Liver Cancer Open Access
Copyright ©2005 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Jan 14, 2005; 11(2): 187-192
Published online Jan 14, 2005. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v11.i2.187
Clinical significance of the expression of isoform 165 vascular endothelial growth factor mRNA in noncancerous liver remnants of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma
I-Shyan Sheen, Liver Research Unit, Division of Hepatogastroenterology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, China
Kuo-Shyang Jeng, Department of Surgery, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, China
Shou-Chuan Shih, Chih-Roa Kao, Wen-Hsing Chang, Horng-Yuan Wang, Po-Chuan Wang, Tsang-En Wang, Li-Rung Shyung, Chih-Zen Chen, Medical Department, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, China
Kuo-Shyang Jeng, Mackay Junior School of Nursing, Taipei, Taiwan, China
Author contributions: All authors contributed equally to the work.
Supported by the Grants from the Department of Medical Research, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, China (MMH9237)
Correspondence to: Kuo-Shyang Jeng, M.D., F.A.C.S., Department of Surgery, Mackay Memorial Hospital, No. 92, Sec 2, Chung-San North Road, Taipei, Taiwan, 10449, China. issheen.jks@msa.hinet.net
Telephone: +886-2-5433535 Fax: +886-2-27065704
Received: May 7, 2004
Revised: May 8, 2004
Accepted: July 5, 2004
Published online: January 14, 2005

Abstract

AIM: To investigate the prognostic role of isoform 165 vascular endothelial growth factor messenger RNA (VEGF165 mRNA) in noncancerous liver tissues from patients with primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS: Using a reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-based assay, VEGF mRNA was determined prospectively in noncancerous liver tissues from 60 consecutive patients with HCC undergoing curative resection. We categorized the patients with VEGF165 mRNA over 0.500 in noncancerous liver tissues as group A, and those below 0.500 as group B.

RESULTS: Among the isoforms of VEGF mRNA by multivariate analysis, a higher level of VEGF165 mRNA in noncancerous liver tissue correlated significantly with a higher risk of HCC recurrence (P = 0.039) and recurrence-related mortality (P = 0.048), but VEGF121 did not. The other significant predictors of recurrence consisted of vascular permeation (P = 0.022), daughter nodules (P = 0.033), cellular dedifferentiation (P = 0.033), an absent or incomplete capsule (P = 0.037). A significant variable of recurrence-related mortality was vascular permeation (P = 0.012). As to the clinical manifestations of 16 patients who developed recurrence, the recurrent tumor number over 2, recurrent extent over two-liver segments, and the median survival after recurrence, all significantly correlated with group A patients (P = 0.043, 0.043, and 0.048, respectively). However, the presence of extrahepatic metastasis was not (P>0.05). The difference in recurrence after treatment between the two groups had no statistical significance (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION: The higher expression of isoform VEGF165 mRNA in noncancerous liver remnant of patients with HCC may be a significant biological indicator of the invasiveness of postoperative recurrence.

Key Words: Hepatocellular carcinoma, VEGF protein, Messenger RNA



INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignant tumors with a poor prognosis. During the last 10 years, efforts have been made worldwide toward earlier detection and safer surgical resection of HCC. However, despite these recent diagnostic and therapeutic advances, postoperative recurrence is still common[1-3]. How to early predict the prognosis after resection is a challenging problem for surgeons.

It is well known that the development of a tumor requires oxygen and nutrients, which are supplied through neovascularization. Angiogenic potential is a prerequisite for tumor growth[4-9]. Thus, enhanced gene expression of angiogenic factors in a developing tumor is strongly expected. The release of angiogenic factors from malignant tumors, in turn, would lead to the production of vascular endothelial cells via a paracrine mechanism. Among the potential angiogenic factors, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is the most potently direct acting and specific one. The variation in size due to alternative exon splicing may produce four different isoforms of 121, 165, 189 and 206 amino acids (monomeric size)[10,11]. According to Ferrara’s analysis, VEGF165 is the predominantly expressed form in human cDNA libraries as in most normal cells and tissues[12]. Different cancers may have different expressions of the isoforms. The majority of HCCs expresses an abundance of VEGF121 and VEGF165[10-12].

