OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic usefulness of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and endostatin mRNA in cervical specimens of patients with cervical dysplasia and carcinoma. STUDY DESIGN: Transcription levels of VEGF and endostatin were detected by RT-PCR in cervical liquid-based preparation specimens and compared with cytological assessments. RESULTS: VEGF as well as endostatin mRNA expression was significantly associated with either cytological or histological diagnosis (p < 0.05). VEGF mRNA and endostatin mRNA were significantly more likely to be expressed in squamous cell carcinomas (SCC) than in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) III (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05), and obviously also more likely to be expressed in CINII than in CINI and in CINIII than in CINII (p < 0.05). Eleven inflammation lesions gave positive results by cytology but negative results by RT-PCR for VEGF and endostatin mRNA. Twenty-four SCC lesions gave false-negative or precancerous lesion results by cytology but positive results by RT-PCR for VEGF and/or endostatin mRNA expression. CONCLUSION: Transcription levels of VEGF and endostatin by RT-PCR may be an adjunct to cytology screening for early detection of cervical carcinomas and may determine the progressive potentiality of individual lesions, especially in high-risk patients.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic usefulness of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and endostatin mRNA in cervical specimens of patients with cervical dysplasia and carcinoma. STUDY DESIGN: Transcription levels of VEGF and endostatin were detected by RT-PCR in cervical liquid-based preparation specimens and compared with cytological assessments. RESULTS:VEGF as well as endostatin mRNA expression was significantly associated with either cytological or histological diagnosis (p < 0.05). VEGF mRNA and endostatin mRNA were significantly more likely to be expressed in squamous cell carcinomas (SCC) than in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) III (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05), and obviously also more likely to be expressed in CINII than in CINI and in CINIII than in CINII (p < 0.05). Eleven inflammation lesions gave positive results by cytology but negative results by RT-PCR for VEGF and endostatin mRNA. Twenty-four SCC lesions gave false-negative or precancerous lesion results by cytology but positive results by RT-PCR for VEGF and/or endostatin mRNA expression. CONCLUSION: Transcription levels of VEGF and endostatin by RT-PCR may be an adjunct to cytology screening for early detection of cervical carcinomas and may determine the progressive potentiality of individual lesions, especially in high-risk patients.