2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.mehy.2015.05.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Adjuvant role of anti-angiogenic drugs in the management of head and neck arteriovenous malformations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Nevertheless, some of these complicated VAs are refractory to the abovementioned treatment modalities. In these cases, rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are found to be more promising (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, some of these complicated VAs are refractory to the abovementioned treatment modalities. In these cases, rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are found to be more promising (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[ 17 18 ] Other medications that have been tried include tetracyclines as vasculostatic agents in brain AVMs, interferon, and VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) inhibitors, particularly in visceral and cranial AVMs. [ 19 ]…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The mentioned authors studied the mitogenactivated protein kinase signaling pathway in their case, considering that it contributes to the progression of AVMs in a related fashion to capillary malformations (Tan, Chernova, & Gao, 2014) and propranolol could interfere in this pathway (Lu et al, 2018). The other two possible mechanisms in the antiangiogenic effect could be inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor and other proangiogenic proteins (e.g., ENG and ALK1; Coletti, Dalmonte, Monenghini, Ferrari, & Allevi, 2015) as well as through blockage of β-adrenergic receptors expressed on the MAV vessels. Of note, AVMs in other locations have also been benefited of beta-blockers as palliative treatment (Kowacs & Werneck, 1996).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%