Literature DB >> 18847499

Prognostic significance of VEGF expression in patients with bulky cervical carcinoma undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Chel Hun Choi1, Sang Yong Song, Jung-Joo Choi, Young Ae Park, Heeseok Kang, Tae-Joong Kim, Jeong-Won Lee, Byoung-Gie Kim, Je-Ho Lee, Duk-Soo Bae.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The prediction of response to treatment would be valuable for managing cervical carcinoma with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
METHODS: To this end, the expression of VEGF was analyzed by immunohistochemistry using paraffin-embedded pre-treatment cervical biopsy tissues. This study included 29 patients with bulky IB to IIA cervical squamous cell carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
RESULTS: Fifteen (51.7%) of 29 patients were scored as VEGF-positive. Response to chemotherapy (complete response or residual tumor with less than 3 mm stromal invasion) was observed in eight patients (27.6%), and it was negatively associated with VEGF expression (P = 0.009). With logistic regression analysis, VEGF positivity continued to be an independent predictor for poor response (P = 0.032). In addition, the progression-free survival rate was significantly lower in patients with VEGF-positive tumors (P = 0.033).
CONCLUSION: Pretreatment assessment of VEGF expression may provide additional information for identification of patients with cervical cancer who had a low likelihood of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and an unfavorable prognosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18847499      PMCID: PMC2572070          DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-8-295

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Cancer        ISSN: 1471-2407            Impact factor:   4.430


Background

Carcinoma of the uterine cervix is the second most common cancer in women, but the prognosis remains very poor in bulky or locally advanced disease [1]. Although concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) is now considered standard treatment, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been adopted to improve the prognosis for these cases [2,3]. The development of convenient and reliable biomarkers predicting the treatment response would be valuable for patient management. If non-responsive tumors could be identified before NAC, using predictive biological factors, these patients could be allocated to CCRT. Furthermore, it would be reinforced if the biological factors found do not affect the response to CCRT. The correlation of angiogenesis with either metastasis or a poor prognosis has been reported in various cancers [4-6]. Among the angiogenic factors, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has been shown to have a pivotal role in tumor angiogenesis. However, the correlation between VEGF expression and prognosis in patient with cervical cancer has been inconsistent; this may be because of the marked heterogeneity of patient disease stages and treatment modalities in reported studies [7-9]. Although, there are some reports that show that VEGF plays an important role in patient response to chemotherapeutic agents, [10] there is little information available on its predictive value for treatment response in patients receiving NAC for cervical carcinoma. Therefore, we evaluated whether VEGF may have predictive value for patient response to NAC in cases with bulky cervical carcinoma. The aim of the present study was to investigate the expression of VEGF and their possible role as predictors of response to NAC in patients with bulky cervical carcinoma.

Methods

Patients and samples

Of the patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma, who had presented to the Samsung Medical Center, 46 patients with stage IB2 to IIB enrolled into a phase II trial of NAC [11]. Among them, 29 patients with stage IB2 to IIA and squamous cell histology were selected to minimize heterogeneity of the patient population studied (15 patients with stage IIB and 2 patients with adenocarcinoma were excluded). The Institutional Review Board at Samsung Medical Center (Seoul, Korea) approved the protocol, and all patients provided written informed consent before entry into the trial. None of the patients was pretreated with any other chemotherapy or radiotherapy before the NAC. The median patient age was 47 years (range, 33 to 70). Twenty (69.0%) patients had stage IB2 disease and nine (31.0%) patients had stage IIA. The other clinicopathologic characteristics are shown in Table 1.
Table 1

Immunoreactivity of VEGF according to clinicopathologic characteristics of the cervical carcinoma patients

No. of patientsVEGF expression

VariablesPositiveNegativeP
Total291514
Age
 ≥50 years12750.55
 < 50 years1789
Stage
 IB2209110.28
 IIA963
Cervical tumor size
 ≥5 cm14950.19
 < 5 cm1569
Clinical node involvement
 Yes11740.32
 No18810
SCC Ag level
 ≥5 ng/ml14860.57
 < 5 ng/ml1578

a(n = 29)

aThe P-value was determined using Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.

