In Vivo Correlation of Tumor Blood Volume and Permeability with Histologic and Molecular Angiogenic Markers in Gliomas
In Vivo Correlation of Tumor Blood Volume and Permeability with Histologic and Molecular Angiogenic Markers in Gliomas
复制标题
DOI：
10.3174/ajnr.a2280
复制
发表时间：
2011-02-01
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Rock, J. P.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jain, R.;Gutierrez, J.;Rock, J. P.
背景和目的：肿瘤血管生成具有很强的异质性，体内灌注成像参数与血管生成标志物的相关性有助于更好地理解灌注成像作为成像生物标志物的作用。本研究的目的是探讨PCT参数如CBV和PS与胶质瘤的组织学和分子血管生成标志物之间的关系。材料和方法：对23例未经治疗的脑胶质瘤患者的36例活检标本进行PCT检查。我们将图像引导下活检标本的MVD、MVCP、VEGFR-2表达、肿瘤细胞密度和WHO分级与PCT参数进行相关性分析。组织切片行苏木精-伊红、CD34、VEGFR-2染色，光镜下观察。这些组织学和分子血管生成标记物与活检标本对应的感兴趣区域的灌注参数相关。结果：CBV与微血管密度呈显著正相关(r=0.596，P<0.01)，PS与MVCP呈显著正相关(r=0.546，P=0.0011)。CBV(r=0.373，P=0.031)和PS(r=0.452，P=0.039)也与WHO分级显著相关。VEGFR-2阳性标本的PS和CBV均较高，但在0.05水平上均无统计学意义。结论：CBV与MVD呈显著正相关，而PS与MVCP呈显著正相关，提示这两个血流参数代表了肿瘤血管的不同方面；因此，体内评估这些参数对于更好地了解肿瘤血管生成具有重要意义。
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Tumor angiogenesis is very heterogeneous and in vivo correlation of perfusion imaging parameters with angiogenic markers can help in better understanding the role of perfusion imaging as an imaging biomarker. The purpose of this study was to correlate PCT parameters such as CBV and PS with histologic and molecular angiogenic markers in gliomas.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six image-guided biopsy specimens in 23 patients with treatment-naive gliomas underwent PCT examinations. We correlated MVD, MVCP, VEGFR-2 expression, tumor cellularity, and WHO grade of the image-guided biopsy specimens with the PCT parameters. Histologic sections were stained with hematoxylin-eosin, CD34, and VEGFR-2 and examined under a light microscope. These histologic and molecular angiogenic markers were correlated with perfusion parameters of the region of interest corresponding to the biopsy specimen. Pearson correlation coefficients and multiple regression analyses by using clustering methods were performed to assess these correlations.RESULTS: CBV showed a significant positive correlation with MVD (r = 0.596, P < .001), whereas PS showed a significant positive correlation with MVCP (r = 0.546, P = .0011. Both CBV (r = 0.373, P = .031) and PS (r = 0.452, P = .039) also showed a significant correlation with WHO grade. VEGFR-2 positive specimens showed higher PS and CBV; however, neither was statistically significant at the .05 level.CONCLUSIONS: CBV showed a significant positive correlation with MVD, whereas PS showed a significant positive correlation with MVCP, suggesting that these 2 perfusion parameters represent different aspects of tumor vessels; hence, in vivo evaluation of these could be important in a better understanding of tumor angiogenesis.