Table 1 Comparison of clinicopathological factors between patients with high and low c-Met expression in IHCC
From: Prognostic significance of overexpression of c-Met oncoprotein in cholangiocarcinoma
c-Met | |||
|---|---|---|---|
High | Low | P -value | |
Gender | |||
 Male | 7 | 59 | 0.7636 |
 Female | 6 | 39 | |
Age | |||
 ⩾65 | 9 | 48 | 0.2396 |
 < 65 | 4 | 50 | |
Tumour size | |||
 ⩾5 cm | 8 | 39 | 0.2430 |
 <5 cm | 5 | 52 | |
Macroscopic type | |||
 Mass forming | 10 | 83 | 0.4397 |
 Non-mass forming | 3 | 15 | |
Intrahepatic metastasis | |||
 Negative | 8 | 70 | 0.5229 |
 Positive | 5 | 28 | |
Invasion to hepatic vein | |||
 Negative | 5 | 53 | 0.2496 |
 Positive | 8 | 41 | |
Invasion to portal vein | |||
 Negative | 1 | 24 | 0.2907 |
 Positive | 12 | 73 | |
Lymph node metastasis | |||
 Negative | 7 | 57 | 0.7739 |
 Positive | 6 | 41 | |
Histopathological classification | |||
 Well differentiated | 4 | 21 | 0.5943 |
 Moderately differentiated | 8 | 73 | |
 Poorly differentiated | 1 | 4 | |
UICC pT | |||
 In situ+1+2a+2b | 4 | 28 | >0.9999 |
 3+4 | 9 | 70 | |
UICC stage | |||
 I+II | 8 | 51 | 0.5680 |
 III+IVA | 5 | 47 | |
Lymphatic vessel invasion | |||
 Negative | 2 | 37 | >0.9999 |
 Positive | 11 | 61 | |
Venous invasion | |||
 Negative | 1 | 19 | 0.4566 |
 Positive | 12 | 79 | |
Perineural invasion | |||
 Negative | 4 | 27 | 0.7536 |
 Positive | 9 | 71 | |
Hepatic surgical margin | |||
 Negative | 9 | 84 | 0.2202 |
 Positive | 4 | 14 | |
Bile duct margin | |||
 Negative | 10 | 86 | 0.3797 |
 Positive | 3 | 12 | |
EGFR expression | |||
 Negative | 5 | 72 | 0.0063 |
 Positive | 8 | 21 | |
VEGF expression | |||
 Negative | 7 | 51 | 0.5697 |
 Positive | 6 | 42 | |
HER2 expression | |||
 Negative | 13 | 92 | >0.9999 |
 Positive | 0 | 1 | |