Angiogenesis in tumors has been proven to be an independent factor of prognosis and metastasis in many carcinomas[13-15]. Mise et al[16] found that VEGF mRNA was also expressed in nontumorous portions of the livers. It remains unknown whether the degree of angiogenesis in nontumorous liver tissues contributes to the grade of HCC malignancy and the potential of postresection recurrence[16].

This study was to elucidate the correlation between VEGF mRNA expression in noncancerous liver tissues and the clinicopathological manifestations of postoperative recurrence, so to provide a useful prognostic parameter for predicting the recurrence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study population

Sixty consecutive patients (35 men and 25 women, with a mean age of 54.5±13.5 years) with HCC undergoing curative hepatectomy from November 2000 to November 2003, were enrolled in this prospective study. Patients who had a previous history of hepatectomy or preoperative neoadjuvant ethanol injection or hepatic arterial chemoembolization (TACE) were all excluded. Surgical procedures performed included 44 major resections (8 extended right lobectomies, 14 right lobectomies, 9 left lobectomies, and 13 two-segmentectomies) and 16 minor resections (14 one-segmentectomies, 1 subsegmentectomy, and 1 wedge resection). Noncancerous liver tissues were obtained from the contralateral lobe remnant of all 60 patients during hepatectomy. The liver tissue was taken at least 3 cm far from the resection margin of HCC. We changed instruments in this procedure to avoid seeding or contaminating the liver biopsy tissues by HCC cells. A control group including 10 healthy volunteers without liver disease (5 men, 5 women, mean age 50 years) and 20 patients with chronic liver disease (10 with liver cirrhosis, 5 with hepatitis B carrier but no cirrhosis, 5 with hepatitis C carrier but no cirrhosis) but without any evidence of HCC also received liver biopsies during laparotomy for other reasons. All liver tissues were examined for VEGF mRNA. All of the patients agreed to participate in this study preoperatively.

Demographic data analysis

Clinicopathological variables analyzed included age, sex (male vs female), presence of liver cirrhosis, Child-Pugh class of liver functional reserve (A vs B), hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection (hepatitis B surface antigen, HBsAg), hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection (anti-hepatitis C virus antibody, Anti-HCV), serum alfafetoprotein (AFP) level (< 20 ng/mL vs 20 to 1000 ng/mL vs≥ 1000 ng/mL), tumor size (<3 cm vs 3 to 10 cm vs≥ 10 cm), tumor encapsulation (complete vs incomplete or absent), presence of daughter nodules, vascular permeation (including vascular invasion and/or tumor thrombi in either the portal or hepatic vein), and cell differentiation grade (Edmondson and Steiner grades I to IV) (Table 1).

Table 1 Characteristics of 60 patients with HCC undergoing curative resection.
VariablesNo. of patients (%)
Age (mean, yr) (±SD)50.4±12.6
Male44(73)
Cirrhosis47(78)
Child- Pugh's class A43(72)
Serum AFP < 20 ng/mL19(32)
20-103 ng/mL29(48)
>103 ng/mL12(20)
HBsAg (+)47(78)
Anti-HCV (+)32(53)
Size of HCC <3 cm17(28)
3-10 cm22(37)
>10 cm2(35)
Edmondson-Steiner's grade I13(22)
Grade II11(18)
Grade III18(30)
Grade IV18(30)
Absent or incomplete capsule39(65)
Vascular permeation33(55)
Daughter nodules31(52)
Detection of VEGF mRNA

It included extraction of RNA and reverse transcription, and amplification of cDNA of VEGF and GAPDH by PCR.

Extraction of RNA and reverse transcription We homogenized each resected tissue (including noncancerous liver tissues and control liver tissues) completely in 1 mL of RNA-beeTM, and added 0.2 mL chloroform and shook it vigorously for 15-30 s. We stored the sample on ice for 5 min and centrifuged at 12000 g for 15 min. We transferred the supernatant to a new 1.5 mL Eppendorf tube and precipitated it with 0.5 mL of isopropanol. The precipitation was as short as 5 min at 4 °C. We centrifuged it at 12000 g for 5 min at 4 °C. Then we removed the supernatant and washed the RNA pellet with 1 mL of 75% ethanol, shaking to dislodge the pellet from the side of the tube. We centrifuged it at 7500 g for 5 min at 4 °C and carefully removed ethanol, the supernatant and dissolved RNA in DEPC-H2O (usually between 50-100 uL), and stored it at -80 °C.

