Microvessel Density Quantification in Gastric Cancer: Comparing Methods for Standard Measures
Letícia Trivellato Gresta*, Ismael Alves Rodrigues Júnior and Mônica Maria Demas Álvares Cabral
Department of Anatomic Pathology and Medicine, University Federal of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 30130-100, Brazi
- *Corresponding Author:
- Letícia Trivellato Gresta, MD, PhD
Department of Anatomic Pathology and Medicine
University Federal of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 30130-100, Brazil
E-mail: [email protected]
Received date: July 30, 2014; Accepted date: September 27, 2014; Published date: September 30, 2014
Citation: Gresta LT, Júnior IAR, Cabral MMDÁ (2014) Microvessel Density Quantification in Gastric Cancer: Comparing Methods for Standard Measures. J Cancer Sci Ther 6: 401-405. doi:10.4172/1948-5956.1000299
Copyright: © 2014 Gresta LT, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
The quantification of angiogenic and linfangiogenic factors has been explored in an attempt to predict the prognosis of various malignancies. In gastric cancer (GC), a promising parameter is the microvessel density (MVD).
Objective: The aim of our study is to evaluate the different methods used for its quantification. Methods: 52 cases of GC were labeled by immunohistochemistry for CD34, CD105 and D2-40. The quantification of the microvasculature was performed for each marker by counting microvessels (mv) in three “hot spots”, using three different microscopic magnifications (100x, 200x and 400x). MVD was then calculated by dividing the number of vessels by the microscopic field area (measured in mm2) and compared between the three different evaluations.
Results: the MVD obtained for CD34 was 203 mv/mm2 (100x), 311 mv/mm2 (200x) and 490 mv/mm2 (400x). The MVD score for CD105 was 127 mv/mm2 (100x), 213 mv/mm2 (200x) and 347 mv/mm2 (400x). The MVD obtained for D2-40 was 35 mv/mm2 (100x), 69 mv/mm2 (200x) and 170 mv/mm2 (400x). We found that MVD obtained in 100x magnification was lower than 200x, which was lower than in 400x. Those differences were statistically significant and occurred in a proportional way for all three markers. MVD obtained for CD34 was higher than for CD105. The MVD for lymphatics obtained by D2-40 was lower than the MVD for CD34 and CD105.
Conclusion: Our results show that the lack of standardized methods for assessing angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis in GC can produce variations in the MDV value, impairing the reproducibility of the results and the comparison between different studies and populations. It is necessary to standardize the MVD determination methods to compare results and confirm its prognostic value in GC and in other types of tumors.