Jou nal o Cance
Resea ch & The apy
O iginal esea ch
Nybe g RH e al., J Cance Res The . 2017, 5(8):50-55
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.14312/2052-4994.2017-10
Can ascula endo helial g ow h ac o C exp ession be o use in
p edic ing su gical s age o p ognosis in ul a cance ?
Nybe g Rei a H1,, Lau ila Ma i a2, S a Synnö e1,3 and Mäenpää Johanna U1,4
1 Depa men o Gynecology and Obs e ics, Tampe e Uni e si y Hospi al, Tampe e, Finland
2 Depa men o Pa hology, Fimlab Labo a o ies Inc., Tampe e, Finland
3 Labo a o y o Cance Biology, BioMediTech, Uni e si y o Tampe e, Tampe e, Finland
4 Facul y o Medicine and Li e Sciences, Uni e si y o Tampe e, Tampe e, Finland
Abs ac
In oduc ion: Nodal me as asis is a main p ognos ic ac o in ul a cance . Inc eased ascula endo helial g ow h ac o C (VEGF-C)
exp ession has been associa ed wi h lymph node me as asis and poo p ognosis in many cance s. The aim o his e ospec i e s udy was o
in es iga e VEGF-C exp ession pa e n in he in asi e edge o ul a cance and in sen inel lymph node me as asis, and i s associa ion wi h
he s age and p ognosis. Me hods: Tumo and sen inel lymph node samples om 44 pa ien s we e e alua ed wi h immunohis ochemis y,
and he esul s we e linked wi h he clinicopa hological da a. Resul s: Six y-se en pe cen o p ima y umo s and 76% o sen inel lymph
node me as ases exp essed VEFG-C. Posi i e VEGF-C exp ession o he p ima y umo did no p edic su gical S age o sen inel lymph
node in ol emen . The isk o elapse was no signi ican ly highe wi h VEGF-C exp essing umo s han wi h VEGF-C nega i e umo s (RR
2.55, 95% CI 0.66-9.90, p = 0.18). The isk o g oin ecu ence was signi ican ly lowe wi h VEGF-C posi i e han nega i e umo s (RR 0.36,
95% CI 0.16-0.79, p = 0.01). Su i al was simila in bo h g oups. No non-sen inel lymph node me as ases we e ound in case o nega i e
VEGF-C exp ession in he sen inel lymph node me as asis, whe eas wi h posi i e VEGF-C exp ession hey we e ound in 5/13 (38%) o cases.
Conclusions: Tumo al VEGF-C exp ession was no associa ed wi h highe su gical S age o poo e p ognosis in ul a cance . Howe e ,
absence o i s exp ession in sen inel lymph node me as asis migh indica e a low isk o non-sen inel lymph node me as ases.
Keywo ds: ul a cance ; VEGF-C; sen inel lymph node; nodal me as asis; lympha ic sp ead; p ognosis; ecu ence
Co esponding au ho : Rei a Nybe g, Depa men o Gynecology and
Obs e ics, Tampe e Uni e si y Hospi al, Tampe e, Finland. Tel.: +358
50 384 7500; Email: [email p o ec ed]
Recei ed 12 July 2017 Re ised 14 Augus 2017 Accep ed 22 Augus 2017
Published 31 Augus 2017
Ci a ion: Nybe g RH, Lau ila M, S a S, Mäenpää JU. Can ascula
endo helial g ow h ac o C exp ession be o use in p edic ing su gical
s age o p ognosis in ul a cance ? J Cance Res The . 2017; 5(8):50-55.
DOI: 10.14312/2052-4994.2017-10
Copy igh : © 2017 Nybe g RH, e al. Published by NobleResea ch
Publishe s. This is an open-access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o
he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License, which pe mi s un es ic ed use,
dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal au ho
and sou ce a e c edi ed.
Open Access
An Open Access Publishe
In oduc ion
Nodal me as a ic in ol emen is he mos impo an
p ognos ic ac o in ul a cance . Node-nega i e pa ien s
ha e a 5-yea su i al a e o 70 - 98% bu hose wi h posi i e
nodes only 12 - 41% [1]. Size o he p ima y umo , p esence
o lympho ascula in asion and he dep h o in asion a e
known o inc ease he isk o nodal me as asis [2–4], as
well as he cen al loca ion o he p ima y umo [5]. Biologic
p ognos ic a iables a e no as well known. Inc eased
umo angiogenesis and al e ed essel cha ac e is ics a e
sugges ed o lead in o a sho e disease- ee su i al [6].
