S Krishna Priya1, Kishore Kumar2, K R Hiran3, M R Bindhu3, Rohit P Nagare1, D K Vijaykumar4, T S Ganesan5. 1. Laboratory for Cancer Biology, Medical Oncology and Clinical Research, Cancer Institute (WIA), 38, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600036, India. 2. Medical Oncology, Command Hospital (CC), Lucknow Cantt., Lucknow, UP, 226002, India. 3. Department of Histopathology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Cochin, Kerala, 682041, India. 4. Department of Surgical Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Cochin, Kerala, 682041, India. 5. Laboratory for Cancer Biology, Medical Oncology and Clinical Research, Cancer Institute (WIA), 38, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600036, India. tsganesan@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate microvessel density (MVD) as assessed by C-type lectin 14A (CLEC14A), which is a new marker for endothelial cells, and compare its expression to CD31 and CD105 in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS: MVD was evaluated in tumors (n = 50) from patients with EOC who underwent primary surgery and in patients with EOC who received preoperative chemotherapy (n = 49) using immunohistochemistry with antibodies to CLEC14A, CD31 and CD105. The median duration of follow-up was 24.5 months (range 1-101 months). The effect of prognostic factors on event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed using the Cox regression model. RESULTS: The amount of residual disease was found to be an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis with respect to EFS (P = 0.009) and OS (P < 0.001). The mean MVD of CLEC14A (MVD = 6), in tumors from patients who underwent primary surgery, was significantly lower than that of CD31 (MVD = 25, P < 0.0001) and CD105 (MVD = 11, P = 0.018). However, there was no significant correlation between MVD as detected by these markers and clinical outcome. There was no expression of CLEC14A in tumors from patients who received preoperative chemotherapy and the MVD of CD31 and CD105 was significantly reduced (P = 0.001 and 0.006, respectively) in this set of patients. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates MVD as detected by CLEC14A in EOC. Treatment with chemotherapy reduces tumor blood vessels significantly. We suggest that CLEC14A may be a more specific endothelial marker to assess tumor angiogenesis.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate microvessel density (MVD) as assessed by C-type lectin 14A (CLEC14A), which is a new marker for endothelial cells, and compare its expression to CD31 and CD105 in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS: MVD was evaluated in tumors (n = 50) from patients with EOC who underwent primary surgery and in patients with EOC who received preoperative chemotherapy (n = 49) using immunohistochemistry with antibodies to CLEC14A, CD31 and CD105. The median duration of follow-up was 24.5 months (range 1-101 months). The effect of prognostic factors on event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed using the Cox regression model. RESULTS: The amount of residual disease was found to be an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis with respect to EFS (P = 0.009) and OS (P < 0.001). The mean MVD of CLEC14A (MVD = 6), in tumors from patients who underwent primary surgery, was significantly lower than that of CD31 (MVD = 25, P < 0.0001) and CD105 (MVD = 11, P = 0.018). However, there was no significant correlation between MVD as detected by these markers and clinical outcome. There was no expression of CLEC14A in tumors from patients who received preoperative chemotherapy and the MVD of CD31 and CD105 was significantly reduced (P = 0.001 and 0.006, respectively) in this set of patients. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates MVD as detected by CLEC14A in EOC. Treatment with chemotherapy reduces tumor blood vessels significantly. We suggest that CLEC14A may be a more specific endothelial marker to assess tumor angiogenesis.
Authors: Jennifer M Rubatt; Kathleen M Darcy; Alan Hutson; Sarah M Bean; Laura J Havrilesky; Lisa A Grace; Andrew Berchuck; Angeles Alvarez Secord Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2009-01-09 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Michael S Gordon; Francisco Robert; Daniela Matei; David S Mendelson; Jonathan W Goldman; E Gabriela Chiorean; Robert M Strother; Ben K Seon; William D Figg; Cody J Peer; Delia Alvarez; Bonne J Adams; Charles P Theuer; Lee S Rosen Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-09-26 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Timothy J Perren; Ann Marie Swart; Jacobus Pfisterer; Jonathan A Ledermann; Eric Pujade-Lauraine; Gunnar Kristensen; Mark S Carey; Philip Beale; Andrés Cervantes; Christian Kurzeder; Andreas du Bois; Jalid Sehouli; Rainer Kimmig; Anne Stähle; Fiona Collinson; Sharadah Essapen; Charlie Gourley; Alain Lortholary; Frédéric Selle; Mansoor R Mirza; Arto Leminen; Marie Plante; Dan Stark; Wendi Qian; Mahesh K B Parmar; Amit M Oza Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Fatima H Karzai; Andrea B Apolo; Liang Cao; Ravi A Madan; David E Adelberg; Howard Parnes; David G McLeod; Nancy Harold; Cody Peer; Yunkai Yu; Yusuke Tomita; Min-Jung Lee; Sunmin Lee; Jane B Trepel; James L Gulley; William D Figg; William L Dahut Journal: BJU Int Date: 2015-06-08 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Reda S Saad; Yulin L Liu; Girija Nathan; James Celebrezze; David Medich; Jan F Silverman Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: E R Horak; R Leek; N Klenk; S LeJeune; K Smith; N Stuart; M Greenall; K Stepniewska; A L Harris Journal: Lancet Date: 1992-11-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: M Mura; R K Swain; X Zhuang; H Vorschmitt; G Reynolds; S Durant; J F J Beesley; J M J Herbert; H Sheldon; M Andre; S Sanderson; K Glen; N-T Luu; H M McGettrick; P Antczak; F Falciani; G B Nash; Z S Nagy; R Bicknell Journal: Oncogene Date: 2011-06-27 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: M K Ki; M H Jeoung; J R Choi; S-S Rho; Y-G Kwon; H Shim; J Chung; H J Hong; B D Song; S Lee Journal: Oncogene Date: 2013-05-06 Impact factor: 9.867