4.7 Article

EF5 binding and clinical outcome in human soft tissue sarcomas

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.05.068

Keywords

EF5; hypoxia; sarcoma; metastasis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To study the 2-nitroimidazole agent EF5 as a surrogate for measuring hypoxia in a series of patients with soft tissue sarcomas, and to determine whether hypoxia measured with this technique was associated with patient outcome. Methods and Materials: Patients with soft tissue sarcomas of the head and neck, extremity, trunk, or retroperitoneum for whom surgical excision was the initial treatment of choice, were given 21 mg/kg EF5 24-48 hours before surgery. Biopsy specimens were stained for EF5 binding with fluorescence-labeled monoclonal antibodies, and the images were analyzed quantitatively. Endpoints included the relationship between EF5 binding, clinically important prognostic factors, and patient outcome. Results: Two patients with recurrent and 14 patients with de novo sarcomas were studied. There were seven low-grade, one intermediate-grade, and eight high-grade tumors. No relationship was found between EF5 binding and patient age, sex, hemoglobin level, or tumor size. In de novo tumors, the presence of mitoses and histologic grade were positively correlated with hypoxia. High-grade and -stage de novo tumors had higher levels of EF5 binding compared with low-grade and -stage tumors. Patients with de novo tumors containing moderate to severe hypoxia (>= 20% EF5 binding), high grade, or >= 7% mitoses were more likely to develop metastases. Conclusions: Further studies in a larger cohort of patients are necessary to determine whether hypoxia, as measured by EF5 binding, is an independent prognostic factor for outcome in high-grade sarcomas. Such data should be useful to identify high-risk patients for clinical trials to determine whether early chemotherapy will influence the occurrence of metastasis. (C) 2006 Elsevier 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available