We heated the RNA sample at 55 °C for 10 min and chilled it on ice. We added into it the following components: (1) 4 μL 5×RT butter containing a composition of 50 mmol/L Tris-HCl (pH 8.3) , 75 mmol/L KCl , 3 mmol/L MgCl2 and 10 mmol/L DTT(dithiothreitol), (2) 3 μL 10 mmol/L dNTP, (3) 1.6 μL Oligo-d(T)18 and 0.4 μL random hexamers (N)6 (1 μg/μL), (4) 0.5 μL RNase inhibitor (40 units/ μL), (5) 3 μL 25 mmol/L MnCl2, (6) 6 μL RNA in DEPC-H2O, (7) 0.5 μL DEPC-H2O. We incubated at 70 °C for 2 min, chilled it to 23 °C to anneal primer to RNA. We added 1 μL of M-MLV RTase to (Moloney murine leukemia virus revers transcriptase, 200 units/μL, Promega product). We incubated it for 8 min at 23 °C, then for 60 min at 40 °C. We heated the reaction at 94 °C for 5 min and chilled it on ice and stored cDNA at -20 °C.

Amplification of cDNA of VEGF and GAPDH by PCR The sequences of the sense primers were 5’-AGTGTGTGCCCACTGAGGA-3’ (VEGF) and 5’-AGTCAACGGATTTGGTCGTA-3’ (GAPDH) and those of the antisense primers were 5’-AGTCAACGGATTTGGTCGTA- 3’ (VEGF) and 5’-GGAACA TGTAAACCATGTAG- 3’ (GAPDH). The first polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) solution contained 5 μL of the synthesized cDNA solution, 10 μL of 10×polymerase reaction buffer, 500 μmol/L each of dCTP, dATP, dGTP and dTTP, 15 pmoL of each external primer (EX-sense and EX-antisense), 4 units of Thermus Brockiamus Prozyme DNA polymerase (PROtech Technology Ent. Co., Ltd., Taipei, Taiwan) and water. The PCR cycles were denatured at 94 °C for 1 min, annealed at 52 °C for 1 min, and primer extension at 72 °C for 1 min. The cycles were repeated 40 times. The PCR products were reamplified with internal primers for nested PCR to obtain a higher sensitivity. The first and second PCR components were the same, but for the primer pairs (IN-sense and IN-antisense), the final products were electrophoresed on 2% agarose gel and stained with ethidium bromide. Four different isoforms of human VEGF were identified, arising from alternative splicing of the primary transcript of a single gene. The majority were VEGF121 (165 bp) and VEGF165 (297 bp). The percentage intensity of the VEGF PCR fragment for each liver was relative to a GAPDH PCR fragment (122 bp). The intensity of bands was measured using Fujifilm Science Lab 98 (Image Gauge V3.12). The sensitivity of our assay was assessed using human hepatocytes.

For a positive control for VEGF mRNA expression, we used a hepatoblastoma cell line (HepG2). EDTA-treated water (filtered and vaporized) served as negative controls.

Follow-up study after recurrence

From the value of VEGF165 mRNA of noncancerous liver remnant, we divided the HCC patients into two groups, i.e., those with a higher level of VEGF165 mRNA (over 0.500) as group A, and those with a lower level of VEGF165 mRNA (below 0.500) as group B.

After discharge, all the patients were assessed regularly to detect tumor recurrence with abdominal ultrasonography (every 2-3 mo during the first 5 years, then every 4-6 mo thereafter), serum AFP and liver biochemistry (every 2 mo during the first 2 years, then every 4 mo during the following 3 years, and every 6 mo thereafter), abdominal computed tomography (CT) (every 6 mo during the first 5 years, then annually), and chest x-ray and bone scans (every 6 mo). Hepatic arteriography was obtained if other studies suggested possible cancer recurrence. Detection of tumors on any imaging study was defined as clinical recurrence.

After the detection of recurrence, the following prognostic factors were analyzed and compared between group A and group B: extrahepatic metastasis (presence or absence), the number of recurrent tumor lesions (solitary or multiple), and the extent of recurrent tumors (affecting more than or less than two segments), treatments for recurrent tumors (surgical or non surgical treatment), and survival time after recurrence. The number and extent of recurrent tumors were evaluated and counted from abdominal CT scan and hepatic arteriography.

