Figures (5)  Tables (6)

    • Figure 1. 

      Expression and diagnostic role of SYT8 in CRC. (a) SYT8 expression assessed by Wilcoxon signed rank test. (b) Diagnostic value analyzed by ROC curve.

    • Figure 2. 

      Survival analysis assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. (a) The SYT8-high group was more likely to have a worse overall survival compared with that of the SYT8-low group. (b) The SYT8-high group was more likely to have a worse progress free interval compared with that of the SYT8-low group.

    • Figure 3. 

      Survival analysis based on the Kaplan-Meier Plotter database. The Kaplan-Meier curves of patients with SYT8 high expression and SYT8 low expression are shown. (a) OS. (b) PFS.

    • Figure 4. 

      SYT8 expression in tumor tissues and adjacent tissues of CRC patients. (a) SYT8 expression levels in CRC tissues was higher than adjacent tissues. (b) Immunohistochemical images of CRC adjacent tissue with low SYT8 expression. (c) Immunohistochemical images of CRC adjacent tissue with high SYT8 expression.

    • Figure 5. 

      Survival analysis assessed by Kaplan–Meier analysis in the retrospective validation cohort. (a) The SYT8-high group had a worse overall survival compared with that of the SYT8-low group. (b) The SYT8-high group had a worse disease free survival compared with that of the SYT8-low group.

    • Characteristics Total Low expression of SYT8 (%) High expression of SYT8 (%) p-value
      n 644 322(50) 322(50)
      Gender, n (%) 0.477
      Female 301 155 (51.5) 146 (48.5)
      Male 343 167 (48.7) 176 (51.3)
      Race, n (%) 0.649
      White 313 175 (55.9) 138 (44.1)
      Asian and black or African American 81 43 (53.1) 38 (46.9)
      Unknown 250 104 (41.6) 146 (58.4)
      Age, n (%) 0.633
      ≤ 65 276 141 (51.1) 135 (48.9)
      > 65 368 181 (49.2) 187 (50.8)
      Pathologic T stage, n (%) 0.046
      T1 & T2 131 55 (42) 76 (58)
      T3 & T4 510 264 (51.8) 246 (48.2)
      Unknown 3 3 (100) 0 (0)
      Pathologic N stage, n (%) 0.767
      N0 368 181 (49.2) 187 (50.8)
      N1 & N2 272 137 (50.4) 135 (49.6)
      Unknown 4 4 (100) 0 (0)
      Pathologic M stage, n (%) 0.107
      M0 475 228 (48) 247 (52)
      M1 89 51 (57.3) 38 (42.7)
      Unknown 80 43 (53.7) 37 (46.3)
      BMI, n (%) 0.358
      ≤ 25 107 54 (50.5) 53 (49.5)
      > 25 222 124 (55.9) 98 (44.1)
      Unknown 315 144 (45.7) 171 (54.3)
      CEA level, n (%) 0.279
      ≤ 5 261 128 (49) 133 (51)
      > 5 154 84 (54.5) 70 (45.5)
      Unknown 229 110 (48) 119 (52)
      Values in bold are statistically significant.

      Table 1. 

      Correlation analysis of clinicopathologic parameters and expression of SYT8.

    • Characteristics Total (N) Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
      Hazard ratio (95% CI) p Hazard ratio (95% CI) p
      Gender (male/female) 643 1.217 (0.892−1.660) 0.216
      Race (Asian and black or African American/white) 394 1.547 (0.992−2.412) 0.054 1.322 (0.807−2.168) 0.268
      Age (> 65/≤ 65) 643 1.006 (0.737−1.371) 0.972
      Pathologic T stage 640
      T1 & T2 131 Reference Reference
      T3 & T4 509 3.198 (1.814−5.636) < 0.001 2.073 (0.871−4.933) 0.099
      Pathologic N stage 639
      N0 367 Reference Reference
      N1 & N2 272 2.624 (1.916−3.592) < 0.001 0.963 (0.591−1.570) 0.881
      Pathologic M stage (M1/M0) 563 5.577 (3.945−7.884) < 0.001 6.018 (3.596−10.069) < 0.001
      SYT8 (high/low) 643 1.135 (0.836−1.541) 0.418
      Values in bold are statistically significant.

      Table 2. 

      COX regression analysis to assess prognostic factors for PFI.