Immunoreactivity of VEGF according to clinicopathologic characteristics of the cervical carcinoma patients a(n = 29) aThe P-value was determined using Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.

Treatment and response

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy (combination of vincristine 1 mg/m2, mitomycin-C 10 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2) was administered every 3 weeks [11]. A type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection was performed within 3 weeks of the administration of the third cycle of NAC in all patients. Following radical surgery, adjuvant radiotherapy was performed if lymph node metastasis, parametrial involvement or a positive resection margin were found. In this study, the tumor response was evaluated pathologically. Complete response (CR) was defined as a complete disappearance of the invasive tumor in the cervix with negative nodes, and optimal pathologic response (OPR) was defined as a residual tumor with less than 3 mm stromal invasion. The 3-mm threshold used was chosen because it represents the maximal extension of FIGO stage IA1 cervical tumor, which is usually considered cured after local resection. And the role of OPR as a possible surrogate endpoint for survival in the neoadjuvant setting, has been reported [12]. In the present study, patients with CR or OPR were grouped together as responders.

Immunohistochemistry and evaluation

Paraffin-embedded tissue blocks of formalin-fixed cervical biopsy specimens taken pre-treatment, were processed for conventional histological assessment by hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis using the avidin – biotin – peroxidase method. VEGF protein expression was detected by mouse anti-human monoclonal VEGF (ab1316) antibody (Abcam, Inc., Cambridge, UK), using conventional peroxidase methods [13]. In brief, 4 μm thick sections were deparaffinized in xylene, dehydrated through graded alcohol concentrations and incubated in citrate buffer (pH = 6.0) for 5 min using a household microwave oven at 800 W. After microwave exposure, the slides were allowed to cool to room temperature. The slides were briefly washed with PBS and incubated for 15 min with 3% hydrogen peroxide in methanol to block endogenous peroxidase activity. The antibody to VEGF was diluted 1:100 and incubated for 1 h at room temperature. Biotinylated antimouse/rabbit antibodies (DAKO) at a dilution of 1:500 were used as the second antibody. Negative controls included substitution of the monoclonal antibody with normal mouse IgG of the same concentration as the monoclonal antibody [see Additional file 1]. Sections of corpus luteum were used as positive control for VEGF immunostaining. After washing, ABC (DAKO) was applied and diaminobenzydine was used for visualization. Tissue sections were lightly counterstained with hematoxylin and then examined by light microscopy. Assessment of the staining was scored independently by two investigators (SYS and CHC) without knowledge of the clinicopathological findings. Expression was defined as positive if distinct staining of the cytoplasm was observed in at least 10% of tumor cells [14]. The scoring by the two investigators was similar. In the cases of disagreement, slides were reevaluated and discussed until consensus was achieved.

Statistical analysis

Fisher's exact probability test or the Chi-square test was used to analyze frequency data. Multiple logistic regression models were used to identify independent prognostic factors for patient response. The tumor stage, nodal involvement, tumor size, and SCC-Ag levels were entered into the logistic regression models. Disease-free survival was measured by the Kaplan-Meier method. Differences between groups were tested using the log-rank test. To determine the independent prognostic value for patient disease-free survival, a Cox regression model was constructed using tumor stage, LN involvement, tumor size, SCC-Ag level, and IHC status as covariates. A P-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. SPSS 10.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for the statistical analysis.

Results

Figure 1 show representative results of IHC staining. Fifteen (51.7%) of 29 patients were scored as VEGF-positive (Table 1). Table 1 lists the positivity of the proteins according to clinicopathologic characteristics.
Figure 1

Representative examples of VEGF staining in bulky cervical carcinoma showing cases with no staining (A), weak staining (B), moderate staining (C) and strong staining (D) (×200).