Statistical analysis

A statistical software (SPSS for Windows, version 8.0, Chicago, Illinois) was employed, Student’s t-test was used to analyze continuous variables and chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test was used for categorical variables. Parameters relating to the presence of VEGF mRNA in liver tissue were analyzed by stepwise logistic regression. A Cox proportional hazard model was used for multivariate stepwise analysis to identify significant variables for outcome of recurrence and mortality. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS
RT-PCR analysis of VEGF transcript in liver tissues

VEGF mRNA was detected in the liver tissues of 10 (VEGF165 in 10 and VEGF121 in 6) of 30 control patients but the values were very low (all below 0.005). In the HCC group, isoform VEGF165 was expressed in noncancerous liver tissues of all 60 patients (100%) (with a value ranging from 0.176 to 0.784) and isoform VEGF121 in 36 patients (60.0%) (with a value ranging from 0.285 to 1.030). As to VEGF165 mRNA values, 49 (81.7%) patients belonged to group A and 11 patients (18.3%) belonged to group B.

We did not detect isoforms VEGF189 and/or VEGF206 in any noncancerous liver tissues or control liver tissues.

Correlation between VEGF mRNA expression in noncancerous liver tissues and clinical histopathologic characteristics

Amongall the patients’ characteristics, age, gender, liver cirrhosis, Child-Pugh class A or B, size of HCC, positivity of HBsAg or anti-HCV, and level of serum AFP showed no statistically significant difference between groups A and B (Table 2). From both univariate and multivariate analyses, the correlation between higher VEGF165 mRNA expression in liver remnant tissues and grade of cellular differentiation (Edmondson Steiner grade), incomplete or absent capsule, presence of daughter nodules, and vascular permeation was significant respectively (Table 2).

Table 2 Comparison of characteristics of primary HCC between different levels of VEGF165 mRNA in noncancerous liver tussues.
CharacteristicsGroup A (%) (n = 49)Group B (%) (n = 11)P
Age (yr, mean)5248NS
Male73.572.7NS
Liver cirrhosis79.672.7NS
Child-Pugh class A71.472.7NS
Tumor size <3 cm28.627.2NS
>10 cm34.736.4NS
HBsAg (+)79.672.7NS
Anti-HCV (+)53.154.5NS
AFP <20 ng/mL32.727.2NS
>1000 ng/mL20.418.2NS
Edmondson-Steiner grade I110.272.70.009
Capsule incomplete or absent275.518.20.007
Daughter nodules361.29.10.001
Vascular permeation465.39.10.001

Table 3 shows that group A patients had more tumor recurrence (28.6% vs 18.2%, P = 0.039), and more recurrence- related death (26.5% vs 9.1%, P = 0.048). After analysis with Cox proportional hazard model, a higher expression of VEGF165 mRNA in the liver remnant had a significant correlation with both a shorter recurrence-free interval and a shorter survival time (P = 0.037 and 0.040, respectively) (Table 3). Factors influencing HCC recurrence and time lapse to recurrence were vascular permeation (P = 0.022, OR = 5.36), daughter nodules (P = 0.033, OR = 4.18), cellular dedifferentiation (P = 0.033, OR = 4.18), incomplete or absent capsule (P = 0.037, OR = 3.10), and higher VEGF165 mRNA expression in the liver remnant (P = 0.039, OR = 2.29) (Table 4). The significant variables affecting death resulting from recurrence included vascular permeation (P = 0.012, OR = 8.35) and higher VEGF165 mRNA expression in the liver remnant (P = 0.048, OR = 2.38) (Table 4).

