• H Hawighorst, U Schaeffer, P G Knapstein, M V Knopp, W Weikel, S O Schönberg, M Essig, and G van Kaick.
• Deutschen Krebsforschungszentrums (dkfz), Heidelberg. H.Hawighorst@dkfz-heidelberg.de
• Rofo. 1998 Nov 1; 169 (5): 499-504.

PurposePurpose of this study is to compare functional MRI parameters with histomorphological markers of tumor microvessel density (MVD) and permeability (vascular endothelial growth factor) and to determine the ultimate value of both approaches by correlation with disease outcome in patients with primary cancer of the uterine cervix.MethodPharmacokinetic parameters were calculated from contrast-enhanced dynamic MR imaging series in 37 patients with biopsy-proven primary cervical cancer. On the operative whole mount specimens, histomorphological markers of tumor angiogenesis (MVD, VEGF) were compared with the MRI-derived parameters. For MRI and histomorphological data, Kaplan-Meier survival curves were calculated and compared using logrank statistics.ResultsSignificant (p < 0.05-0.01) associations were found between MVD and dynamic MRI parameters. No significant relationships were observed between VEGF expression and dynamic MRI parameters. Disease outcome was better assessed with dynamic MRI parameters than with the histomorphological approach.ConclusionsIt is concluded that 1) the pathophysiological basis for the amplitude A in dynamic MRI is MVD but not VEGF expression; and 2) a functional, dynamic MRI approach may be more suited to assess angiogenic activity in terms of patient survival than current histomorphological-based markers of tumor angiogenesis.

33 keywords...

hide…