Prognostic significance of vascular endothelial growth factor expression in human ovarian carcinoma

G H Shen, M Ghazizadeh, O Kawanami, H Shimizu, E Jin, T Araki, Y Sugisaki, G H Shen, M Ghazizadeh, O Kawanami, H Shimizu, E Jin, T Araki, Y Sugisaki

Abstract

The influence of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression and microvessel density (MVD) on prognosis and the relationship between VEGF expression and MVD in ovarian carcinoma are not well defined. We studied VEGF expression in parallel with MVD by immunohistochemistry in 94 ovarian tumours (64 malignant, 13 borderline, and 17 benign) and correlated the results with the clinicopathologic prognostic factors of the disease to clarify their significance in this disease. Assessment of VEGF mRNA isoforms by RT-PCR was also performed. Of the malignant, borderline, and benign ovarian tumours respectively, two (3%), four (31%) and 16 (94%) were negative, 31 (48%), seven (54%) and one (6%) had low expressions, and 31 (48%), two (15%) and none (0%) had high expressions of VEGF. There were significant associations between the VEGF expression and disease stage (P= 0.002), histologic grade (P= 0.0004), and patient outcome (P= 0.0002). MVD did not correlate significantly with the clinicopathologic parameters. Likewise, no correlation was found between MVD and VEGF expression. The survival of patients with high VEGF expression was significantly worse than that of patients with low and negative VEGF expression (P = 0.0004). Multivariate analysis revealed that disease stage and VEGF expression were significant and independent prognostic indicators of overall survival time (P = 0.008 and P = 0.006 respectively). These findings suggest that in conjunction with the established clinicopathologic prognostic parameters of ovarian carcinoma, VEGF expression may enhance the predictability of patients at high risk for tumour progression who are potential candidates for further aggressive therapy.

References

    1. Science. 1983 Feb 25;219(4587):983-5
    1. Cancer Res. 1986 Feb;46(2):467-73
    1. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1989 Jun 15;161(2):851-8
    1. Science. 1989 Dec 8;246(4935):1309-12
    1. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1990 Jan 3;82(1):4-6
    1. N Engl J Med. 1991 Jan 3;324(1):1-8
    1. Science. 1992 Feb 21;255(5047):989-91
    1. Nature. 1993 Apr 29;362(6423):841-4
    1. Cancer Res. 1994 Jan 1;54(1):276-80
    1. Nature. 1994 Feb 10;367(6463):576-9
    1. Am J Pathol. 1995 Jan;146(1):157-65
    1. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995 Apr 5;87(7):506-16
    1. Am J Pathol. 1995 Jul;147(1):33-41
    1. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1995;36(2):127-37
    1. Lab Invest. 1996 Jun;74(6):1105-15
    1. Important Adv Oncol. 1996;:167-90
    1. Cancer. 1997 Jul 1;80(1):98-106
    1. Hum Pathol. 1997 Aug;28(8):960-6
    1. Br J Cancer. 1997;76(9):1221-7
    1. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1997 Jul;16(3):256-62
    1. Lab Invest. 1997 Dec;77(6):607-14
    1. Cancer Lett. 1997 Dec 23;121(2):169-75
    1. Br J Cancer. 1998 Jun;77(12):2204-9
    1. Obstet Gynecol. 1998 Sep;92(3):360-3
    1. Cancer. 1998 Dec 15;83(12):2528-33
    1. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 1999;237:1-30
    1. Cancer. 1999 Jan 1;85(1):178-87
    1. Int J Cancer. 1999 Apr 20;84(2):101-8
    1. Clin Cancer Res. 1999 Apr;5(4):823-9
    1. Cancer. 1999 May 15;85(10):2219-25
    1. Gynecol Oncol. 1999 Jun;73(3):396-401

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir