1998
DOI: 10.1200/jco.1998.16.5.1684
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Vascular enumeration as a significant prognosticator for invasive breast carcinoma.

Abstract: Vascular enumeration with both methods was an independent prognosticator for relapse-free-survival (RFS) in both node-negative and -positive patients in the univariate analysis, but only vascular enumeration with the image analyzer was an independent prognostic factor in the multivariate analysis, together with lymph node metastases.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
14
2
3

Year Published

2000
2000
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
14
2
3
Order By: Relevance
“…In our present study, the statistically significant association was detected between high MVD and RFS, BCSS in TNBC patients using CD31, one of the gold standard markers of analyzing vascularity, with the optimal cutoff value near the median. However, standardization of assessment technique for MVD is required to obtain the vascularity in a more reproducible manner [46], and it requires further investigations to consolidate the clinical value of MVD analysis as a prognostic marker of the patients with TNBC. EGFR, CK5/6, and CK14 were reported as more specific biomarkers to define the basal-like subtype and to reflect the cancer survival as a result of surrogating gene expression profiles analysis [3][4][5][6][7][8][9].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our present study, the statistically significant association was detected between high MVD and RFS, BCSS in TNBC patients using CD31, one of the gold standard markers of analyzing vascularity, with the optimal cutoff value near the median. However, standardization of assessment technique for MVD is required to obtain the vascularity in a more reproducible manner [46], and it requires further investigations to consolidate the clinical value of MVD analysis as a prognostic marker of the patients with TNBC. EGFR, CK5/6, and CK14 were reported as more specific biomarkers to define the basal-like subtype and to reflect the cancer survival as a result of surrogating gene expression profiles analysis [3][4][5][6][7][8][9].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[48][49][50] In HCC, several groups have reported that high tumor MVD by CD34 or vWF immunostaining may serve as an adverse prognostic marker for HCC less than 5 cm. 51,52 Some suggested that higher tumor MVD may predispose to micrometastasis and tumor angiogenesis may be one of the most important factors to influence tumor recurrence of small HCC.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been shown to have a prognostic value in several solid tumors such as breast, lung, prostate, cervical, and colon cancer (1)(2)(3)(4)(5). Previous studies also have demonstrated that the vascular density of a tumor directly correlates with metastasis and poor outcome in patients with solid tumors (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%