Table 3 Correlation between VEGF165 mRNA expression in liver remnant and the outcome of patients with HCC.
OutcomeGroup A (%) (n = 49)Group B (%) (n = 11)P
Recurrence (number; %)14(28.6)2(18.2)0.039
Death1 (number; %)13(26.5)1(9.1)0.048
Recurrence-free interval (median, mo)8.5430.037
Duration of survival (median, mo)11.541.50.04
Table 4 Factors influencing tumor recurrence and death of patients in multivariate analysis.
VariablesPOR
Recurrence
Vascular permeation0.0225.36
Daughter nodules0.0334.18
Cellular dedifferentiation0.0334.18
Incomplete or absent capsule0.0373.1
Higher VEGF165 mRNA in liver remnant0.0392.29
Death
Vascular permeation0.0128.35
Higher VEGF165 mRNA in liver remnant0.0482.38

During the follow-up period (range 1 to 3 years, median 2 years), 16 patients (26.7%) had clinically detected recurrence. In 16 patients with recurrent HCCs, there was no statistically significant correlation between the status of a higher VEGF165 mRNA expression in the liver remnant and the treatment for recurrent tumors, and the existence of extrahepatic metastasis (P>0.05, respectively) (Table 5). However, compared with the extent of intrahepatic recurrence and the outcome, group A patients had a greater number of HCC nodules (P = 0.043), and a greater involvement of over two-liver segments (P = 0.043). The median survival after recurrence was significantly shorter (4.4 mo vs 11.0 mo) in group A (P = 0.048) (Table 5).

Table 5 Correlation between the clinical features of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma and the expression of VEGF165 mRNA in primary lesions.
Clinical featuresVEGF165 mRNA
P
high (n = 14)low (n = 2)
Extent of recurrent tumors:
Extrahepatic metastasis (number, %)8(57.1)1(50.0)NS
Multiple recurrent tumors (number, %)10(71.4)1(50.0)0.043
Involvement over two-segments (number, %)10(71.4)1(50.0)0.043
Survival after recurrence (median mo)4.4110.048
Treatment for recurrent tumors
Surgery (number)00NS
Non-surgical treatment1 (number, %)8(57.1)1(50.0)NS
No treatment (number, %)6(42.9)1(50.0)NS
DISCUSSION

Our study revealed that a higher value of VEGF mRNA isoform 165 in noncancerous liver remnant tissues of HCC patients was significantly associated with an increased risk of postoperative recurrence and disease mortality. Even after recurrence, those with a higher VEGF165 mRNA expression had a larger extent of recurrence and a worse outcome. The value of VEGF mRNA isoform 121 in liver remnant tissues was not significantly predictive of the outcome.

Studies reporting the correlation between VEGF of noncancerous liver tissues and the potential recurrence were rare. Mise et al[16] found that vascular endothelial cells in tumorous tissues showed a dense VEGF immunostaining, whereas those in nontumorous tissues did not show any appreciable staining. In contrast, Feng et al[17] found VEGF protein was heterogeneously expressed both in almost all the noncarcinoma portions of the liver and in HCC portions of the liver with HCC. According to Feng et al, the nearer the non-cancerous liver cells were to cancerous cells, the stronger the VEGF expression they showed. In HCC cases, VEGF expression in non-cancerous liver cells was a little stronger than that in HCC cells, although there was no significant difference.

To be more accurate, we measured mRNA expression of VEGF in liver tissues rather than the protein itself. According to the study of El-Assal et al[18], the level of VEGF mRNA did not always correlate with the protein concentration. Immunohistochemistry could not distinguish small amounts of protein, which may partly explain the discrepancy in protein and mRNA levels. From the study of Mise et al, the level of VEGF mRNA in tumorous tissues was higher than that in corresponding nontumorous ones in 12 of 20 patients by more than 1.2-fold. In contrast, in only 2 cases VEGF mRNA levels were lower in tumorous tissues than that in nontumorous tissues (ratio<0.8)[16]. From our study, the level of VEGF mRNA in tumorous tissues was higher than that in corresponding nontumorous ones in 48 (80%) of 60 patients. In 9 patients, the two values were similar and their difference was less than 0.0005. In other 3 patients, VEGF mRNA levels were lower in tumorous tissues than that in nontumorous tissues. We attributed this discrepancy with the result of Mise et al to the different methods of mRNA examination and different backgrounds of study patients. The method we used was the nested RT-PCR which was more accurate than conventional RT-PCR.

The value of VEGF165 mRNA in remnant livers was a ratio of its expression value to the expression value of GAPDH. We defined it as high if it was over 0.5000. There were 81.7% of our study patients belonging to the high-value group. The detailed mechanisms underlying the increase of VEGF mRNA in the remnant liver remain unclear.

