Originally published as JCO Early Release 10.1200/JCO.2004.00.3467 on December 12 2005
Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 24, No 2 (January 10), 2006: pp. 228-240
© 2006 American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-D and Its Receptor VEGFR-3: Two Novel Independent Prognostic Markers in Gastric Adenocarcinoma
Stefan Jüttner,
Christoph Wißmann,
Thomas Jöns,
Michael Vieth,
Johannes Hertel,
Stephan Gretschel,
Peter M. Schlag,
Wolfgang Kemmner,
Michael Höcker
From the Laboratory for Angiogenesis and Tumor Metastasis, Charité, Campus Virchow-Klinikum; Centrum für Anatomie, Institut für Integrative Neuroanatomie, Charité, Campus Mitte; Klinik für Chirurgie und Chirurgische Onkologie, Robert-Rössle-Klinik, Charité, Campus Buch; Max-Delbrück-Zentrum für Molekulare Medizin, Berlin; Institut für Pathologie, Otto-von-Guericke-Universität, Magdeburg, Germany
Address reprint requests to Michael Höcker, MD, Charité, UniversitätsmedizinBerlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin; e-mail: hoecker{at}charite.de
PURPOSE: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-D and its homolog VEGF-C influence lymphangiogenesis through activation of VEGF receptor 3 (VEGFR-3), and have been implicated in lymphatic tumor spread. Nodal dissemination of gastric adenocarcinomas critically determines clinical outcome and therapeutic options of affected patients. Therefore, we analyzed expression and prognostic significance of VEGF-D along with VEGF-C, and VEGFR-3 in gastric adenocarcinomas.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: VEGF-C, VEGF-D, and VEGFR-3 were analyzed in 91 R0-resected primary gastric adenocarcinomas, corresponding noncancerous gastric mucosa, and lymph node metastases employing immunohistochemistry and/or in situ hybridization. Blood and lymph vessel densities were assessed after staining with CD31 and LYVE-1specific antibodies.
RESULTS: VEGF-D and VEGF-C were detected in 67.0% and 50.5% of gastric cancers, respectively. Healthy gastric mucosa was negative for VEGF-C and in 12.5% positive for VEGF-D. Presence of VEGF-D (P = .005) or VEGF-C (P = .006) was correlated with lymphatic metastases and decreased survival (VEGF-D, P < .05; VEGF-C, P < .05). VEGFR-3 was correlated with reduced carcinoma-specific survival (P < .05), and Cox multivariate regression analysis qualified VEGF-D and VEGFR-3, but not VEGF-C, as independent prognostic parameters. In lymph nodepositive gastric cancers, presence of VEGF-D/VEGFR-3 was associated with poor survival, whereas absence of VEGF-D/VEGFR-3 defined a subgroup of patients with clearly favorable prognosis.
CONCLUSION: VEGF-D and VEGFR-3 are novel independent prognostic marker molecules aiding to identify patients with poor prognosis after curative resection of gastric adenocarcinomas. Combined analysis of the VEGF-C/VEGF-D/VEGFR-3 system can be useful to identify patients with unfavorable clinical outcome and thereby may help to refine therapeutic decisions in gastric cancer.
Supported by Grant No. NBLIII TP 3.2 from the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung and by a grant from the Sonnenfeld Stiftung, Berlin, Germany.
S.J. and C.W. contributed equally to this manuscript.
Terms in blue are defined in the glossary, found at the end of this article and online at www.jco.org.
Authors disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. Schafer, C. Wissmann, J. Hertel, V. Lunyak, and M. Hocker
Regulation of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor D by Orphan Receptors Hepatocyte Nuclear Factor-4{alpha} and Chicken Ovalbumin Upstream Promoter Transcription Factors 1 and 2
Cancer Res.,
January 15, 2008;
68(2):
457 - 466.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Lieto, F. Ferraraccio, M. Orditura, P. Castellano, A. La Mura, M. Pinto, A. Zamboli, F. DeVita, and G. Galizia
Expression of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) is an Independent Prognostic Indicator of Worse Outcome in Gastric Cancer Patients
Ann. Surg. Oncol.,
January 1, 2008;
15(1):
69 - 79.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. Donnem, S. Al-Saad, K. Al-Shibli, M. P. Delghandi, M. Persson, M. N. Nilsen, L.-T. Busund, and R. M. Bremnes
Inverse Prognostic Impact of Angiogenic Marker Expression in Tumor Cells versus Stromal Cells in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
Clin. Cancer Res.,
November 15, 2007;
13(22):
6649 - 6657.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. S. Sundar and T. S. Ganesan
Role of Lymphangiogenesis in Cancer
J. Clin. Oncol.,
September 20, 2007;
25(27):
4298 - 4307.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. Boku, A. Ohtsu, F. Nagashima, K. Shirao, and W. Koizumi
Relationship between Expression of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor in Tumor Tissue from Gastric Cancers and Chemotherapy Effects: Comparison between S-1 alone and the Combination of S-1 plus CDDP
Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol.,
August 2, 2007;
(2007)
hym057v1.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. Kim, S. Sohn, Y. Chae, Y. Cho, H-I Bae, G Yan, J. Park, M-H Lee, H. Chung, and W Yu
Vascular endothelial growth factor gene polymorphisms associated with prognosis for patients with gastric cancer
Ann. Onc.,
June 1, 2007;
18(6):
1030 - 1036.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Marchet, S. Mocellin, C. Belluco, A. Ambrosi, F. DeMarchi, E. Mammano, M. Digito, A. Leon, A. D'Arrigo, M. Lise, et al.
Gene Expression Profile of Primary Gastric Cancer: Towards the Prediction of Lymph Node Status
Ann. Surg. Oncol.,
March 1, 2007;
14(3):
1058 - 1064.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. H. Einhorn, M. J. Brames, B. Juliar, and S. D. Williams
Phase II Study of Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Salvage Chemotherapy for Germ Cell Tumors After Progression Following High-Dose Chemotherapy With Tandem Transplant
J. Clin. Oncol.,
February 10, 2007;
25(5):
513 - 516.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J Heidemann, D G Binion, W Domschke, and T Kucharzik
Antiangiogenic therapy in human gastrointestinal malignancies.
Gut,
October 1, 2006;
55(10):
1497 - 1511.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|