Microtissue density prognostic factor evaluation based on antigens CD34 and CD 105 in ovarian cancer patients
More details
Hide details
Railway Hospital, Lublin, Poland
Department of Gynaecology and Endocrynological Gynaecology, Department of Gynaecological Oncology and Gynaecology, Medical University, Lublin, Poland
Department of Gynaecological Oncology and Gynaecology, Medical University, Lublin, Poland
Department of Gynecological Oncology and Gynecology, Medical University, Lublin, Poland
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2013;20(4):838–842
Uncontrollable cell division and disorders of the apoptotic processes constitute the key phenomena in cancer transformation. The theory that the tumour growth above critical density is possible due to creation of the new blood vessels during angiogenesis process was put forward in 1971 by Folkman. The panendotelial antibodies targeted against such markers as CD34 are used most frequently in cancer vessel evaluation. The anti-CD34 reacts with the largest number of endoepithelial cells. The second group constitutes the antibodies that agglomerate with the antigens characteristic for proliferous endoepithelial cells. The most popular marker used for functional endothelial tissues is endoglin called CD105. The subject of this publication is to find the answer to a question whether the practical usage of the CD34 and CD 105 as a prognostic factor in predicting failure of a planned treatment, determining expected remission and the total survival rate is possible. 74 patients with the diagnosed ovarian cancer, treated in the I Clinic of Gynecology Oncology and Gynecology, Medical University in Lublin, between years 1999–2004 were included into the analysis. Representative paraffin blocks with the embedded ovarian cancer fragments were used for immunohistochemical research. Density of the microvessels was being evaluated basing on the expression of the antigen CD34 and CD105. Evaluation of the microvessel density with CD34 and CD105 markers is not useful in forecasting survival rate and disease recurrence in patients with ovary cancer.
Folkman J, Watson K, Ingber D, et al. Induction of angiogenesis during the transition from hyperplasia to neoplasia. Nature 1989; 339: 58–61.
Kerbel RS. Tumour angiogenesis: past, present and the near future. Carcinogenesis 2000; 21: 505–15.
Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. N Engl J Med. 1971; 285: 1182–1186.
Fanelli M, Locopo N, Gattuso D, et al. Assessment of tumor vascularization: immunohistochemical and non-invasive methods. Intern J Biol Marker.s 1999; 14: 218–231.
Fonsatti E, Altomonte M, Nicotra MR, et al. Endoglin (CD105): a powerful therapeutic target on tumor-associated angiogenic blood vessels. Oncogene 2003; 22: 6557–6563.
Wang JM, Kumar S, Pye D, et al. A monoclonal antibody detects heterogenity in vascular endothelium of tumours and normal tissues. Int J Cancer. 1993; 54: 363–370.
Wilkstrom P, Lissbrant JF, Stattin P, et al. Endoglin (CD105) is expressed on immature blood vessels and is a marker for survival in prostate cancer. Prostate 2002; 51: 268–275.
Basolo F, Pollina L, Fontanini G, et al. Apoptosis and proliferation in thyroid carcinoma: correlation with bcl-2 and p53 protein expression. Br J Cancer. 1997; 75: 537–541.
Bettencourt MC, Bauer JJ, Sesterhenn IA, et al. CD34 immunohistochemical assessment of angiogenesis as a prognostic marker for prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 1998; 160: 459–465.
Lenczewski A, Terlikowski SJ, Sulkowska M, et al. Prognostic significance of CD34 expression in early cervical squamous cell carcinoma. Folia Histochem Cytobiol. 2002; 40: 205–206.
Salvesen HB, Gulluoglu MG, Stefansson I, et al. Significance of CD 105 expression for tumor angiogenesis and prognosis in endometrial carcinomas. APMIS 2003; 111: 1011–1018.
Landen CN, Chavez-Reyes AJr, Bucana C, et al. Therapeutic EphA2 gene targeting in vivo using neutral liposomal small interfering RNA delivery. Cancer Res. 2005; 65: 6919–6918.
Nakanishi Y, Kodama J, Yoshinouchi M, et al. The expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and transforming growth factorbeta associates with angiogenesis in epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1997; 16: 256–262.
Orre M, Lofti-Miri M, Mamers P, et al. Increased Microvessel density in mucinous serous and benign tumors of the ovary. Br J Cancer. 1998; 77: 2204–2209.
Abulafia O, Ruiz JE, Holcomb K, et al. Angiogenesis in early-invasive low-malignant-potential epithelian ovarian carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol. 2000; 95: 548–552.
Amis SJ, Coulter-Smith SD, Crow JC, et al. Microvessel quantification in benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Int J Gynoecol Cancer. 2005; 15: 58–65.
Nakayama K, Kanzaki A, Takebayashi Y, et al. Different features of angiogenesis between ovarian and breast carcinoma. Cancer Lett. 2001; 170: 161–167. 18. Owens OJ, Stewart C, Brown I, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFR) in human ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer. 1991; 64: 907–910.
van Diest PJ, Zevering JP, Zevering LC, et al. Prognostic value of microvessel quantitation in cisplatin treated FIGO 3 and 4 ovarian cancer patients. Pathol Res Pract. 1995; 191: 25–30.
Hollingsworth HC, Kohn EC, Steinberg SM, et al. Tumor angiogenesis in advanced stage ovarian carcinoma. Am J Pathol. 1995; 147: 33–41.
Stone PJ, Goodheart MJ, Rose SL, et al. The influence of microvessel density on ovarian carcinogenesis. Gynecol Oncol. 2003; 90: 566–71.
Kumar S, Ghellal A, Li C, et al. Breast carcinoma: vascular density determined using CD105 antibody correlates with tumor prognosis. Cancer Res. 1999; 59: 856–861.
Dales JP, Garcia S, Andrac L, et al.: Prognostic significance of angiogenesis evaluated by CD105 expression compared to CD31 in 905 breast carcinomas: correlation with long-term patient outcome. Int J Oncol. 2004; 24: 1197–1204.