Exp ession le els o ma ix me allop o einase-2 exp ession
highe han 50% a e also an indica o o a lowe i e-
yea su i al a e [7]. O e -exp ession o issue ma ix
me allop o einases, ansmemb ane p o ein CD44 and i s
iso o ms, h ombospondin-1, ascula endo helial g ow h
ac o (VEGF) and some G2/M pa hway egula o s, as well
as, loss o me as asis supp esso NM23-H1 gene, seem
o p omo e local and me as a ic g ow h. Howe e , no all
hese indings co ela e wi h clinical p ognosis [1, 8].
S udies in animal models and humans ha e shown ha
lymphangiogenesis in a p ima y umo inc eases nodal
me as asis [9]. E en be o e he me as asis ac ually akes
place, he lymph nodes d aining s aigh om he umo –
so called sen inel lymph nodes (SLNs) - unde go emodelling
p ocesses including lymphangiogenesis, al e a ions in
s uc u e, lympha ic low and immune cell composi ion,
and inc eases in chemokine and cy okine p oduc ion, hus
c ea ing a p eme as a ic niche [10]. Vascula endo helial
g ow h ac o C (VEGF-C) sec e ed by he p ima y umo
is he mos impo an lymphangiogenic ac o causing he
emodelling. I al e s he lympha ic essels a ound he
p ima y umo , inc eases he lympha ic low and causes
expansion o lympha ic ne wo k in SLNs, all his p omo ing
lympha ic sp ead [11].
51
In many human cance s, o e -exp ession o VEGF-C by
p ima y umo is associa ed wi h poo e p ognosis. I
co ela es wi h sho e p og ession ee su i al (PFS),
o e all su i al (OS) and lymph node me as asis in
melanoma [12], and is a poo p ognos ic ac o in non-
small-cell lung cance and adenoca cinoma o he lung
[13, 14]. High le els o VEGF-C exp ession in gas ic cance
issue imply wo se o e all p ognosis han low VEGF-C
le els [15]. P ima y umo VEGF-C exp ession has been
epo ed o co ela e wi h he possibili y o lymph node
me as asis in lung, oesophageal, p os a e, hy oid and
colo ec al cance s [11].
To ou knowledge, he in luence o VEGF-C on he clinical
cou se o ul a cance has no been s udied, bu one
epo o VEGF-C exp ession in 10 issue samples has been
published [16]. The aim o his s udy was o explo e he
p esence o VEGF-C exp ession in ul a cance (p ima y
umo and SLN me as asis), and i s in luence on pa ien s’
su gical S age, isk o ecu ence and p ognosis.
Ma e ials and me hods
Pa ien s and issue samples
Tissue samples om 44 ul a cance pa ien s ha had
p e iously unde gone ul a su ge y and a SLN mapping
be o e comple e lymph node dissec ion in Tampe e
Uni e si y Hospi al we e used o his s udy. Unde a
4.5-yea amilia iza ion pe iod, a SLN mapping had been
pe o med o all su gically ea ed ul a cance pa ien s,
and has been desc ibed elsewhe e [17]. The specimens
we e ob ained om he Tissue Biobank and Resea ch
Se ices FinTiB (Fimlab Labo a o ies Inc., Tampe e,
Finland). Fo y-six umo samples wi h ep esen a i e
malignan g ow h as well as 17 me as a ic SLN samples
we e a ailable o analysis.
The clinicopa hological his o y and ollow-up da a o all
pa ien s we e e ospec i ely collec ed om he hospi al
eco ds. The his o y included he age a he ime o he
su ge y, he da e o he su ge y, he si e o he p ima y
umo , he ype o su ge y, he su gical S age o he disease,
he his opa hology epo , he s a us o he SLN (posi i e o
nega i e o me as asis) and o he egional lymph nodes,
and whe he o no o he me as ases we e p esen . The
ollow-up da a included also in o ma ion o a po en ial
adju an ea men and i s du a ion, he obse a ion da e
and loca ion(s) o a ecu ence, i any, he inal da e o he
ollow-up, and he da e and cause o dea h, i i happened
du ing he ollow-up pe iod. This da a was combined wi h
he esul s o he VEGF-C immunos aining o he inal
analysis.
