Korean J Urol.  2006 Feb;47(2):111-117. 10.4111/kju.2006.47.2.111.

Prognostic Value of Tumor Angiogenesis and Microvascular Invasion in Renal Cell Carcinoma

• Cho DS
• Yim H
• Oh DK
• Kang JH
• Kim YS
• Kim SJ

• KMID: 2294187
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2006.47.2.111

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study was performed to evaluate the impact of microvessel density (MVD), a reflection of tumor angiogenesis, and microvascular invasion (MVI) on the prognosis of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue sections of RCC from 81 patients who had undergone radical nephrectomy were stained immunohistochemically for CD34, which decorate endothelial cells, in order to assess MVD and MVI. The immunostaining results of MVD and MVI were compared with the clinicopathological variables.
RESULTS
Twenty-two patients had either synchronous or metachronous metastases and fourteen patients died during the follow-up. MVD was significantly correlated with only metastasis (synchronous or metachronous; p=0.020). MVI was significantly correlated with tumor size (p=0.005), TNM stage (p<0.001), T stage (p<0.001), M stage (p=0.001), and metastasis (synchronous or metachronous; p=0.007). MVD was not significantly associated with MVI (p=0.232). The survival rate of patients with higher MVD or MVI-positive tumors was significantly lower than that of patients with lower MVD or MVI-negative tumors, respectively (p<0.0001, p=0.0002). Multivariate analyses indicated that tumor size, M stage and MVI were independent prognostic factors for cancer-specific survival. MVD was not an independent factor.
CONCLUSIONS
MVD and MVI were associated with metastasis and a worse prognosis in RCC, which suggests that tumor angiogenesis and MVI may play an important role in the progression of RCC. MVI was an independent prognostic factor for cancer-specific survival.

Keyword

Renal cell carcinoma; Prognosis; Veins

MeSH Terms

Carcinoma, Renal Cell*
Endothelial Cells
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Microvessels
Multivariate Analysis
Neoplasm Metastasis
Nephrectomy
Prognosis
Survival Rate
Veins

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. Immunohistochemical staining for CD34. (A) Endothelial cells of microvessels in renal cell carcinoma are demonstrated by anti-CD34 immunostaining (x200). (B) Note the group of tumor cells surrounded by endothelial cells, which are stained with anti-CD34 antibody (x200).

• 

  Fig. 2. Kaplan-Meier cancer-specific survival curves according to microvascular invasion (MVI). The survival rate of patients with MVI-positive tumors is significantly lower than that of patients with MVI-negative tumors (p=0.0002).

Reference

1.Chow WH., Devesa SS., Warren JL., Fraumeni JF Jr. Rising in cidence of renal cell cancer in the United States. JAMA 1999. 281:1628. ∗.

2.Delahunt B. Histopathologic prognostic indicators for renal cell carcinoma. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1998. 15:68–76.

3.Yasunaga Y., Shin M., Miki T., Okuyama A., Aozasa K. Prognostic factors of renal cell carcinoma: a multivariate analysis. J Surg Oncol. 1998. 68:11–8.

4.Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. N Engl J Med. 1971. 285:1182–6.

5.Blood CH., Zetter BR. Tumor interactions with the vasculature: angiogenesis and tumor metastasis. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1990. 1032:89–118.

6.Bochner BH., Cote RJ., Weidner N., Groshen S., Chen SC., Skinner DG, et al. Angiogenesis in bladder cancer: relationship between microvessel density and tumor prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995. 87:1603–12.

7.Tanigawa N., Amaya H., Matsumura M., Lu C., Kitaoka A., Matsuyama K, et al. Tumor angiogenesis and mode of metastasis in patients with colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 1997. 57:1043–6.

8.Weidner N., Carroll PR., Flax J., Blumenfeld W., Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis correlates with metastasis in invasive prostate carcinoma. Am J Pathol. 1993. 143:401–9.

9.Yoshino S., Kato M., Okada K. Prognostic significance of microvessel count in low stage renal cell carcinoma. Int J Urol. 1995. 2:156–60.

