Advertisement

Clinical & Experimental Metastasis

, Volume 29, Issue 6, pp 541–549 | Cite as

The histological growth pattern of colorectal cancer liver metastases has prognostic value

  • Gert G. Van den EyndenEmail author
  • Nigel C. Bird
  • Ali W. Majeed
  • Steven Van Laere
  • Luc Y. Dirix
  • Peter B. Vermeulen
Research Paper

Abstract

Little is known about the biological characteristics that determine the prognosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases. In previous work we reported three different histological patterns of the tumour-liver interface of CRC liver metastases, termed the pushing, replacement and desmoplastic growth pattern (GP). The purpose of this study was to confirm differences in angiogenic and hypoxic properties of CRC liver metastases with different GPs in a large data set and to study the value of the GP as a prognostic factor. In 205 patients undergoing a resection of CRC liver metastases, the GP of the metastasis was determined using haematoxylin-eosin and Gordon Sweet’s silver staining. The tumour cell proliferation fraction (TCP%), endothelial cell proliferation fraction (ECP%) and carbonic anhydrase 9 (CA9) expression were determined using immunohistochemistry. Standard clinicopathological data and overall survival were recorded. 27.8, 15.6, 34.6 and 17.6 % of liver metastases had a replacement, pushing, desmoplastic and mixed GP, respectively. Analyses of TCP%, ECP% and CA9 expression demonstrated that CRC liver metastases with a replacement GP are non-angiogenic, while the ones with a pushing GP are the most angiogenic with angiogenesis being, at least partially, hypoxia-driven. GP (pushing or not) was the only independent predictor of survival at 2 years. CRC liver metastases grow according to different GP patterns with different angiogenic properties. At 2 years of follow-up a GP with a pushing component was an independent predictor of poor survival, suggesting that the pushing GP is characterized by a more aggressive tumour biology. Further elucidation of the mechanisms and biological pathways involved in and responsible for the differences in GP between CRC liver metastases in different patients might lead to therapeutic agents and strategies taking advantage of this 2 year ‘window of opportunity’.