Immunohis ochemis y
The VEGF-C p o ein exp ession in ul a umo s and SLN
samples we e e alua ed by using immunohis ochemis y
(IHC). Rep esen a i e samples om he in asi e edges o
he p ima y umo s and SLN me as ases we e selec ed o
he s udy by an expe ienced pa hologis (M.L.). 4 µm hick
sec ions we e cu om pa a in-embedded issue blocks
using a s anda d mic o ome. Fo IHC s aining, he slides
we e hen depa a inized, ehyd a ed, and subsequen ly
p e ea ed wi h a PT-Module (Lab Vision, F emon , CA) a
98°C o 15 min in 0.05 M T isHCl bu e , pH 9.0 con aining
0.001 M EDTA. The p ima y VEGF-C an ibody (Rabbi an i-
VEGF-C; In i ogen, Cama illo, CA) was isualized wi h a
Powe Vision + polyme ki (Leica Biosys ems Newcas le
L d., Newcas le, UK) and diaminobenzidine as ch omogen
(DABImmPac , Vec o labs, Bu lingame, CA). The issue
sec ions we e coun e s ained wi h hema oxylin (Maye ’s
hema oxylin, Oy FFChemicals Ab, Haukipudas, Finland).
Human colon ca cinoma samples, known o ha e a s ong
VEGF-C exp ession, we e used as a posi i e con ol.
Nega i e con ols we e made by omi ing he p ima y
VEGF-C an ibody om he p ocedu e.
Analysis o he immunos aining
Immunos ained sec ions we e scanned wi h an Ape io
Scanscope XT (Ape io Technologies, Vis a, CA) and isually
analysed on a compu e sc een. Two obse e s (R.N. and
S.S.) assessed hem, blinded o he clinicopa hological da a
o he pa ien s. In he i s ound, he assessmen s we e
pe o med independen ly and he esul s hen pooled.
I he assessmen s o wo obse e s we e con adic o y,
he s aining was assessed again in consensus. In all
issue samples, IHC s aining in ensi y was sco ed
semiquan i a i ely as nega i e (no s aining a all), weak
(some sca e ed s ained cells o ain mo e widesp ead
s aining), mode a e (mo e abundan widesp ead s aining
o ocal in ensi e s aining) o s ong (almos all cells
in ensi ely s ained). Fo he s a is ical analysis, nega i e and
weak s aining we e combined as “nega i e” and simila ly,
mode a e and s ong s aining as “posi i e” s aining.
S a is ical analysis
The conco dance be ween wo obse e ’s assessmen s
o he VEGF-C exp ession in he i s e alua ion ound
was assessed using Cohen’s unweigh ed kappa es
[18]. Associa ions be ween VEGF-C s aining and
clinicopa hological pa ame e s we e analyzed using he
Fishe ’s exac es , odds a io and ela i e isk. Disease-
speci ic and p og ession ee su i al cu es we e
calcula ed using Kaplan-Meie su i al analysis, and
compa ed using he log ank es . A p- alue less han 0.05
was conside ed s a is ically signi ican . SPSS S a is ics o
Windows ( e sion 19.0 eleased 2010, IBM Co p., A monk,
NY, USA) was used in calcula ion o s a is ical analysis.
E hical conside a ions
The use o a chi ed issue specimens o IHC was app o ed
by Val i a, Na ional Supe iso y Au ho i y o Wel a e
and Heal h (6746/05.01.00.06/2009). The e ospec i e
collec ion o pa ien da a om he hospi al eco ds was
app o ed by he E hics Commi ee o Pi kanmaa Hospi al
Dis ic (R09066).
Resul s
Pa ien and ollow-up da a
The median age o pa ien s was 76 yea s ( ange 44-93).
The median ollow-up ime was 39 mon hs ( ange 0.6 -
109 mon hs). Tumo cha ac e is ics wi h S age, adju an
ea men and ollow-up da a a e p esen ed in Table 1.
