Skip to main content
. 2014 Jun 12;111(3):539–550. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.298

Table 1. MYO10 expression correlated with clinicopathological and biological factors in 120 breast cancer specimensa.

Factor Variable n (%) Fold of MYO10 expression (means±s.e.) P-value
Age
 
 
 
0.198b
  ⩽45 48 (40.00) 3.637±0.338  
  45–60 56 (46.67) 4.198±0.288  
 
>60
16 (13.33)
4.759±0.678
 
Size (mm)
 
 
 
0.069b
  <20 (stage T1) 44 (36.67) 3.663±0.356  
  20–50 (stage T2) 63 (52.50) 4.050±0.285  
 
⩾50 (stage T3)
13 (10.83)
5.349±0.580
 
ER
 
 
 
0.000c
  Positive 70 (58.33) 2.934±0.206  
 
Negative
50 (41.67)
5.608±0.304
 
PR
 
 
 
0.000c
  Positive 68 (56.67) 2.841±0.203  
 
Negative
52 (43.33)
5.628±0.290
 
Her2
 
 
 
0.521c
  Positive 45 (37.50) 3.872±0.262  
 
Negative
75 (62.50)
4.154±0.300
 
Luminal A vs B
 
 
 
0.227c
  A (ER+, PR+, Her2–, Ki-67 <14%) 22 (18.33) 3.238±0.400  
 
B (ER+, PR+, Her2–, Ki-67 ⩾14% or ER+, PR+, Her2+)
47 (39.17)
2.708±0.232
 
Her2 subtyped
 
 
 
0.000c
 
ER–, PR–, Her2+
31 (25.83)
4.523±0.291
 
Triple negative (ER–, PR–, Her2–)
 
 
 
0.000c
  Yes 20 (16.67) 7.354±0.350  
 
No
100 (83.33)
3.387±0.183
 
Tumour differentiation grade
 
 
 
0.000c
  Grade 1/2 75 (62.50) 2.883±0.200  
 
Grade 3
45 (37.50)
5.990±0.271
 
Lymph node metastasis
 
 
 
0.002c
  No (N–) 49 (40.83) 3.255±0.361  
  Yes (N+) 71 (59.17) 4.596±0.238  
a

Fold of MYO10 expression (GAPDH as control) in breast cancer tissue over adjacent nonmalignant tissue from the same specimen. Triple repeated per specimen.

b

One-way ANOVA.

c

Independent t-test.

d

Compared with luminal A and B.

HHS Vulnerability Disclosure