In the literature, the tumor invasiveness variables included high-serum AFP, hepatitis, vascular permeation, grade of cellular differentiation, infiltration or absence of capsule, tumor size, coexisting cirrhosis, presence of daughter nodules, multiple lesions, p53 gene mutation, and gamma glutamyl transpeptidase expression[19-30]. Based on the study of Yamaguchi et al[31], VEGF expression in HCC tissues was thought to be related to the histological grade. Suzuki et al[32] found that VEGF mRNA expression in HCC was associated with fibrous capsule formation and septal formation. Whereas, as to the higher level of VEGF165 mRNA in noncancerous liver tissues but not HCC itself from Table 2, we could find it corresponded significantly with some invasiveness variables (cellular differentiation, capsule status, daughter nodules, and vascular permeation) of primary HCC. We propose the following three possible pathogenetic mechanisms.

The first is that if HCC cells have a more invasive behavior, then they may secrete a higher level of VEGF. VEGF may enter the circulation and increase angiogenesis of the remnant liver via its paracrine growth factor function. Some authors reported that VEGF might be synthesized both in HCC cells and in liver cells, and accumulated in their target endothelial cells[32-39]. Yamaguchi et al[31] found VEGF was expressed in surrounding HCC tissues. The noncarcinoma liver cells themselves stimulated by VEGF might also secrete VEGF protein. This effect thus results in a longer and higher VEGF level in remnant liver.

The second is that the noncancerous liver remnant itself has a precancerous change. It is developing into an angiogenetic environment which may secrete a higher VEGF. The mechanism of the precancerous change may be complex, not only influenced by the original HCC itself. Coexisting cirrhosis might contribute to VEGF level[18]. Sasaki et al[24] emphasized that cirrhosis had a higher carcinogenic potential. The association of liver cirrhosis with HCC in our patients was as high as 78% (Table 1). Angiogenesis, the sprouting of new capillaries from a pre-existing vascular bed, could provide a route favoring for the malignantly degenerated hepatocytes to develop and to progress[40]. Regeneration in the cirrhotic liver would pose a potential of malignant degeneration[34]. Akiyoshi et al[34] suggested that serum VEGF level might be associated with hepatocyte regeneration grade. Suzuki et al[32] also supported that VEGF might play an important role in the development of HCC. This could also result in a high level of VEGF in liver remnants.

The third is that the microscopic metastasis from primary HCC to the remnant liver takes place very early. The metastatic lesions may be too small to be detected by the conventional imaging studies including ultrasound, CT scan or arteriography. However, these metastatic HCC cells may also produce a high level of VEGF, resulting in a high expression of VEGF165 mRNA in the remnant liver. Miura et al[33] observed VEGF expression both in HCC and in non-HCC liver tissues, and supported the hypothesis that VEGF may be involved in the development and/or progression of HCC. Yoshiji et al[41] suggested that VEGF played a critical role in the development of HCC in cooperation with endothelial cells, because they found that VEGF-transduced cells showed a marked increase in their invasion activity. Torimura et al considered that HCC seemed to originate as a well-differentiated tumor, becoming progressively less differentiated with enlargement. They concluded that VEGF production could increase with tumor progression[40].

The prognosis after recurrence in relation to VEGF165 mRNA in the noncancerous liver remnant was rarely reported. VEGF, may also increase the permeability of microvessels to 50000-fold over that of histamine, thus causing a significant vascular leakiness. An increase in tumor vessel permeability could increase the change of the entry of tumor cells into the circulation, and newly formed vessels or capillaries may have leaky and weak basement membranes through which tumor cells could penetrate more easily than those of mature vessels, thus accelerating the hematogenous metastasis[5-10]. In addition, VEGF could induce both urokinase-type and tissue-type plasmins in endothelial cells which are the key proteases involved in the degradation of the extracellular matrix. These could result in the progression of recurrent HCC in remnant livers. Our findings suggest that remnant livers with a higher VEGF165 mRNA have a higher malignant potential manifested as a greater number of recurrent tumors, and a larger extent of involved hepatic segments, a higher recurrence rate and mortality, a shorter recurrence-free interval and a shorter survival. All these factors correlated with an aggressive hematogenous metastasis as the majority of our patients had diffuse multiple recurrent nodules over the remnant liver. Repeat surgery was not undertaken on any patient.