Du ing he ollow-up, one pa ien died o cance less han
h ee weeks a e su ge y and wo pa ien s du ing he
Nybe g RH e al., J Cance Res The . 2017, 5(8):50-55
52
adju an adio he apy be o e comple ion o he ea men
(7%, 3/44). Thi een pa ien s (30%) had a ecu ence a e
he comple ion o he ea men , 7 in he ul a and 6
ou side he ul a. Th ee ou o 7 pa ien s (43%) wi h ul a
ecu ence we e sal aged by eope a ion and we e ali e
a he end o he ollow-up, while all six pa ien s wi h
ecu ences ou side ul a died o hei disease. A he end
o he ollow-up, hal o he pa ien s we e s ill ali e.
In e obse e ag eemen on IHC
The in e obse e ag eemen s on he VEGF-C exp ession in
p ima y umo and SLN samples we e subs an ial; Cohen’s
unweigh ed kappa o conco dance in umo samples was
0.69 (95% CI 0.48-0.90) and in SLN samples 0.72 (95% CI
0.50-1.06).
VEGF-C exp ession in p ima y umo s and SLN me as ases
O 46 p ima y umo samples, only 7% (3/46) o he in asi e
edges o ul a umo s did no exp ess any VEGF-C. The
exp ession was weak in 26% (12/46). Thus, al oge he 15
umo s (33%) we e classi ied as VEGF-C nega i e (Figu e
1a). The s aining was mode a e o s ong in 53% (25/46)
and 13% (6/46) o he umo edges, espec i ely, and a o al
o 31 (67%) umo s classi ied as VEGF-C posi i e (Figu e 1b).
The e was no di e ence in median age o pa ien s wi h
ei he VEGF-C nega i e o VEGF-C posi i e umo s (75.5
s. 76 yea s, p = 1.00). The high- G ade umo s ended o
exp ess VEGF-C mo e o en han he low-G ade umo s bu
he di e ence was no s a is ically signi ican (p = 0.36), see
Figu e 2. Fo one umo , he G ade was no a ailable.
Table 1 Da a on disease and umo cha ac e is ics in all 44 pa ien s.
Va iable De ini ion Numbe o pa ien s
(pe cen age o all)
FIGOa S age I 19 (43%)
II 4 (9%)
III 20 (46%)
IV 1 (2%)
His ology and G ade o he
p ima y umo in ul a
SCCb43 (98%)
G ade 1 22 (50%)
G ade 2 14 (32%)
G ade 3 7 (16%)
Anaplas ic
ca cinoma
1 (2%)
G ade 3 1 (2%)
Sen inel node me as asis No 23 (52%)
Yes 20 (46%)
No SLN de ec ed 1 (2%)
Pos ope a i e adju an
ea men
No adju an
eamen
22 (50%)
RTc21 (48%)
Concu en CRTd1 (2%)
Ali e a he end o he
ollow-up
Yes 22 (50%)
No 22 (50%)
Cause o dea h Vul a cance o
ela ed
15 (34%)
O he cause 7 (16%)
aThe In e na ional Fede a ion o Gynecology and Obs e ics; bsquamous
cell ca cinoma; c adia ion he apy; dchemo adio he apy
Figu e 1 Examples o (a) a weak and (b) a s ong VEGF-C immunos aining in
squamous cell ca cinoma o he ul a (magni ica ion x 20).
Tumo al VEGF-C exp ession and su gical S age
A he ime o he su ge y, 17 ou o 30 (57%) VEGF-C
posi i e and 8 ou o 14 (57%) VEGF-C nega i e umo s
we e ad anced (> FIGO S age I). The isk o mo e ad anced
su gical S age was he same wi h VEGF-C posi i e and
nega i e umo g oups (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.27-3.53, p =
0.98). Also, he isk o ha ing SLN me as asis a he ime
o su ge y did no signi ican ly di e be ween VEGF-C
posi i e o nega i e umo s (47%, 14/30 and 46%, 6/13,
espec i ely; OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.28-3.77, p = 0.98).
Nybe g RH e al., J Cance Res The . 2017, 5(8):50-55
Figu e 2 VEGF-C exp ession in in asi e edges o ul a cance acco ding o
he his ological G ade.
