Medical Oncology

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 314–318

Microvessel density in chemosensitive and chemoresistant diffuse large B-cell lymphomas

  • O Bairey
  • Y Zimra
  • E Kaganovsky
  • M Shaklai
  • E Okon
  • E Rabizadeh
Original Paper


Preliminary reports involving a number of different kinds of tumors have indicated that microvessel quantification may be useful in predicting disease outcome. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between microvessel density (MVD) as a parameter of tumor angiogenesis and the response to chemotherapy in diffuse large B-cell (DLBC) lymphomas.

A total of 36 DLBC lymphoma patients were evaluated, 23 of them with a chemosensitive; responsive disease (median survival 8 y) and 13 with a chemoresistant, refractory disease (median survival 8 months). Microvessel quantification was performed by immunohistochemical staining, using monoclonal antibodies against factor VIII related antigen (F8RA) and against platelet/endothelial cell adhesion molecule-CD31.

We found that F8RA stained a significantly higher number of blood vessels (about 2.5 times more) than CD-31; 7 samples were not stained with CD-31 but were positive for F8RA. There was no significant difference between the density of microvessel staining of the two groups. In the chemosensitive DLBC lymphomas positive for F8RA, the mean number of microvessels stained was 54.5±36.1 per microscopic field (200×) examined (range 6–149) whereas in the chemoresistant group the corresponding mean number was 43.1±25.5 (range 11–94).

F8RA appears to be more sensitive for staining DLBC lymphomas microvessels than CD-31. Our data demonstrate that there is no correlation between tumor MVD and response to chemotherapy in patients with DLBC lymphomas.


angiogenesis non-Hodgkin's lymphoma microvessel count chemosensitive chemoresistant survival 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Folkman J. Clinical application of research on angiogenesis.New Engl J Med 1995;333: 1757–1763.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pluda JM. Tumor-associated angiogenesis: mechanisms, clinical implications, and therapeutic strategies.Semin Oncol 1997;24: 203–218.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Folkman J. What is the evidence that tumors are angiogenesis dependent?J Natl Cancer Inst 1990;82: 4–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baillie CT, Winslet MC, Bradley NJ. Tumor vasculature a potential therapeutic target.Br J Cancer 1995;72: 257–267.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gasparini G, Harris AL. Clinical importance of the determination of tumor angiogenesis in breast carcinoma: more than a new prognostic tool.J Clin Oncol. 1995;13: 765–782.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weidner Net al. Tumor angiogenesis: a new significant and independent prognostic indicator in early stage breast carcinoma.J Natl Cancer Inst 1992;84: 1875–1887.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bochner BHet al. Angiogenesis in bladder cancer: relationship between microvessel density and tumor prognosis.J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87: 1603–1612.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hollingsworth HCet al. Tumor angiogenesis in advanced stage ovarian carcinoma.Am J Pathol 1995;147: 33–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kaku Tet al. Angiogenesis in endometrial carcinoma.Cancer 1997;80: 741–747.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fontanini Get al. Angiogenesis as a prognostic indicator of survival in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: a prospective study.J Natl Cancer Inst 1997;89: 881–886.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    roychowdhury DFet al. New prognostic factors in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Cancer 1996;77: 1419–1426.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lindmark Get al. Prognostic significance of the microvascular count in colorectal cancer.J Clin Oncol 1996;14: 461–466.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tanigawa Net al. Extent of tumor vascularization correlates with prognosis and hematogenous metastasis in gastric carcinomas.Cancer Res 1996;56: 2671–2676.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gasparini Get al. Intratumoral microvessel density and p53 protein: correlation with metastasis in head-and-neck squamous-cell carcinoma.Int J Cancer 1993;55: 739–744.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Foss AJet al. Microvessel count predicts survival in uveal melanoma.Cancer Res 1996;56: 2900–2903.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weidner N. Intratumor microvessel density as a prognostic factor in cancer.Am J Pathol 1995;147: 9–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ribatti Det al. Angiogenesis spectrum in the stroma of B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. An immunohistochemical and ultrastructural study.Eur J Haematol 1996;56: 45–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vacca Aet al. Angiogenesis extent and macrophage density increase simultaneously with pathological progression in B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphomas.Br J Cancer 1999;79: 965–970.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harris NLet al. A revised European-American classification of lymphoid neoplasms: a proposal from the international Lymphoma Study Group.Blood 1994;84: 1361–1392.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vermeulen PBet al. Quantification of angiogenesis in solid human tumours: an international consensus on the methodology and criteria of evaluation.Eur J Cancer 1996;32A: 2474–2484.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Perez-Atayde ARet al. Spectrum of tumor angiogenesis in the bone marrow of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.Am J Pathol 1997;150: 815–821.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vacca Aet al. Bone marrow of patients with active multiple myeloma: angiogenesis and plasma cell adhesion molecules LFA-1, VLAQ-4, LAM-1, and CD44.Am J Hamatol 1995;50: 9–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vacca Aet al. Bone marrow neovascularization, plasma cell angiogenic potential, and matrix metalloproteinase-2 secretion parallel progression of human multiple myeloma.Blood 1999;93: 3064–3073.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rajkumar SV, Fonseca R, Witzig TEet al. Bone marrow angiogenesis in patients achieving complete response after stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma.Leukemia 1999;13: 469–472.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Singhal Set al. Antitumor activity of thalidomide in refractory multiple myeloma.New Engl J Med 1999;341: 1565–1571.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    salven P, Teerenhovi L, Joensuu H. A high pretreatment serum basic fibroblast growth factor concentration is an independent predictor of poor prognosis in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.Blood 1999;94: 3334–3339.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Salven P, Teerenhovi L, Joensuu H. A high pretreatment serum vascular endothelial growth factor concentration is associated with poor outcome in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.Blood 1997;90: 3167–3172.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bertolini Fet al. Angiogenic growth factors and endostatin in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.Br J Haematol 1999;106: 504–509.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bairey O, Zimra Y, Shaklai Met al. Expression of Bcl-2, Bcl-X, Bax and Bak proteins in short and long-lived patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphomas.Clin Cancer Res 1999;5: 2860–2866.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd All rights reserved 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • O Bairey
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Y Zimra
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • E Kaganovsky
    • 4
    • 3
  • M Shaklai
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • E Okon
    • 4
    • 3
  • E Rabizadeh
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of HematologyRabin Medical CenterPetah-TikvaIsrael
  2. 2.Felsenstein Medical Research CenterRabin Medical CenterPetah-TiqvaIsrael
  3. 3.Sackler Faculty of MedicineTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  4. 4.Pathology and the Felsenstein Medical Research CenterRabin Medical CenterPetah-TikvaIsrael

Personalised recommendations