Relationship between the expression of iNOS, VEGF, tumor angiogenesis and gastric cancer

Table 1 The relationship between the expressions of iNOS and VEGF, MVD and pathological features of gastric carcinoma

Pathological characteristics	MVD (¯x ± s)	positive iNOS (%)	positive VEGF (%)	total
Site of gastric cancer lesion
Upper one third	61.50 ± 14.50	5 (62.50)	4 (50.0)	8
Middle one third	59.82 ± 16.54	8 (61.54)	10 (76.92)	13
Lower one third	54.52 ± 20.01	14 (56.00)	21 (84.0)	25
Size of tumor
< 3 cm	61.50 ± 20.51	1 (50.0)	2 (100.0)	2
3-5 cm	59.78 ± 16.58	11 (61.11)	14 (77.78)	18
> 5 cm	54.86 ± 17.99	15 (57.69)	19 (73.08)	26
Depth of invasion
Invading serosa	62.35 ± 32.97	22 (64.71)	29 (85.29)c	34
Not invading serosa	55.15 ± 18.28	5 (41.67)	6 (50.0)	12
Metastasis of lymph nodes
Positive	68.69 ± 18.07a	26 (70.27)b	31 (83.78)d	37
Negative	54.40 ± 14.23	3 (33.33)	4 (44.44)	9
Degree of differentiation*
Well differentiated	49.49 ± 20.10	10 (66.67)	11 (73.33)	15
Poorly differentiated	59.24 ± 16.80	17 (54.84)	24 (77.42)	31

Note:*Well differentiated cancer cells include highly and moderately differentiated ones; poorly differentiated cancer cells include poorly differentiated and undifferentiated ones and mucous adenocarcinoma.

^aP < 0.01 (t = 2.205), vs MVD in cases having no lymph node metastasis;

^bP < 0.05 (χ² = 6.3587), vs the rate of expression of iNOS in cases having no lymph node metastasis;

^cP < 0.05 (χ² = 6.2584), vs the rate of expression of VEGF in gastric carcinomas not invading to serosa;

^dP < 0.05 (χ² = 6.1574), vs the rate of expression of VEGF in cases having no lymph node metastasis.