Barbareschi M, Gasparini G, Morelli L, Forti S, Dalla Palma P
Department of Pathology, S. Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1995;36(2):181-92. doi: 10.1007/BF00666039.
At present the most used method to quantify tumor angiogenesis in human solid tumors is the count of intratumoral microvessels in the primary lesion. This method requires the use of specific markers to vascular endothelium and of immunohistochemical procedures to visualize microvessels. Several studies have found that intratumoral microvessel density (IMD) determined in the primary tumor is significantly associated with metastasis and prognosis in some solid neoplasia, particularly in operable breast carcinoma. The subjective evaluation of IMD made by two observers at the microscope is rapid and of low cost, but presents some difficulties, mainly the identification of the most vascularized area ("hot-spot") within each tumor. This method can be improved upon to attain a better reproducibility among different pathologists. For example, the use of a multiparametric computerized image analysis system (CIAS) seems to be a promising tool to improve accuracy, feasibility and reproducibility of microvessel counts, although there are still some open technical problems to completely automate its use. Angiogenic activity is the result of a balance between angiogenic stimuli and angio-inhibition. Therefore the determination of angiogenic peptides and/or natural angiogenesis inhibitors in the tumor tissue, serum, or urine of cancer patients seems to be a promising alternative to microvessel counting. At present it is possible to determine the expression of basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), vascular endothelial growth factor, and transforming growth factor beta using immunohistochemical methods. Serum and urine levels of bFGF can be assessed using an immunoenzymatic assay. Methods used to assess the expression and levels of urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) or plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) have also been developed, and correlate with angiogenic activity and prognosis of patients with breast cancer. Finally, some investigational methods to assess angiogenesis in vivo are presented and discussed. Angiogenesis is a very complex phenomenon. Thus it seems reasonable to hypothesize that its assessment by using concurrently several of the available methods may provide more valid, accurate, and comprehensive information on the angiogenic activity of each single tumor. For a reliable and reproducible assessment of angiogenesis for all of the assays, validation procedures and quality control protocols are mandatory.
目前,在人类实体瘤中量化肿瘤血管生成最常用的方法是对原发性病变中的肿瘤内微血管进行计数。该方法需要使用血管内皮特异性标记物以及免疫组织化学程序来观察微血管。多项研究发现,在原发性肿瘤中测定的肿瘤内微血管密度(IMD)与某些实体瘤尤其是可手术乳腺癌的转移和预后显著相关。由两名观察者在显微镜下对IMD进行主观评估快速且成本低,但存在一些困难,主要是识别每个肿瘤内血管化程度最高的区域(“热点”)。该方法可加以改进,以在不同病理学家之间获得更好的可重复性。例如,使用多参数计算机图像分析系统(CIAS)似乎是提高微血管计数准确性、可行性和可重复性的一种有前景的工具,尽管仍存在一些未解决的技术问题,无法完全实现其使用自动化。血管生成活性是血管生成刺激与血管生成抑制之间平衡的结果。因此,测定癌症患者肿瘤组织、血清或尿液中的血管生成肽和/或天然血管生成抑制剂似乎是微血管计数的一种有前景的替代方法。目前,可以使用免疫组织化学方法测定碱性成纤维细胞生长因子(bFGF)、血管内皮生长因子和转化生长因子β的表达。bFGF的血清和尿液水平可使用免疫酶测定法进行评估。用于评估尿激酶型纤溶酶原激活物(uPA)或纤溶酶原激活物抑制剂-1(PAI-1)表达和水平的方法也已开发出来,并且与乳腺癌患者的血管生成活性和预后相关。最后,介绍并讨论了一些评估体内血管生成的研究方法。血管生成是一个非常复杂的现象。因此,合理的假设是,同时使用几种现有方法对其进行评估可能会为每个单一肿瘤的血管生成活性提供更有效、准确和全面的信息。为了对所有检测进行可靠且可重复的血管生成评估,验证程序和质量控制方案是必不可少的。