340P - The Prognostic Role Of High Mobility Group Box Protein-1 In Glioblastoma And Its Relationship With The Inflammatory Response

Date 10 September 2017
Event ESMO 2017 Congress
Session Poster display session
Topics Central Nervous System Malignancies
Translational Research
Presenter Mustafa Yildirim
Citation Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v109-v121. 10.1093/annonc/mdx366
Authors M. Yildirim1, D. Süren2, A.S. Alikanoğlu3, Ö. Çakın4, İ.A. Karacay3, C. Sezer3, V. Kaya5, A. Güzel6
  • 1İnternal Medicine, Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi, 27090 - Gaziantep/TR
  • 2Department Of Pathology, Health Science University, Antalya Education and Research Hospital, 07000 - Antalya/TR
  • 3Department Of Pathology, Antalya Education and Research Hospital, Antalya/TR
  • 4Department Of Anaesthesia And Reanimation, Akdeniz University School of Medicine, Antalya/TR
  • 5Department Of Radiation Oncology, Medstar Antalya Hospital, 07000 - Antalya/TR
  • 6Department Of Neurosurgery, Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi, 27090 - Gaziantep/TR

Abstract

Background

In this study, the prognostic role of HMGB expression determined with immunohistochemistry in patients with glioblastoma, and the relationship with the systemic inflammatory response indicators, NLR and PLR are studied.

Methods

This study included 30 patients who had a histopathologic diagnosis of glioblastoma and 14 patients who underwent surgery for a non-tumoural intracranial pathology in Antalya Education and Research Hospital between 2008-2012. HMGB1 expression was examined via immunohistochemical method.

Results

There were a significant difference of HMGB1 expression between the study and the control group (p = 0.002). HMGB1 expression was found positive in 23 patients (76.7%) and negative in 7 (23.3%) patients in the study group. In the control group, it was positive in 4 (28.6%) patients and negative in 10 (71.4%) patients. When NLR was used as the SIR indicator, it was determined as positive in 11 (36.7%) patients and as negative in 19 (63.3%) patients. When PLR was used as the SIR indicator, it was determined as positive in 10 (33.3%) patients and negative in 20 (66.7%) patients. Median follow up period of patients was 7.8±7.2 (Range 0.7-26.1). Median survival of the study group was 9.6±1.8 (95% Confidence Interval Range 6-13.2) (Figure 1). There wasn’t any significant difference between HMGB1 expression and survival (p = 0.692) (Figure 2). When NLR or PLR was used as the SIR indicator, there wasn’t any relation or difference determined between SIR and survival (p = 0.692, p = 0.740). A significant relation was determined between HMBG1 expression and NLR (p = 0.29). NLR was negative in 17 (73.9%) patients with positive HMGB1 expression, whereas it was negative in 2 (28.6%) patients with negative HMGB1 expression. HMGB1 expression suppresses SIR response. There wasn't any relationship between HMGB1 expression and PLR (p = 0,127).

Conclusions

Results we achieved in our study lead to the opinion that HMGB1 overexpression might have a role in the immune response to the developing tumour in patients with glioblastoma. While treatment strategies are developing in patients with glioblastoma, we believe that HMGB1 could be an important treatment goal.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Mustafa Yıldırım

Funding

None

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.