100 %
90 %
80 %
70 %
60 %
50 %
40 %
30 %
20 %
10 %
0 %
VEGF-C
exp ession
nega i e
VEGF-C
exp ession
posi i e
G ade 1 G ade 2 G ade 3
(a)
(b)
53
Figu e 5 P og ession- ee su i al analysis acco ding o VEGF-C exp ession
o ul a umo s (log ank es p=0.19).
Foo no e: — nega i e VEGF-C exp ession; --- posi i e VEGF-C exp ession; +
censo ed
VEGF-C exp ession in SLN me as asis
The SLN me as ases we e VEGF-C nega i e in 24% (4/17)
and VEGF-C posi i e in 76% (13/17) o he cases (Figu e
3). When he p ima y umo was VEGF-C posi i e, he SLN
me as asis exp essed VEGF-C in 91% (10/11) o he cases
as compa ed o 50% (3/6) o he SLN me as ases in he
VEGF-C nega i e ul a umo s, bu he di e ence did no
each a s a is ical signi icance (p = 0.099).
Figu e 3 Examples o (a) a weak and (b) a s ong VEGF-C immunos aining in
sen inel lymph node me as ases (magni ica ion x 20).
When he SLN me as asis exp essed VEGF-C, in 5 cases ou
o 13 (38%) me as a ic non-SLNs we e also ound. Howe e ,
in ou cases when he SLN me as asis was VEGF-C nega i e,
no o he LN me as ases we e ound (0/4; OR 5.82, 95% CI
0.26-130.89, p = 0.267). The posi i e p edic i e alue o
VEGF-C exp ession in he SLN me as asis in ela ion o he
non-SLN me as ases was 38 % and he nega i e p edic i e
alue 100%, bea ing in mind he small numbe o VEGF-C
nega i e SLN me as ases.
VEGF-C exp ession and he clinical cou se o he disease
In p ima y umo s: Excluding h ee pa ien s ha died be o e
he comple ion o he p ima y ea men , he pa ien s wi h
VEGF-C posi i e p ima y umo s seemed o elapse mo e
o en (39%, 11/28) du ing he ollow-up han he pa ien s
wi h VEGF-C nega i e umo s (15%, 2/13), al hough he isk
was no s a is ically signi ican (RR 2.55, 95% CI 0.66-9.90, p
= 0.18). The VEGF-C posi i e umo s ecu ed mos ly in he
ul a a ea (64%, 7/11) while he VEGF-C nega i e umo s
ecu ed in he inguinal a ea (100%, 2/2). The isk o
g oin ecu ence was signi ican ly lowe , when he umo
exp essed VEGF-C (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16-0.79, p = 0.01).
The disease-speci ic su i al (DSS) as a unc ion o he
VEGF-C exp ession o he p ima y umo s is shown in
Figu e 4. No di e ence was obse ed (Log ank es , p =
0.83). The e seemed o be a end owa ds a be e PFS in
pa ien s wi h VEGF-C nega i e umo s when compa ed o
VEGF-C posi i e umo s, see Figu e 5. Howe e , his end
did no each a s a is ical signi icance (Log ank es , p =
0.19).
Figu e 4 Disease-speci ic su i al analysis acco ding o VEGF-C exp ession
o ul a umo s (log ank es p=0.83).
Foo no e: — nega i e VEGF-C exp ession; --- posi i e VEGF-C exp ession; +
censo ed
In SLN me as ases: The e was no di e ence in he isk o
ecu ence be ween pa ien s wi h VEGF-C posi i e and
nega i e SLN me as ases (5/12 and 1/3, espec i ely,
RR 1.25, 95 % CI 0.22-7.08, p = 0.80), espec i ely. The
only ecu ence in he g oup wi h VEGF-C nega i e SLN
me as asis appea ed in ul a a ea whe eas h ee ou o
i e ecu ences (60%) in he g oup wi h VEGF-C posi i e
SLN me as asis appea ed in inguinal a ea and wo
Nybe g RH e al., J Cance Res The . 2017, 5(8):50-55
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
Follow-up ime (mon hs)
0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
P og ession ee su i al (mon hs)
Su i al p opo ionSu i al p opo ion
(a)
(b)
54
ecu ences (40%) in ul a a ea. These g oups we e oo
small o s a is ical analysis.