10.Nativ O., Sabo E., Reiss A., Wald M., Madjar S., Moskovitz B. Clinical significance of tumor angiogenesis in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma. Urology. 1998. 51:693–6.

11.Delahunt B., Bethwaite PB., Thornton A. Prognostic significance of microscopic vascularity for clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Br J Urol. 1997. 80:401–4.

12.Imao T., Egawa M., Takashima H., Koshida K., Namiki M. Inverse correlation of microvessel density with metastasis and prognosis in renal cell carcinoma. Int J Urol. 2004. 11:948–53.

13.MacLennan GT., Bostwick DG. Microvessel density in renal cell carcinoma: lack of prognostic significance. Urology. 1995. 46:27–30.

14.Samma S., Yoshida K., Ozono S., Ohara S., Hayashi Y., Tabata S, et al. Tumor thrombus and microvascular invasion as prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1991. 21:340–5.

15.Sevinc M., Kirkali Z., Yoriikoglu K., Mungan U., Sade M. Prognostic significance of microvascular invasion in localized renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2000. 38:728–33.

16.Sosa RE., Muecke EC., Vaughan ED Jr., McCarron JP Jr. Renal cell carcinoma extending into the inferior vena cava: the prognostic significance of the level of vena caval involvement J Urol. 1984. 132:1097–100.

17.Ljungberg B., Stenling R., Osterdahl B., Farrelly E., Aberg T., Roos G. Vein invasion in renal cell carcinoma: impact on metastatic behavior and survival. J Urol. 1995. 154:1681–4.

18.Cherrie RJ., Goldman DG., Lindner A., deKemion JB. Prognostic implications of vena caval extension of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 1982. 128:910–2.

19.Golimbu M., Joshi P., Sperber A., Tessler A., Al-Askari S., Morales P. Renal cell carcinoma: survival and prognostic factors. Urology. 1986. 27:291–301.

20.Mrstik C., Salamon J., Weber R., Stogermayer F. Microscopic venous infiltration as predictor of relapse in renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 1992. 148:271–4.

21.Goncalves PD., Srougi M., Dall' oglio MF., Leite KR., Ortiz V., Hering F. Low clinical stage renal cell carcinoma: relevance of microvascular tumor invasion as a prognostic parameter. J Urol. 2004. 172:470–4.

22.Van Poppel Η., Vandendriessche H., Boel K., Mertens V., Goethuys H., Haustermans K, et al. Microscopic vascular invasion is the most relevant prognosticator after radical nephrectomy for clinically nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 1997. 158:45–9.

23.Lang H., Lindner V., Letoumeux H., Martin M., Saussine C., Jacqmin D. Prognostic value of microscopic venous invasion in renal cell carcinoma: long-term follow-up. Eur Urol. 2004. 46:331–5.

24.Ishimura T., Sakai I., Harada KI., Hara I., Eto H., Miyake H. Clinicopathological features of recurrence after radical surgery for nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma. Int J Clin Oncol. 2004. 9:369–72.

25.Dekel Y., Koren R., Kugel V., Livne PM., Gal R. Significance of angiogenesis and microvascular invasion in renal cell carcinoma. Pathol Oncol Res. 2002. 8:129–32.

26.Hermanek P., Schrott KM. Evaluation of the new tumor, nodes and metastases classification of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 1990. 144:238–42.

27.Yi JW., Kim YJ., Kim YW., Chang SG. The prognostic factors influencing the survival rate in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma. Korean J Urol. 2004. 45:872–7.

28.Guinan P., Sobin LH., Algaba F., Badellino F., Kameyama S., MacLennan G, et al. TNM staging of renal cell carcinoma: Workgroup No. 3. Union Internationale Contre le Cancer (UICC) and the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC). Cancer. 1997. 80:992–3.

29.Fuhrman SA., Lasky LC., Limas C. Prognostic significance of morphologic parameters in renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 1982. 6:655–63.