    • Characteristics Total (N) Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
      Hazard ratio (95% CI) p Hazard ratio (95% CI) p
      Gender (male/female) 643 1.054 (0.744−1.491) 0.769
      Race (Asian and black or African American/white) 394 1.072 (0.622−1.848) 0.802
      Age (> 65/≤ 65) 643 1.939 (1.320−2.849) < 0.001 2.583 (1.667−4.002) < 0.001
      Pathologic T stage 640
      T1 & T2 131 Reference Reference
      T3 & T4 509 2.468 (1.327−4.589) 0.004 2.277 (1.034−5.011) 0.041
      Pathologic N stage 639
      N0 367 Reference Reference
      N1 & N2 272 2.627 (1.831−3.769) < 0.001 1.842 (1.164−2.916) 0.009
      Pathologic M stage (M1/M0) 563 3.989 (2.684−5.929) < 0.001 3.105 (1.949−4.948) < 0.001
      SYT8 (high/low) 643 1.356 (0.956−1.923) 0.087 1.666 (1.130−2.455) 0.010
      Values in bold are statistically significant.

      Table 3. 

      COX regression analysis to assess prognostic factors for OS.

    • Characteristics Total Positive Negative P value
      n 153 58(38) 95(62)
      Age, n (%) 0.386
      ≥ 60 58 37(63.8) 21(36.2)
      < 60 95 67(70.5) 28(29.5)
      Gender, n (%) 0.64
      Male 94 37(39.4) 57(60.6)
      Female 59 21(35.6) 38(64.4)
      Margins 0.201
      Present 1 1(100) 0(0)
      Absent 152 57(37.5) 95(62.5)
      N stage 0.008
      N1 74 36(48.6) 38(51.3)
      N0 79 22(27.8) 57(72.2)
      Vascular invasion 0.192
      Present 56 25(44.6) 31(55.4)
      Absent 97 33(34) 64(66)
      Nerve invasion 0.221
      Present 49 22(44.9) 27(55.1)
      Absent 104 36(34.6) 68(65.4)
      T stage 0.283
      T1 2 0(0) 2(100)
      T2 11 3(27.3) 8(72.7)
      T3 122 45(36.9) 77(36.1)
      T4 18 10(55.6) 8(44.4)
      Differentiation 0.41
      Low 34 16(47.1) 18(52.9)
      Middle 108 39(36.1) 69(63.9)
      High 11 3(27.3) 8(72.7)
      M stage 0.571
      M1 5 3(60) 2(40)
      M0 148 55(37.2) 93(62.8)
      Values in bold are statistically significant.

      Table 4. 

      Clinicopathologic parameters and demographic features in CRC patients with or without SYT8 expression in the retrospective validation cohort.

    • Characteristics Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
      Hazard ratio (95% CI) p Hazard ratio (95% CI) p
      SYT8 (low/high) 3.811 (1.710−8.494) 0.001 3.256 (1.427−7.426) 0.005
      Gender (male/female) 1.265 (0.568−2.815) 0.561
      Age (≥ 60/< 60) 2.006 (0.759−5.298) 0.160
      N stage (N1/N0) 1.460 (0.683−3.120) 0.329
      M stage (M0/M1) 0.139(0.041−0.467) 0.001 0.150 (0.042−0.532) 0.003
      Margins (absent/present) 0.047 (0.006−0.384) 0.004
      Vascular invasion (absent/present) 0.405 (0.190−0.867) 0.020
      Nerve invasion (absent/present) 0.376 (0.177−0.802) 0.011
      T stage 0.035
      T1/T4 0.980
      T2/T4 0.166 (0.020−1.357) 0.094
      T3/T4 0.286 (0.119−0.684) 0.005
      Differentiation 0.197
      Low/high 1.534 (0.331−7.108) 0.584
      Middle/high 0.723 (0.166−3.145) 0.665
      Values in bold are statistically significant.

      Table 5. 

      COX regression analysis to assess prognostic factors for OS in the retrospective validation cohort.

    • Characteristics Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
      Hazard ratio (95% CI) p Hazard ratio (95% CI) p
      SYT8 (low/high) 1.790 (1.031−3.108) 0.039 1.571 (0.891−2.770) 0.119
      Gender (male/female) 1.246 (0.696−2.230) 0.459
      Age (≥ 60/< 60) 1.623 (0.833−3.164) 0.155
      N stage (N1/N0) 1.723 (0.986−3.011) 0.056
      M stage (M1/M0) 4.603 (1.643−12.892) 0.004 3.713 (1.304−10.574) 0.014
      Margins (absent/present) 0.143 (0.019−1.064) 0.057
      Vascular invasion (absent/present) 0.805 (0.461−1.407) 0.447
      Nerve invasion (absent/present) 0.523 (0.300−0.910) 0.022
      T stage 0.068
      T1/T4
      T2/T4 0.111 (0.014−0.870) 0.036
      T3/T4 0.466 (0.233−0.932) 0.031
      Differentiation 0.217
      Low/high 0.989 (0.325−3.011) 0.985
      Middle/high 0.594 (0.210−1.678) 0.326
      Values in bold are statistically significant.

      Table 6. 

      COX regression analysis to assess prognostic factors for DFS in the retrospective validation cohort.