Discussion
Acco ding o he esul s o his s udy, he p ima y umo s
o mos ul a cance s exp ess VEGF-C on hei in asi e
edges. The equency o exp ession ended o co ela e
posi i ely wi h his ological G ade, bu he di e ence
did no each s a is ical signi icance. VEGF-C was also
exp essed in h ee qua e s o he SLN me as ases, mo e
o en when he p ima y umo exp essed i , al hough he
di e ence was again no signi ican . VEGF-C exp ession
o he p ima y umo was no associa ed wi h highe
su gical S age o isk o nodal me as asis, no did i
ha e any s a is ically signi ican impac on DSS o PFS. A
nega i e VEGF-C exp ession in a SLN me as asis could be a
a ou able indica o o cance - ee non-SLNs.
When conside ing he a i y o ul a cance , ou sample
size o 44 umo s was ep esen a i e. Howe e , i was s ill
no la ge enough o show s a is ical signi icance be ween
di e en g oups e en when a end was obse ed. The
s eng hs o his s udy we e a long ollow-up ime and i s
clinical o ien a ion. Ou median ollow-up o 39 mon hs
was long enough o elapses o become e iden . We
chose o keep he IHC sco ing simple, bea ing in mind i s
po en ial applica ion o clinical pa ien ca e.
Ou inding o he equency o VEGF-C exp ession in ul a
cance di e s om he only o he published epo by Jach
e al. In hei much smalle popula ion, VEGF-C exp ession
was obse ed only in 10% (1 ou o 10) o ul a squamous
cell cance (SCC) cases. The ca cinoma specimens hey
used o he IHC analysis we e indi idually selec ed [16].
Howe e , he au ho s did no speci y, which pa o he
umo hese specimens ep esen ed no did hey ell
he his ological G ades o ul a umo s – a ea u e ha
in ou s udy seemed o e ec on he VEGF-C exp ession.
When he exp ession o VEGF-C was s udied om 111
ce ical SCC samples by Gombos e al., i was ound o
be he e ogeneous wi hin he umo s. The exp ession was
signi ican ly highe in he ma ginal po ions o ca cinomas
compa ed wi h he cen al egions [19]. We also ocused
on he in asi e edge o ul a umo s and no iced he
same phenomenon as Gombos e al. Fu he mo e; he
semiquan i a i e sco ing sys em Jach e al. used o assess
VEGF-C exp ession ook in o accoun he pe cen age o
VEGF-C posi i e cells. I cen al pa s o he ul a umo s
we e used o he immunos aining analysis, i migh
ha e diminished hei sco es e en when he s aining was
s ong.
Acco ding o li e a u e, SCCs in many di e en o gans
exp ess VEGF-C, i.e., umo s o o al ca i y [20], oesophageal
cance [21] and ce ical cance [22]. The posi i e exp ession
has been associa ed wi h poo e p ognosis and highe isk
o lympha ic me as asis. Howe e , in ou s udy umo al
VEGF-C exp ession did no p edic su gical S age o
equency o he SLN in ol emen .
We obse ed ha VEGF-C posi i e cance s ended o ecu
mo e o en han VEGF-C nega i e cance s, and he e o e
also PFS seemed o be mo e a o able in pa ien s wi h
VEGF-C nega i e umo s, albei no signi ican ly. In ou
s udy popula ion, 43% o pa ien s wi h a ul a ecu ence
we e success ully sal aged, while all g oin ecu ences
we e a al. The isk o g oin ecu ence was signi ican ly
lowe in VEGF-C posi i e umo g oup han in VEGF-C
nega i e umo g oup. Be e p ognosis o he local
ecu ences compa ed o he g oin ecu ences migh
pa ly explain why he posi i e umo al VEGF-C exp ession
had no impac on he disease-speci ic su i al. The VEGF-C
exp ession in SLN me as asis was no associa ed wi h he
ecu ence a e.
A he momen , he only known p ognos ic ac o o
non-SLN me as asis in ul a cance in ela ion o
cha ac e is ics o a SLN me as asis is he size o he
me as asis. GROINSS-V s udy showed ha he isk o non-
SLN me as asis inc eases wi h he size o SLN me as asis.
