| Literature DB >> 33247698 |
Khurshid Ali1, Sultan Zeb Khan1, Nuzhat Sultana2, Osama Alghamdi3, Samrina Muhammad1, Sameer A Mokeem4, Saqib Ali5, Tariq Abduljabbar6, Fahim Vohra6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Angiogenesis is critical for tumor growth and reflects the aggressive behavior of invasive odontogenic lesions [like Ameloblastoma (AM), Odontogenic Keratocyst (OKC) and Central giant cell lesion (CGCL)]. Mean vascular density (MVD) shows the angiogenic potential and CD105 is an ideal endothelial biomarker due to its specificity to new blood vessels for MVD detection. The aim of the study was to compare the MVD (angiogenic potential) among AM, OKC and CGCL in comparison to Pyogenic Granuloma (PG) using CD105 biomarker.Entities:
Keywords: Blood vessels; Endoglin; Giant cell granuloma; Pathologic angiogenesis, Odontogenic tumors
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33247698 PMCID: PMC8033110 DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2020.21.11.3373
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian Pac J Cancer Prev ISSN: 1513-7368
Means and Standard Deviations of Mean Vascular Density (MVD) among Compared Lesions
| Lesion Type | Mean | SD | 95% CI | Range | P Value* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AM | 8.07 a | 0.36 | (7.87, 8.26) | 7.3- 8.8 | |
| OKC | 7.21 a | 0.75 | (6.80, 7.60) | 5.5-8.2 | < 0.05 |
| GCL | 32.99 b | 0.77 | (32.60, 33.38) | 31.6 -34.4 | |
| PG (control) | 14.7 c | 0.96 | (14.24, 15.15) | 13.3-17.2 |
AM, Ameloblastoma; OKC, Odontogenic Keratocyst; GCL, Giant cell lesion; PG, Pyogenic granuloma
Statistical Comparison of the Mean Vascular Density (MVD) of AM, OKC and GCL with Pyogenic Granuloma (Control)
| Lesions compared | Paired Differences | P value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference | |||
| Lower | Upper | ||||
| PG vs AM | -6.55000 | 0.91652 | -7.03838 | -6.06162 | P <0.01 |
| PG vs OKC | -7.41250 | 1.21922 | -8.06218 | -6.76282 | P<0.01 |
| PG vs GCL | -18.30625 | 1.28035 | -18.98850 | -17.62400 | P<0.01 |
AM, Ameloblastoma; OKC, Odontogenic Keratocyst; GCL, Giant cell lesion; PG, Pyogenic granuloma
Figure 1Photomicrograph of H & E Staining (A) and Immunohistochemical staining (B) with CD105, of micro vessels around giant cells in a Central giant cell lesion section
Figure 2Photomicrograph of H & E Staining (A) and Immunohistochemical staining (B) with CD105, of micro vessels in a Pyogenic granuloma section
Figure 3Photomicrograph of H & E Staining (A) and Immunohistochemical staining (B) with CD105, of micro vessels in connective tissue wall beneath epithelium in a Odontogenic Keratocyst section
Figure 4Photomicrograph of H & E Staining (A) and Immunohistochemical staining (B) with CD105, of micro vessels adjacent to epithelial islands in an AM section