Representative examples of VEGF staining in bulky cervical carcinoma showing cases with no staining (A), weak staining (B), moderate staining (C) and strong staining (D) (×200). Pathologic responses, including complete and optimal responses, were observed in eight (27.6%) patients, with no response in the remaining 21 (72.4%) patients (Table 2). VEGF expression was shown to be highly associated with tumor susceptibility to NAC. The response rate of VEGF-positive tumors was significantly lower than VEGF-negative tumors (7% vs. 50%, P = 0.009). When logistic regression was applied, VEGF positivity continued to be an independent predictor of poor response to treatment (P = 0.032).
Table 2

Clinicopathologic parameters and the expression of VEGF as predictors of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with bulky cervical carcinoma

Pathologic responderNonresponder


CharacteristicsNo. of patientsRRCR (n = 4)OPR a (n = 4)(n = 21)PbPc
Age, years0.16
 Median584746
 Range38 – 6034 – 6033 – 70
Cervical tumor size (cm)0.070.22
 Median3.83.55.0
 Range3.2 – 6.03.0 – 5.63.7 – 7.1
Clinical node involvement0.980.22
 Yes1127.3%218
 No1827.8%2313
Stage0.670.54
 IB22030.0%2414
 IIA922.2%207
SCC Ag level0.470.36
 ≥5 ng/ml1421.4%1211
 < 5 ng/ml1533.3%3210
VEGF expression0.0090.032
 Negative1450.0%347
 Positive156.7%1014

aResidual tumor but only with less than 3 mm stromal invasion

bRank sum test or Chi-square test/Fisher's exact test

cLogistic regression analysis with stage, tumor size, SCC-Ag level, and lymph node involvement as a covariate.

RR, pathologic response rate; CR, complete response; OPR, optimal pathologic response

Clinicopathologic parameters and the expression of VEGF as predictors of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with bulky cervical carcinoma aResidual tumor but only with less than 3 mm stromal invasion bRank sum test or Chi-square test/Fisher's exact test cLogistic regression analysis with stage, tumor size, SCC-Ag level, and lymph node involvement as a covariate. RR, pathologic response rate; CR, complete response; OPR, optimal pathologic response With a median follow-up period of 48 months (range, 3 to 105), three (10.3%) of 29 patients died of disease and recurrence occurred in seven (24.1%). The overall 5-year disease-free survival rate was higher in the responder group than the non-responder group (100% vs. 65%), although this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.07) (Figure 2A). The progression-free survival rate was significantly lower in patients with VEGF-positive tumors (vs. VEGF-negative tumors, P = 0.033) (Table 3 and Figure 2B). VEGF-positivity was identified as an independent predictor of patient disease-free survival using a Cox regression model (P = 0.037; hazards ratio, 11.4; 95% CI, 1.15 – 112.58) (Table 3).
Figure 2

Disease-free survival curve as a function of pathologic response (A) and immunoreactivity to VEGF (B). The P-values were determined using the log-rank test.

Table 3

Univariate and multivariate analysis of clinicopathologic factors affecting disease-free survival rate

Univariate analysisMultivariate analysis


CharacteristicsNo. of patients5-y DFS (%)PRelative risk (95% CI)P
Cervical tumor size
 ≥5 cm1469.20.500.660.53a
 < 5 cm1580.0(0.18 – 2.42)
Clinical node involvement
 Yes1170.60.492.300.39
 No1881.8(0.35 – 15.10)
Stage
 IB22073.30.830.670.64
 IIA977.8(0.13 – 3.58)
SCC Ag level
 ≥5 ng/ml1469.20.501.030.45a
 < 5 ng/ml1580.0(0.95 – 1.12)
VEGF expression
 Negative1492.30.03311.400.037
 Positive1560.0(1.15 – 112.58)

a Treated as a continuous variable.

Univariate and multivariate analysis of clinicopathologic factors affecting disease-free survival rate a Treated as a continuous variable. Disease-free survival curve as a function of pathologic response (A) and immunoreactivity to VEGF (B). The P-values were determined using the log-rank test.

