4.3 Article

Poor perfusion of the microvasculature in peritoneal metastases of ovarian cancer

期刊

CLINICAL & EXPERIMENTAL METASTASIS
卷 37, 期 2, 页码 293-304

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10585-020-10024-4

关键词

Microvasculature; Microcirculation; EOC; Peritoneal carcinomatosa; Incident dark field imaging

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) suffer from peritoneal carcinomatosis upon first clinical presentation. Extensive peritoneal carcinomatosis has a poor prognosis and its pathophysiology is not well understood. Although treatment with systemic intravenous chemotherapy is often initially successful, peritoneal recurrences occur regularly. We hypothesized that insufficient or poorly-perfused microvasculature may impair the therapeutic efficacy of systemic intravenous chemotherapy but may also limit expansive and invasive growth characteristic of peritoneal EOC metastases. In 23 patients with advanced EOC or suspicion thereof, we determined the angioarchitecture and perfusion of the microvasculature in peritoneum and in peritoneal metastases using incident dark field (IDF) imaging. Additionally, we performed immunohistochemical analysis and 3-dimensional (3D) whole tumor imaging using light sheet fluorescence microscopy of IDF-imaged tissue sites. In all metastases, microvasculature was present but the angioarchitecture was chaotic and the vessel density and perfusion of vessels was significantly lower than in unaffected peritoneum. Immunohistochemical analysis showed expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and hypoxia inducible factor 1 alpha, and 3D imaging demonstrated vascular continuity between metastases and the vascular network of the peritoneum beneath the elastic lamina of the peritoneum. We conclude that perfusion of the microvasculature within metastases is limited, which may cause hypoxia, affect the behavior of EOC metastases on the peritoneum and limit the response of EOC metastases to systemic treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据