OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quantification of angiogenesis by assessing microvessel density in cervical cancer, comparing the performance of three monoclonal antibodies: anti-CD34 and BNH9, which are still little known markers in cervical neoplasia, and anti-CD31. METHODS: Fifty-four consecutive patients diagnosed with stages I and II invasive cervical cancer undergoing radical hysterectomy and bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy were evaluated. The monoclonal primary antibodies used were anti-CD34, anti-CD31 and BNH9 antibody. The areas of highest microvessel density were used for counting microvessels in 10 high-power fields. Microvessel density was the mean vessel number counted in 10 high-power fields. RESULTS: The mean of microvessel density was 10.3, 9.7 and 5.8 for anti-CD34, BNH9 and anti-CD31, respectively. According to the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test, microvessel density estimated by anti-CD34 and BNH9 was significantly higher than the microvessel density estimated by anti-CD31. The difference between microvessel density measured by anti-CD34 and BNH9 was not statistically significant. There was diagnostic agreement in 44 out of 54 cases for anti-CD34 and BNH9 monoclonal antibodies, kappa coefficient being 0.63. The kappa coefficient was 0.41 between anti-CD34 and anti-CD31 and 0.26 between anti-CD31 and BNH9. CONCLUSIONS: The anti-CD34 and BNH9 seem to have higher sensitivity than anti-CD31. The agreement to quantify microvessel density between anti-CD34 and BNH9 is higher than between them and anti-CD31. Additionally, considering that the BNH9 is much less unknown than anti-CD34 and that they showed very similar performance, the BNH9 clinical significance should be test in different neoplasms.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quantification of angiogenesis by assessing microvessel density in cervical cancer, comparing the performance of three monoclonal antibodies: anti-CD34 and BNH9, which are still little known markers in cervical neoplasia, and anti-CD31. METHODS: Fifty-four consecutive patients diagnosed with stages I and II invasive cervical cancer undergoing radical hysterectomy and bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy were evaluated. The monoclonal primary antibodies used were anti-CD34, anti-CD31 and BNH9 antibody. The areas of highest microvessel density were used for counting microvessels in 10 high-power fields. Microvessel density was the mean vessel number counted in 10 high-power fields. RESULTS: The mean of microvessel density was 10.3, 9.7 and 5.8 for anti-CD34, BNH9 and anti-CD31, respectively. According to the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test, microvessel density estimated by anti-CD34 and BNH9 was significantly higher than the microvessel density estimated by anti-CD31. The difference between microvessel density measured by anti-CD34 and BNH9 was not statistically significant. There was diagnostic agreement in 44 out of 54 cases for anti-CD34 and BNH9 monoclonal antibodies, kappa coefficient being 0.63. The kappa coefficient was 0.41 between anti-CD34 and anti-CD31 and 0.26 between anti-CD31 and BNH9. CONCLUSIONS: The anti-CD34 and BNH9 seem to have higher sensitivity than anti-CD31. The agreement to quantify microvessel density between anti-CD34 and BNH9 is higher than between them and anti-CD31. Additionally, considering that the BNH9 is much less unknown than anti-CD34 and that they showed very similar performance, the BNH9 clinical significance should be test in different neoplasms.
Authors: Vivide Tuan-Chyan Chang; Peter S Cartwright; Sarah M Bean; Greg M Palmer; Rex C Bentley; Nirmala Ramanujam Journal: Neoplasia Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 5.715
Authors: Corinne M Doll; Kathryn Winter; David K Gaffney; Janice K Ryu; Anuja Jhingran; Adam P Dicker; Joanne B Weidhaas; Brigitte E Miller; Anthony M Magliocco Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Mustafa Kemal Takal; Cem Baykal; Eralp Başer; Mustafa Derda Kaya; Polat Dursun; Ozlem Ozen; Asuman Nihan Haberal; Ali Ayhan Journal: J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc Date: 2013-09-01
Authors: Liudmyla M Lazarenko; Olena E Nikitina; Evgen V Nikitin; Olga M Demchenko; Galyna V Kovtonyuk; Larysa O Ganova; Rostyslav V Bubnov; Veronika O Shevchuk; Natalia M Nastradina; Viktoria V Bila; Mykola Ya Spivak Journal: EPMA J Date: 2014-01-06 Impact factor: 6.543