. 2022 Jul 18;24:10. doi: 10.1186/s12575-022-00169-9

Table 2.

Relationship between expression of OTUB2, YAP1, TAZ and CTGF in ESCC and clinicopathological parameters

Clinicopathological parameters	N	OTUB2 expression		P	YAP1 expression		P	TAZ expression		P	CTGF expression		P
Clinicopathological parameters	183	negative	positive	P	negative	positive	P	negative	positive	P	negative	positive	P
Gender
Female	54	11	43	0.097	15	39	0.444	11	43	0.519	20	34	0.827
Male	129	42	87	0.097	29	100	0.444	32	97	0.519	50	79	0.827
Age
< 60	67	22	45	0.380	18	49	0.497	13	54	0.321	24	43	0.607
≥ 60	116	31	85	0.380	26	90	0.497	30	86	0.321	46	70	0.607
Tumor size
<3	70	29	41	0.003	24	46	0.011	27	43	< 0.001	33	37	0.001
≥ 3	113	24	89	0.003	20	93	0.011	16	97	< 0.001	33	80	0.001
Degree of differentiation
Well differentiated	67	27	40	0.037	22	45	0.037	19	48	0.128	27	40	0.712
Moderately differentiated	98	22	76		21	77		23	75		35	63
Poorly differentiated	18	4	14		1	17		1	17		8	10
Depth of invasion
Mucosa	15	2	13	0.250	6	9	0.134	7	8	0.020	6	9	0.910
Muscularis	90	30	60		24	66		24	66		33	57
Full-thickness	78	21	57		14	64		12	66		31	47
pTNM stage
IB	49	17	32	0.576	18	31	0.027	22	27	< 0.001	25	24	0.087
IIA,B	113	30	83		24	89		20	93		39	74
IIIA,B,C	21	6	15		2	19		1	20		6	15
Lymph node metastasis
No	131	43	88	0.067	40	91	0.001	39	92	0.001	58	73	0.008
Yes	52	10	42	0.067	4	48	0.001	4	48	0.001	12	40	0.008

P＜0.05, the difference was statistically significant