No size cu -o exis ed below which chances o non-SLN
me as ases would be close o ze o. The e o e, addi ional
ea men was ecommended o all SLN posi i e pa ien s,
bu i always inc eases side e ec s and lowe s quali y o li e
[23]. Ou s udy sugges s ha a nega i e VEGF-C exp ession
in SLN me as ases could ac as an indica o o cance - ee
non-SLNs. Howe e , he small numbe o me as a ic SLN
samples ( ou ) limi s d awing conclusions and his inding
should be es ed in a la ge popula ion. I ep oducible,
VEGF-C exp ession in SLN me as asis could se e as
ano he p ognos ic ac o when conside ing addi ional
ea men .
Conclusion
VEGF-C exp ession was equen in he in asi e edges
o malignan ul a umo s and hei SLN me as ases. I
e i ied in a la ge popula ion, he lack o VEGF exp ession
in SLN me as asis may in he u u e p o e o be a use ul
indica o o lowe isk o non-sen inel lymph node
me as asis. O he wise, VEGF-C exp ession in p ima y
umo s did no seem o unc ion as a help ul indica o o
su gical S age o p ognosis in ul a cance .
Acknowledgemen s
The au ho s wan o hank P o . Jo ma Isola, MD, PhD, o
his aluable ad ice and consul a ion in ela ion o IHC,
Heini Huh ala, M.Sc. o he assis ance wi h he s a is ical
analysis and AV consul an Mika Ma ikainen o his help
wi h he digi al a wo k.
Funding
This s udy has been suppo ed by Resea ch G an s
om Pi kanmaa Hospi al Dis ic 's Science Cen e
(G an numbe 9H183), Compe i i e Resea ch Funding
o Tampe e Uni e si y Hospi al (G an numbe 9L062)
and Resea ch Founda ion o Obs e ics and Gynecology,
Finland (Pe sonal G an o R.N.).
Con lic s o in e es
Au ho s decla e no o he con lic s o in e es han he
abo emen ioned G an s (J.M., R.N.).
Nybe g RH e al., J Cance Res The . 2017, 5(8):50-55

55
Re e ences
[1] Gadducci A, Tana R, Ba so i C, Gue ie i ME, Genazzani AR. Clinico-
pa hological and biological p ognos ic a iables in squamous cell
ca cinoma o he ul a. C i Re Oncol Hema ol. 2012; 83(1):71–83.
[2] Ayhan A, Velipasaoglu M, Salman MC, Gu en S, Gul ekin M, e al.
P ognos ic ac o s o ecu ence and su i al in p ima y ul a
squamous cell cance . Ac a Obs e Gynecol Scand. 2008; 87(11):1143–
1149.
[3] Woelbe L, Eulenbu g C, Choschzick M, K uell A, Pe e sen C, e al.
P ognos ic ole o lymph node me as ases in ul a cance and
implica ions o adju an ea men . In J Gynecol Cance . 2012;
22(3):503–508.
[4] Sznu kowski JJ, Milczek T, Eme ich J. P ognos ic ac o s and a alue o
2009 FIGO s aging sys em in ul a cance . A ch Gynecol Obs. 2013;
287(6):1211–1218.
[5] Hin en F, an den Einden LC, Cissen M, In Hou J, Massuge LF, e
al. Cli o al in ol emen o squamous cell ca cinoma o he ul a:
localiza ion wi h he wo s p ognosis. Eu J Su g Oncol. 2015; 41(4):592–
598.
[6] Näyhä V V, S enbäck FG. Inc eased angiogenesis is associa ed wi h
poo p ognosis o squamous cell ca cinoma o he ul a. Ac a Obs e
Gynecol Scand. 2007; 86(11):1392–1397.
[7] Zan e o PH, Filho DF, Soa es FA, Ne es AR, Palmei a LO. S udy o
biomolecula and clinical p ognos ic ac o s in pa ien s wi h cance o
he ul a unde going su gical ea men . In J Gynecol Cance . 2014;
24(4):766–772.
[8] Wang Z, Slipice ic A, Fø sund M, T ope CG, Nesland JM, e al.