Keywords

Liver metastasis Colorectal Histological Growth pattern Prognosis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank our collaborators of the liver metastasis research network (www.lmrn.org) for inspiring and critical discussions. This work was supported by the King Baudouin Foundation. We want to thank the technical staff of the Laboratory for Pathology GZA and of the TCRU for expert technical assistance. We thank all patients for their willingness to participate in this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Bird NC, Mangnall D, Majeed AW (2006) Biology of colorectal liver metastases: a review. J Surg Oncol 94:68–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dukes CE (1932) The classification of cancer of the rectum. J Pathol Bacteriol 35:323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zakaria S, Donohue JH, Que FG, Farnell MB, Schleck CD, Ilstrup DM, Nagorney DM (2007) Hepatic resection for colorectal metastases: value for risk scoring systems? Ann Surg 246:183–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vermeulen PB, Colpaert C, Salgado R, Royers R, Hellemans H, Van Den Heuvel E, Goovaerts G, Dirix LY, Van Marck E (2001) Liver metastases from colorectal adenocarcinomas grow in three patterns with different angiogenesis and desmoplasia. J Pathol 195:336–342PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stessels F, Van den Eynden G, Van der Auwera I, Salgado R, Van Den Heuvel E, Harris AL, Jackson DG, Colpaert CG, van Marck EA, Dirix LY, Vermeulen PB (2004) Breast adenocarcinoma liver metastases, in contrast to colorectal cancer liver metastases, display a non-angiogenic growth pattern that preserves the stroma and lacks hypoxia. Br J Cancer 90:1429–1436PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bertout JA, Patel SA, Simon MC (2008) The impact of O2 availability on human cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 8:967–975PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rasheed S, Harris AL, Tekkis PP, Turley H, Silver A, McDonald PJ, Talbot IC, Glynne-Jones R, Northover JMA, Guenther T (2009) Hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha and -2alpha are expressed in most rectal cancers but only hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha is associated with prognosis. Br J Cancer 100:1666–1673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lunevicius R, Nakanishi H, Ito S, Kozaki K, Kato T, Tatematsu M, Yasui K (2001) Clinicopathological significance of fibrotic capsule formation around liver metastasis from colorectal cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 127:193–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yamaguchi J, Sakamoto I, Fukuda T, Fujioka H, Komuta K, Kanematsu T (2002) Computed tomographic findings of colorectal liver metastases can be predictive for recurrence after hepatic resection. Arch Surg 137:1294–1297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pezzella F, Pastorino U, Tagliabue E, Andreola S, Sozzi G, Gasparini G, Menard S, Gatter KC, Harris AL, Fox S, Buyse M, Pilotti S, Pierotti M, Rilke F (1997) Non-small-cell lung carcinoma tumor growth without morphological evidence of neo-angiogenesis. Am J Pathol 151:1417–1423PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sardari Nia P, Colpaert C, Blyweert B, Kui B, Vermeulen P, Ferguson M, Hendriks J, Weyler J, Pezzella F, Van Marck E, Van Schil P (2004) Prognostic value of nonangiogenic and angiogenic growth patterns in non-small-cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer 91:1293–1300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sardari Nia P, Van Marck E, Weyler J, Van Schil P (2010) Prognostic value of a biologic classification of non-small-cell lung cancer into the growth patterns along with other clinical, pathological and immunohistochemical factors. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 38:628–636PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chia SK, Wykoff CC, Watson PH, Han C, Leek RD, Pastorek J, Gatter KC, Ratcliffe P, Harris AL (2001) Prognostic significance of a novel hypoxia-regulated marker, carbonic anhydrase IX, in invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 19:3660–3668PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Illemann M, Bird N, Majeed A, Sehested M, Laerum OD, Lund LR, Danø K, Nielsen BS (2006) MMP-9 is differentially expressed in primary human colorectal adenocarcinomas and their metastases. Mol Cancer Res 4:293–302PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Illemann M, Bird N, Majeed A, Laerum OD, Lund LR, Danø K, Nielsen BS (2009) Two distinct expression patterns of urokinase, urokinase receptor and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 in colon cancer liver metastases. Int J Cancer 124:1860–1870PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Paku S, Kopper L, Nagy P (2005) Development of the vasculature in ‘pushing-type’ liver metastases of an experimental colorectal cancer. Int J Cancer 115:893–902PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weidner N, Folkman J, Pozza F, Bevilacqua P, Allred EN, Moore DH, Meli S, Gasparini G (1992) Tumor angiogenesis: a new significant and independent prognostic indicator in early-stage breast carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 84:1875–1887PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Takebayashi Y, Aklyama S, Yamada K, Akiba S, Aikou T (1996) Angiogenesis as an unfavorable prognostic factor in human colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 78:226–231PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vermeulen PB, Van den Eynden GG, Huget P, Goovaerts G, Weyler J, Lardon F, Van Marck E, Hubens G, Dirix LY (1999) Prospective study of intratumoral microvessel density, p53 expression and survival in colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 79:316–322PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paku S, Lapis K (1993) Morphological aspects of angiogenesis in experimental liver metastases. Am J Pathol 143:926–936PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Paku S, Timár J, Lapis K (1990) Ultrastructure of invasion in different tissue types by Lewis lung tumour variants. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol 417:435–442PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tóvári J, Paku S, Rásó E, Pogány G, Kovalszky I, Ladányi A, Lapis K, Timár J (1997) Role of sinusoidal heparan sulfate proteoglycan in liver metastasis formation. Int J Cancer 71:825–831PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Paku S (1998) Current concepts of tumor-induced angiogenesis. Pathol Oncol Res 4:62–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gert G. Van den Eynden
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nigel C. Bird
    • 2
  • Ali W. Majeed
    • 2
  • Steven Van Laere
    • 1
  • Luc Y. Dirix
    • 1
  • Peter B. Vermeulen
    • 1
  1. 1.Translational Cancer Research Unit, Augustinus HospitalWilrijk, AntwerpBelgium
  2. 2.Liver Research Group, Clinical Sciences (South), Royal Hallamshire HospitalSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations