4.4 Article

Prognostic impact of VEGF, CD31, CD34, and CD105 expression and tumour vessel invasion after radical surgery for IB-IIA non-small cell lung cancer

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY
卷 57, 期 6, 页码 591-597

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jcp.2003.013508

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: To evaluate the prognostic impact of tumour angiogenesis assessed by vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), microvessel density (MVD), and tumour vessel invasion in patients who had undergone radical resection for stage IB-IIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Fifty one patients ( 42 men, nine women; mean age, 62.3 years; SD, 6.9) undergoing complete surgical resection ( 35 lobectomy, 16 pneumonectomy) of pathological stage IB (n = 43) and IIA ( n = 8) NSCLC were evaluated retrospectively. No patient underwent postoperative chemotherapy or neoadjuvant treatment. Tumour specimens were stained for VEGF and specific MVD markers: CD31, CD34, and CD105. Results: VEGF expression significantly correlated with high CD105 expression (p < 0.0001) and tumour vessel invasion (p = 0.04). Univariate analysis showed that those patients with VEGF overexpression (p = 0.0029), high MVD by CD34 ( p = 0.0081), high MVD by CD105 ( p = 0.0261), and tumour vessel invasion (p = 0.0245) have a shorter overall survival. Furthermore, multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that MVD by CD34 ( p = 0.007), tumour vessel invasion ( p = 0.024), and VEGF expression (p = 0.042) were significant predictive factors for overall survival. Finally, the presence of both risk factors, tumour vessel invasion and MVD by CD34, was highly predictive of poor outcome ( odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.7 to 6.5; p = 0.0002). Conclusions: High MVD by CD34 and tumour vessel invasion are more closely related to poor survival than the other neoangiogenetic factors in stage IB-IIA NSCLC. This may be because these factors are more closely related to the metastatic process.

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

4.4
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