4.5 Article

VEGF and Cortactin Expression Are Independent Predictors of Tumor Recurrence Following Curative Resection of Gastric Cancer

Journal

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 102, Issue 4, Pages 325-330

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/jso.21644

Keywords

gastric cancer; tumor recurrence; prognostic factor; vascular endothelial growth factor; cortactin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: To investigate the clinicopathological role of expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and cortactin, as well as whether their expression are independent predictors of tumor recurrence following curative resection of gastric cancer. Methods: One hundred twenty-eight patients with gastric cancer were included in this study. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens were stained for VEGF and cortactin, and the correlation between the staining, clinicopathological parameters and prognostic power were analyzed. Results: Of the 128 patients studied, 58 (45.3%) and 71 (55.5%) cases were strongly positive for VEGF and cortactin, respectively. VEGF expression correlated with Lauren classification (P < 0.001), pathological tumor stage (P < 0.001), and pathological tumor node metastasis (TNM) stage (P = 0.003). Cortactin expression correlated with pathological lymph node stage (P = 0.018), pathological TNM stage (P < 0.001), and degree of differentiation (P < 0.001). There were statistically significant associations between tumor recurrence and VEGF expression (P = 0.023), and cortactin expression (P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, pathological TNM stage, VEGF expression, and cortactin expression were independent prognostic influence on disease-free survival (P < 0.001, 0.022, and 0.034, respectively). Conclusions: VEGF and cortactin may be a good biomarker to be applied in clinic to predict the prognosis of patients with curatively resected gastric cancer. J. Surg. Oncol. 2010; 102: 325-330. (C) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available