Exp ession o CDK1Ty 15, pCDK1Th 161, Cyclin B1 (To al) and pCyclin
B1Se 126 in ul a squamous cell ca cinoma and hei ela ions
wi h clinicopa ological ea u es and p ognosis. PLoS One. 2015;
10(4):e0121398.
[9] Podg abinska S, Skobe M. Role o lympha ic ascula u e in egional
and dis an me as ases. Mic o asc Res. 2014; 95:46–52.
[10] Pe ei a ER, Jones D, Jung K, Pade a TP. The lymph node
mic oen i onmen and i s ole in he p og ession o me as a ic cance .
Semin Cell De Biol. 2015; 38:98–105.
[11] S acke SA, Williams SP, Ka nezis T, Shayan R, Fox SB, e al.
Lymphangiogenesis and lympha ic essel emodelling in cance . Na
Re Cance . 2014; 14(3):159–172.
[12] Boone B, Blokx W, De Bacque D, Lambe J, Rui e D, e al. The ole
o VEGF-C s aining in p edic ing egional me as asis in melanoma.
Vi chows A ch. 2008; 453(3):257–265.
[13] Kil ae TK, Paulsen EE, Hald SM, Wilsgaa d T, B emnes RM, e al.
Lymphangiogenic ma ke s and hei impac on nodal me as asis and
su i al in non-small cell lung cance - A s uc u ed e iew wi h me a-
analysis. PLoS One. 2015; 10(8):e0132481.
[14] Kojima H, Shijubo N, Yamada G, Ichimiya S, Abe S, e al. Clinical
signi icance o ascula endo helial g ow h ac o -C and ascula
endo helial g ow h ac o ecep o 3 in pa ien s wi h T1 lung
adenoca cinoma. Cance . 2005; 104(8):1668–1677.
[15] Cao W, Fan R, Yang W, Wu Y. VEGF-C exp ession is associa ed wi h he
poo su i al in gas ic cance issue. Tumou Biol. 2014; 35(4):3377–
3383.
[16] Jach R, Dyduch G, Radon-Pok acka M, P zybylska P, Mika M, e al.
Exp ession o ascula endo helial g ow h ac o s VEGF-C and -D,
VEGFR-3, and compa ison o lympha ic essels densi y labeled wi h
D2-40 an ibodies as a p ognos ic ac o s in ul a epi helial neoplasia
(VIN) and in asi e ul a cance . Neu o Endoc inol Le . 2011;
32(4):530–539.
[17] Nybe g RH, Ii onen M, Pa kkinen J, Kuoppala T, Mäenpää JU. Sen inel
node and ul a cance : A se ies o 47 pa ien s. Ac a Obs e Gynecol
Scand. 2007; 86(5):615–619.
[18] Cohen J. A coe icien o ag eemen o nominal scales. Educ Psychol
Meas. 1960; 20(1):37–46.
[19] Gombos Z, Xu X, Chu CS, Zhang PJ, Acs G. Pe i umo al lympha ic essel
densi y and ascula endo helial g ow h ac o C exp ession in ea ly-
s age squamous cell ca cinoma o he u e ine ce ix. Clin Cance Res.
2005; 11(23):8364–8371.
[20] Ka a zanis AD, Koudouna akis E, Papadakis I, Veleg akis G. Molecula
pa hways o lymphangiogenesis and lymph node me as asis in head
and neck cance . Eu A ch O o hinola yngol. 2012; 269(3):731–737.
[21] Peng J, Shao N, Peng H, Chen LQ. P ognos ic signi icance o ascula
endo helial g ow h ac o exp ession in esophageal ca cinoma: A
me a-analysis. J Balk Union Oncol. 2013; 18(2):398–406.
[22] Zhang J, Liu J, Zhu C, He J, Chen J, e al. P ognos ic ole o ascula
endo helial g ow h ac o in ce ical cance : A me a-analysis.
Onco a ge . 2017; 8(15):24797–24803.
[23] Oonk MH, an Hemel BM, Hollema H, de Hullu JA, Ansink AC, e al.
Size o sen inel-node me as asis and chances o non-sen inel-node
in ol emen and su i al in ea ly s age ul a cance : Resul s om
GROINSS-V, a mul icen e obse a ional s udy. Lance Oncol. 2010;
11(7):646–652.
Nybe g RH e al., J Cance Res The . 2017, 5(8):50-55