Discussion

In this study, the clinical significance of IHC-positivity for VEGF in pre-treatment biopsy specimens was examined in 29 patients with cervical squamous cell carcinoma undergoing NAC. The most interesting finding of our study was the strong correlation between VEGF expression and response to NAC. These results suggest that patients with cervical cancer who are positive for VEGF expression are less likely to benefit from NAC. Therefore, patient monitoring for VEGF expression may provide an important determinant for the differential treatment of bulky cervical cancer. Although it is very difficult to develop the best alternative strategy in such VEGF-positive patients, concurrent chemoradiation or radical surgery without delay or the addition of anti-VEGF therapy may be useful in improving the prognosis of those patients [15]. However, additional study is needed for confirmation of these findings. The reason for the correlation between VEGF positivity and chemoresistance is unclear. The presence of increased vascularity may suggest improved tumor oxygenation and drug delivery; this may improve response to chemotherapy. However, this remains contradictory in many cases [16,17]. Unlike normal blood vessels, tumor vessels are structurally and functionally abnormal, i.e., the formation of tortuous and saccular blood vessels that are poorly organized and hyperpermeable [18]. These abnormalities can increase resistance to blood flow and impair blood supply, and therefore compromise the delivery and effectiveness of conventional cytotoxic therapies [19]. It has also been suggested that the role of angiogenic factors in the treatment response may be governed by hypoxia. Piret and colleagues suggested that HIF-1α (key proteins regulating angiogenesis) has both pro- and anti-apoptotic effects [20]. Mild hypoxia causes the expression of various anti-apoptotic proteins, whereas severe hypoxia leads to cell death, at least in part, through stabilization of p53 by HIF-1α [20]. The overall balance of the activation effects of HIF-1α may depend on the type of cancer and treatment modality used [21]. Clinical studies on the correlation between VEGF expression and prognosis have reported inconsistent results [7-9,22]. Some reasons for the conflicting results include the following. First, the patient groups studied were heterogeneous in terms of disease stages and treatment modalities. Second, the studies were prone to sampling errors because the neovascularization status of the tumor could not be reliably determined with a single measurement of only a small portion of the whole tumor. Jain reported that not only does the microcirculation vary from one tumor to the next, but within the same tumor, it varies both spatially and temporally [23].

Conclusion

The present study showed that the assessment of VEGF expression in pretreatment biopsy specimens could provide additional information to identify patients with a poor chance of response to NAC and unfavorable prognosis in patients with bulky cervical carcinoma.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

CHC and SYS collected the data, performed analysis and prepared the manuscript. JJC, YAP, HK and TJK performed the immunoassays and statistical analysis. JWL, BGK and JHL selected the cases and interpreted the results. DSB designed the study concept, interpreted the results and approved the final manuscript.

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:

Additional file 1

Negative controls for VEGF staining. All slides show negative staining (×200). Click here for file
  23 in total

1.  High expression of vascular endothelial growth factor is associated with liver metastasis and a poor prognosis for patients with ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Y Seo; H Baba; T Fukuda; M Takashima; K Sugimachi
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-05-15       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  The association between vascular endothelial growth factor, microvessel density and clinicopathological features in invasive cervical cancer.

Authors:  W Tjalma; J Weyler; B Weyn; E Van Marck; A Van Daele; P Van Dam; G Goovaerts; P Buytaert
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.435

3.  Continuous low-dose therapy with vinblastine and VEGF receptor-2 antibody induces sustained tumor regression without overt toxicity.

Authors:  G Klement; S Baruchel; J Rak; S Man; K Clark; D J Hicklin; P Bohlen; R S Kerbel
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 14.808

4.  VEGF, flt-1, and KDR/flk-1 as prognostic indicators in endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  B A Fine; P T Valente; G I Feinstein; T Dey
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.482

5.  Hypoxia-inducible factors HIF-1alpha and HIF-2alpha in head and neck cancer: relationship to tumor biology and treatment outcome in surgically resected patients.

Authors:  Nigel J P Beasley; Russell Leek; Mohammed Alam; Helen Turley; Graham J Cox; Kevin Gatter; Peter Millard; Sue Fuggle; Adrian L Harris
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2002-05-01       Impact factor: 12.701

6.  Vascular endothelial growth factor and prognosis of cervical carcinoma.

Authors:  W F Cheng; C A Chen; C N Lee; L H Wei; F J Hsieh; C Y Hsieh
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Fractals and cancer.

