在不同部位表达与临床病理特征及预后的相关性[J].实用癌症杂志, 2023, 38(2): 207-212.
[12]	Ji C, Ma Y, Zheng Z, et al. Borrmann Type IV Gastric Cancer:Computed Tomography Features and Corresponding Pathological Findings[J]. J Comput Assist Tomo, 2023, 48(2): 200-205.
[13]	王忆梅, 吕丹丹, 李茂新. 胃癌组织中泛素特异性肽酶49和结缔组织生长因子表达与临床病理特征和预后的关系研究[J]. 中国临床医生杂志, 2023, 51(8): 942-946.
[14]	黄飞, 孔琼琼. 胃癌组织MLH1、MSH2、MSH6和PMS2蛋白表达意义及与患者病理特征的关系研究[J]. 浙江医学, 2023, 45(19):2089-2092, 2096.
[15]	杨姮, 贾英, 黄晓英. 胃癌组织中miR-135a-5p、CDCA8表达与患者临床病理特征及预后的关系[J]. 山东医药, 2023, 63(19): 60-63.
[16]	Censi AD, Johansson H, Puntoni M, et al. Effect of low-dose tamoxifen on IGF-I/IGFBP-3 and estradiol/SHBG ratio and their prognostic/predictive effect in DCIS/LCIS/ADH[J]. J Clin Oncol,2024, 42(16): 10510-10510.
[17]	Xie Y, Sang Q, Da Q, et al. Improving diagnosis and outcome prediction of gastric cancer via multimodal learning using whole slide pathological images and gene expression[J]. Artif Intell Med,2024, 152: 102871.
[18]	Xie T, Li Y, Yang L, et al. A random forest model to predict the efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibody in lung adenocarcinoma[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2024, 42(16): e20558-e20558.
[19]	陈敬信, 王小玲. IRMA及SP免疫组化染色检测在结肠癌诊断中的意义[J]. 贵州医药, 2022, 46(12): 1940-1941.
[20]	Zhou X, Tan F, Zhang WT. A Strategy based on Bioinformatics and Machine Learning Algorithms Reveals Potential Mechanisms of Shelian Capsule against Hepatocellular Carcinoma[J]. Curr Pharm Design, 2024, 30(5): 377-405.
[21]	张泽天, 杨婕琳, 吴娜, 等. 胃癌组织RRBP1、LAMB3的mRNA表达水平及其与患者临床病理特征、预后的关系[J]. 广西医学,2023, 45(21): 2561-2565.
[22]	吴萌, 杜佳璇, 公小纪. 胃癌组织中METTL3的表达及其与患者临床病理特征及预后的关系[J]. 国际消化病杂志, 2024, 44(3):186-190.
[23]	Taghehchian N, Alemohammad R, Farshchian M, et al. Inhibitory role of LINC00332 in gastric cancer progression through regulating cell EMT and stemness[J]. Life Sci, 2022, 305: 120759.
[24]	厉冰, 尚华, 梅孝臣, 等. 长链非编码RNA ITGB1在胆囊癌组织表达及其对胆囊癌细胞增殖、迁移和侵袭的影响[J]. 中华实验外科杂志, 2022, 39(4): 653-656.
[25]	Marzocchi C, Capezzone M, Sagnella A, et al. Pregnancy-associated plasma protein A mRNA expression as a marker for differentiated thyroid cancer: results from a "surgical" and a "cytological"series[J].J Endocrinol Invest, 2022, 45(2): 369-378.

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export