| Literature DB >> 28337358 |
Filipa Macedo1, Kátia Ladeira2, Adhemar Longatto-Filho3, Sandra F Martins4.
Abstract
Gastric cancer (GC) has high mortality owing to its aggressive nature. Tumor angiogenesis plays an essential role in the growth, invasion, and metastatic spread of GC. The aim of this work was to review the angiogenic biomarkers related to the behavior of GC, documented in the literature. A search of the PubMed database was conducted with the MeSH terms: "Stomach neoplasms/blood [MeSH] or stomach neoplasms/blood supply [MeSH] and angiogenic proteins/blood [Major]". A total of 30 articles were initially collected, and 4 were subsequently excluded. Among the 26 articles collected, 16 examined the role of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), 4 studied endostatin, 3 investigated angiopoietin (Ang)-2, 2 studied the Ang-like protein 2 (ANGTPL2), and 1 each examined interleukin (IL)-12, IL-8, and hypoxia inducible factor. Regarding VEGF, 6 articles concluded that the protein was related to lymph node metastasis or distant metastases. Five articles concluded that VEGF levels were elevated in the presence of GC and decreased following tumor regression, suggesting that VEGF levels could be a predictor of recurrence. Four articles concluded that high VEGF levels were correlated with poor prognosis and lower survival rates. Ang-2 and ANGTPL2 were elevated in GC and associated with more aggressive disease. Endostatin was associated with intestinal GC. VEGF is the most extensively studied angiogenic factor. It is associated with the presence of neoplastic disease and lymph node metastasis. It appears to be a good biomarker for disease progression and remission, but not for diagnosis. The data regarding other biomarkers are inconclusive.Entities:
Keywords: Angiogenic proteins; Lymph nodes; Neoplasm metastasis; Recurrence; Stomach neoplasms; Vascular endothelial growth factor A
Year: 2017 PMID: 28337358 PMCID: PMC5362829 DOI: 10.5230/jgc.2017.17.e1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Gastric Cancer ISSN: 1598-1320 Impact factor: 3.720
Main results of selected studies
| Study/author | Year | No. | Molecule | Conclusion | Values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wang et al. [ | 2012 | 80 patients | VEGF-C | Preoperative diagnosis of lymph node metastasis and distant metastasis (P<0.001). | - Cut-off value of 542.5 pg/mL. |
| - Sensitivity of 82.5%, specificity of 92.3%. | |||||
| Tsirlis et al. [ | 2010 | 40 patients | VEGF-C and VEGF-D | Detection and staging in GC (P<0.001). | - VEGF-C cut-off value 1.1 pg/mL, sensitivity 83%, specificity 70%. |
| - VEGF-D cut-off value 370 pg/mL, sensitivity 88%, specificity 73%. | |||||
| - VEGF-C/D ratio cut-off value 2.7, sensitivity 88%, specificity 75%. | |||||
| Kikuchi et al. [ | 2011 | 164 patients | VEGF, VEGFR-1, and VEGFR-2 | VEGF level is elevated in patients with GC, VEGFR-1, and VEGFR-2 are reduced compared to controls. | - VEGF cut-off value of 415 pg/mL, sensitivity of 63.5%, and specificity of 65.1%, for intestinal type cancer. |
| - VEGFR-1 cut-off value of 46 pg/mL, sensitivity of 60%, and specificity of 58.6%, for early cancer. | |||||
| - VEGFR-2 cut-off value of 8,314 pg/mL, sensitivity of 66.3%, and specificity of 61.6%, for advanced and diffuse type cancer. | |||||
| 2010 | 181 patients | VEGF | Poor OS and progression-free survival in advanced GC. | ||
| Sheng et al. [ | 2008 | 92 patients | VEGF | It was higher in GC patients than in healthy controls and benign gastric disease. | - VEGF cut-off value of 217.79 pg/mL, sensitivity of 40.2%, and specificity of 93.7%, by TR-IFMA. |
| Association with distant metastases, invasion depth of the tumor and tumor stage. | |||||
| Wang et al. [ | 2007 | 80 patients | VEGF-C | Lymph node metastasis and poor prognosis. | - Serum VEGF-C cut-off value of 367.5 ng/L, sensitivity of 85%, and specificity of 80%, for GC diagnosis. |
| - Serum VEGF-C cut-off value of 542.5 ng/L, sensitivity of 82.8%, and specificity of 81.8%, for lymph nodes metastasis diagnosis. | |||||
| Ding et al. [ | 2005 | 135 patients | VEGF-A | Levels were higher in patients with GC (P<0.010) and they decreased following tumor excision (P<0.001). | |
| Park et al. [ | 2015 | 381 patients (118 Caucasians+263 Asians) | VEGF-A and VEGFR-2/CD31 | Caucasians had a median VEGF-A level that was 95% higher than that of Asians (P<0.001). | |
| Survival was worse in Caucasians with high VEGFR-2/CD31 levels (P=0.038). | |||||
| These were independent predictors of survival only in Caucasians. | |||||
| Villarejo-Campos et al. [ | 2013 | 59 patients | VEGF | Levels decreased after treatment (P<0.010). Preoperative levels were independent prognostic factor. | - Preoperative VEGF values over 761 pg/mL were associated with shorter patient survival. |
| Vidal et al. [ | 2009 | 97 patients | VEGF | Higher in patients with GC than controls (P=0.002). | - Serum VEGF over 320 pg/mL was the only preoperative predictor of both recurrence and disease-specific survival. |
| Bilgiç et al. [ | 2015 | 30 patients | VEGF | Correlation with the tumor type classification and the presence of distant tissue invasion. | |
| Konno et al. [ | 2003 | 37 patients | VEGF | Higher in patients with GC than controls and higher in patients with venous invasion. | |
| Blank et al. [ | 2015 | 76 patients | VEGF | Prognostic relevance in patients with primary resection (P=0.028). | |
| Park et al. [ | 2014 | 147 patients | VEGF-A | Higher in patients with R1 vs. R0 resection (P=0.037). | |
| Significant independent prognostic factor for survival (P=0.028). |
VEGF = vascular endothelial growth factor; VEGFR = vascular endothelial growth factor receptor; GC = gastric cancer; OS = overall survival; TR-IFMA = time-resolved immunofluorometric assay; CD31 = cluster of differentiation 31; R1 = circumferential resection with margin involvement; R0 = circumferential resection without margin involvement.