Authors:  J W Baish; R K Jain
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2000-07-15       Impact factor: 12.701

8.  Vascular endothelial growth factor in cervical carcinoma.

Authors:  W F Cheng; C A Chen; C N Lee; T M Chen; F J Hsieh; C Y Hsieh
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Phase II study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with mitomycin-c, vincristine and cisplatin (MVC) in patients with stages IB2-IIB cervical carcinoma.

Authors:  Chel Hun Choi; Tae-Joong Kim; Jeong-Won Lee; Byoung-Gie Kim; Je-Ho Lee; Duk-Soo Bae
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2006-08-10       Impact factor: 5.482

10.  Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression is a prognostic factor for radiotherapy outcome in advanced carcinoma of the cervix.

Authors:  J A Loncaster; R A Cooper; J P Logue; S E Davidson; R D Hunter; C M West
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  9 in total

1.  Responsiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery predicts favorable prognosis for cervical cancer patients: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qing Ye; Hong-Xin Yuan; Hong-Lin Chen
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 4.553

2.  Human telomerase reverse transcriptase regulates vascular endothelial growth factor expression via human papillomavirus oncogene E7 in HPV-18-positive cervical cancer cells.

Authors:  Fang Li; Jinquan Cui
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2015-06-12       Impact factor: 3.064

3.  Prospective cohort study to evaluate the efficacy of taxane plus platinum and CPT-11plus platinum regimes and to identify prognostic risk factors in cervical cancer patients.

Authors:  Kecheng Huang; Xiong Li; Ru Yang; Jian Shen; Zhilan Chen; Xiaomin Qin; Shaoshuai Wang; Yao Jia; Fangxu Tang; Hang Zhou; Haiying Sun; Jin Zhou; Lili Guo; Lin Wang; Long Qiao; Jiaqiang Xiong; Congyi Wang; Ding Ma; Shuang Li; Ting Hu; Shixuan Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-09-15

4.  Expression of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) in Patients With Serous Ovarian Carcinoma and Their Clinical Significance.

Authors:  Reza Ranjbar; Foroogh Nejatollahi; Ahmad Sina Nedaei Ahmadi; Hossein Hafezi; Akbar Safaie
Journal:  Iran J Cancer Prev       Date:  2015-08-24

5.  Prognostic role of vascular endothelial growth factor in cervical cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jing Zhang; Jiaming Liu; Chenjing Zhu; Jialing He; Jinna Chen; Yunliu Liang; Feng Yang; Xin Wu; Xuelei Ma
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-04-11

6.  Early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy can help predict long-term survival in patients with cervical cancer.

Authors:  Xiong Li; Kecheng Huang; Qinghua Zhang; Jian Shen; Hang Zhou; Runfeng Yang; Lin Wang; Jiong Liu; Jincheng Zhang; Haiying Sun; Yao Jia; Xiaofang Du; Haoran Wang; Song Deng; Ting Ding; Jingjing Jiang; Yunping Lu; Shuang Li; Shixuan Wang; Ding Ma
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-12-27

7.  Identification of Core Genes Involved in the Progression of Cervical Cancer Using an Integrative mRNA Analysis.

Authors:  Marina Dudea-Simon; Dan Mihu; Alexandru Irimie; Roxana Cojocneanu; Schuyler S Korban; Radu Oprean; Cornelia Braicu; Ioana Berindan-Neagoe
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-10-03       Impact factor: 5.923

8.  Intratumoral Injection of a Human Papillomavirus Therapeutic Vaccine-Induced Strong Anti-TC-1-Grafted Tumor Activity in Mice.

Authors:  Yuxin Che; Yang Yang; Jinguo Suo; Chang Chen; Xuelian Wang
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 3.989

9.  Esophageal adenocarcinoma microenvironment: Peritumoral adipose tissue effects associated with chemoresistance.

Authors:  Amedeo Carraro; Elisabetta Trevellin; Matteo Fassan; Andromachi Kotsafti; Francesca Lunardi; Andrea Porzionato; Luigi Dall'Olmo; Matteo Cagol; Rita Alfieri; Veronica Macchi; Umberto Tedeschi; Fiorella Calabrese; Massimo Rugge; Carlo Castoro; Roberto Vettor; Marco Scarpa
Journal:  Cancer Sci       Date:  2017-11-04       Impact factor: 6.716

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.