Annals of African medicine · 2026
Immunohistochemical Analysis of MUC1 and MUC4 Co-expression in Oral Leukoplakia and Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abidullah Mohammed
Аннотация
AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the immunohistochemical co-expression of MUC1 and MUC4 in oral leukoplakia (OL) and oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and assess their potential as biomarkers for diagnosing and prognosticating oral malignancies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue specimens from the archives of the Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology. A total of 80 histopathologically confirmed cases, consisting of 40 OL and 40 OSCC cases, were selected. Immunohistochemical staining for MUC1 and MUC4 was performed using specific monoclonal antibodies, and the expression was evaluated based on localization, intensity, and extent of staining. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS, with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: The study found that MUC1 and MUC4 expression were significantly higher in OSCC compared to OL. High MUC1 expression was observed in 82.5% of OSCC cases versus 30% in OL cases ( P < 0.001), and high MUC4 expression was found in 70% of OSCC cases versus 30% in OL ( P = 0.002). Co-expression of MUC1 and MUC4 was seen in 90% of OSCC cases and 65% of OL cases ( P = 0.027). Logistic regression analysis confirmed that OSCC diagnosis was a strong predictor of high MUC1 and MUC4 expression ( P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that MUC1 and MUC4 are significantly overexpressed in OSCC compared to OL, and their co-expression may serve as a valuable biomarker combination for early diagnosis and prognosis. Elevated expression of both mucins is associated with poor prognosis, indicating their potential for use in clinical practice for risk stratification and personalized treatment in OSCC patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue specimens from the archives of the Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology. A total of 80 histopathologically confirmed cases, consisting of 40 OL and 40 OSCC cases, were selected. Immunohistochemical staining for MUC1 and MUC4 was performed using specific monoclonal antibodies, and the expression was evaluated based on localization, intensity, and extent of staining. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS, with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: The study found that MUC1 and MUC4 expression were significantly higher in OSCC compared to OL. High MUC1 expression was observed in 82.5% of OSCC cases versus 30% in OL cases ( P < 0.001), and high MUC4 expression was found in 70% of OSCC cases versus 30% in OL ( P = 0.002). Co-expression of MUC1 and MUC4 was seen in 90% of OSCC cases and 65% of OL cases ( P = 0.027). Logistic regression analysis confirmed that OSCC diagnosis was a strong predictor of high MUC1 and MUC4 expression ( P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that MUC1 and MUC4 are significantly overexpressed in OSCC compared to OL, and their co-expression may serve as a valuable biomarker combination for early diagnosis and prognosis. Elevated expression of both mucins is associated with poor prognosis, indicating their potential for use in clinical practice for risk stratification and personalized treatment in OSCC patients.