Vol 49, No 1 (2011)
Original paper
Published online: 2011-04-19

open access

Page views 1824
Article views/downloads 1900
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Correlation between Fas and FasL proteins expression in normal gastric mucosa and gastric cancer

Mariusz Gryko, Katarzyna Guzińska-Ustymowicz, Anna Pryczynicz, Dariusz Cepowicz, Adam Kukliński, Jolanta Czyżewska, Andrzej Kemona, Bogusław Kędra
DOI: 10.5603/FHC.2011.0020
Folia Histochem Cytobiol 2011;49(1):142-147.

Abstract

The study’s objective was to assess the expressions of Fas and FasL proteins in gastric cancer in correlation with chosen clinicohistological parameters. Fas and FasL expression was analyzed in 68 patients with gastric cancer, using the immunohistochemical method. The expression of Fas was found to be lower in gastric cancer cells than in healthy mucosa, both in the lining epithelium and in glandular tubes (28% vs. 48% and 44%; p < 0.001). The expression of FasL was also markedly lower in cancer cells than in glandular tubes, yet higher than in the lining epithelium (51% vs. 73% and 14%; p < 0.01). Positive expressions of FasL and Fas were lower in less advanced gastric cancer cells (T1, T2), than in more advanced tumors (T3, T4), but only in the case of FasL was this difference statistically significant (p < 0.05). Our findings seem to confirm the theory of the impact of apoptotic disorders at the level of Fas receptor and FasL protein in the process of gastric cancer formation and growth, which is manifested in the varied expressions of these proteins in gastric cancer and in the normal lining and glandular epithelium of the stomach. However, the lack of significant differences in the expressions of Fas and FasL in correlation to other clinicohistological parameters indicates the existence of mechanisms that have a greater impact on the process of differentiation of gastric cancers. This in our opinion eliminates these proteins as prognostic factors. (Folia Histochemica et Cytobiologica 2011; Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 142–147)

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file