Et al.,83 1997 Kitadai et al.,42 1998 Uchida et al.,84 1998 Li et al.,85 2000

Et al.,83 1997 Kitadai et al.,42 1998 Uchida et al.,84 1998 Li et al.,85 2000 Gastric carcinoma Maeda et al.,86 1996 Tanigawa et al.,49 1997 Maeda et al.,87 1998 Saito et al.,88 1999 Ikeguchi et al.,89 1999 Maeda et al.,90 1999 Sakatani et al.,91 2000 Ichikura et al.,92 2001 Kido et al.,93 2001 Kimura et al.,94 2001 Kakeji et al.,95 2002 Colorectal carcinoma Takahashi et al.,55 1997 Amaya et al.,96 1997 Tokunaga et al.,97 1998 Ishigami et al.,98 1998 Maeda et al.,99 2000 Cascinu et al.,100 2000 Lee et al.,101 2000 Harada et al.,102 2001 Pancreatic carcinoma Itakura et al.,103 1997 Ellis et al.,63 1998 Fujimoto et al.,104 1998 Ikeda et al.,64 1999 Ikeda et al.,105 2001 Niedergethmann et al.,65 2000 Search engine optimisation et al.,106 2000 Knoll et al.,107 2001 Hepatocellular carcinoma El-Assal et al.,69 1998 An et al.,108 2000 No. of Patients Strategy Univariate Evaluation Multivariate Analysis75 119 102 96 129 163 120 356 97 195 128 76 56 102 243 27 136 61 60 100 121 145 259 75 22 50 40 48 29 142 19 71Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining ELISA Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining RT-PCR Northern blot Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining RT-PCR Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining Immunostaining RT-PCR ImmunostainingYes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No NoYes NA No No Yes No NA Yes NA Yes NA Yes No NA NA No Yes Yes Yes NA Yes Yes Yes NA NA NA Yes Yes NA Yes No No NAP 0.05. NA, not available; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; RT-PCR, reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction.noma. The significance of VEGF in CEACAM1 Proteins Biological Activity Barrett’s adenocarcinoma is unknown. With the 11 studies on patients with gastric carcinoma (Table 3), 9 demonstrated a poorer prognosis with high tumorVEGF expression.86 88,90 five 4 research located a significant prognostic value of tumor VEGF expression even with multivariate evaluation.86,88,90,92 Once again, all of these research had been performed in Japanese sufferers, and it should be noted that four of the2003 Lippincott Williams WilkinsAnnals of Surgery Volume 238, Number 1, JulyAngiogenesis in Gastrointestinal Cancers11 research had been reported by the same group.86,87,90,91 In one particular study, VEGF expression in preoperative endoscopic tumor biopsies was a important independent predictor of disease recurrence immediately after resection of early gastric cancer.90 As well as these studies, other authors have demonstrated a positive connection between VEGF expression and vascular invasion, lymph node metastasis, and tumor stage.109,110 Tanigawa et al.49 reported that tumor MVD but not VEGF expression was predictive of Fc gamma RII/CD32 Proteins Synonyms patient survival, though there was a considerable correlation between VEGF expression and tumor MVD. Saito et al.88 studied 356 patients with advanced gastric carcinoma characterized by serosal invasion and found that VEGF-positive tumors had been linked having a drastically worse prognosis. Nevertheless, precisely the same group reported that VEGF expression was not a significant prognostic issue in an additional study confined to sufferers with serosal invasion by tumor but without having lymph node secondaries.89 Eight studies on colorectal cancer have consistently demonstrated that a high VEGF expression in the tumor was a signif.