Examination of VEGF mRNA expression in liver remnants during hepatectomy may give us information on the risk of postoperative recurrence. Neoadjuvant antiangiogenic therapy after surgery may be considered for such patients. From this prospective study, we suggest that VEGF mRNA expression in noncancerous liver tissues, especially isoform VEGF165, not only plays a significant role in the prediction of postresection recurrence of HCC, but also correlates with a vigorous invasive behavior after recurrence.

Footnotes

Edited by Wang XL Proofread by Zhu LH

References
1.  Poon RT, Fan ST, Lo CM, Liu CL, Wong J. Intrahepatic recurrence after curative resection of hepatocellular carcinoma: long-term results of treatment and prognostic factors. Ann Surg. 1999;229:216-222.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 437]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 467]  [Article Influence: 18.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
2.  Jeng KS, Chen BF, Lin HJ. En bloc resection for extensive hepatocellular carcinoma: is it advisable? World J Surg. 1994;18:834-839.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 30]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 31]  [Article Influence: 1.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
3.  Lai EC, Ng IO, Ng MM, Lok AS, Tam PC, Fan ST, Choi TK, Wong J. Long-term results of resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a multivariate analysis of clinicopathological features. Hepatology. 1990;11:815-818.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 121]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 124]  [Article Influence: 3.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
4.  Folkman J. What is the evidence that tumors are angiogenesis dependent? J Natl Cancer Inst. 1990;82:4-6.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 3254]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3164]  [Article Influence: 93.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
5.  Folkman J. Endothelial cells and angiogenic growth factors in cancer growth and metastasis. Introduction. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 1990;9:171-174.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 95]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 103]  [Article Influence: 3.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
6.  Zhou J, Tang ZY, Fan J, Wu ZQ, Li XM, Liu YK, Liu F, Sun HC, Ye SL. Expression of platelet-derived endothelial cell growth factor and vascular endothelial growth factor in hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein tumor thrombus. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2000;126:57-61.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 55]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 66]  [Article Influence: 2.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
7.  Fox SB, Gatter KC, Harris AL. Tumour angiogenesis. J Pathol. 1996;179:232-237.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
8.  Marmé D. Tumor angiogenesis: the pivotal role of vascular endothelial growth factor. World J Urol. 1996;14:166-174.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 33]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 35]  [Article Influence: 1.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
9.  Folkman J. Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular, rheumatoid and other disease. Nat Med. 1995;1:27-31.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 5621]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5457]  [Article Influence: 188.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
10.  Dvorak HF, Brown LF, Detmar M, Dvorak AM. Vascular permeability factor/vascular endothelial growth factor, microvascular hyperpermeability, and angiogenesis. Am J Pathol. 1995;146:1029-1039.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
11.  Houck KA, Ferrara N, Winer J, Cachianes G, Li B, Leung DW. The vascular endothelial growth factor family: identification of a fourth molecular species and characterization of alternative splicing of RNA. Mol Endocrinol. 1991;5:1806-1814.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 903]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 886]  [Article Influence: 26.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
12.  Ferrara N, Houck K, Jakeman L, Leung DW. Molecular and biological properties of the vascular endothelial growth factor family of proteins. Endocr Rev. 1992;13:18-32.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1033]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1106]  [Article Influence: 34.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
13.  Anan K, Morisaki T, Katano M, Ikubo A, Kitsuki H, Uchiyama A, Kuroki S, Tanaka M, Torisu M. Vascular endothelial growth factor and platelet-derived growth factor are potential angiogenic and metastatic factors in human breast cancer. Surgery. 1996;119:333-339.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 114]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 118]  [Article Influence: 4.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
14.  Sun HC, Tang ZY, Li XM, Zhou YN, Sun BR, Ma ZC. Microvessel density of hepatocellular carcinoma: its relationship with prognosis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1999;125:419-426.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 84]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 99]  [Article Influence: 4.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
15.  Inoue K, Ozeki Y, Suganuma T, Sugiura Y, Tanaka S. Vascular endothelial growth factor expression in primary esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Association with angiogenesis and tumor progression. Cancer. 1997;79:206-213.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
16.  Mise M, Arii S, Higashituji H, Furutani M, Niwano M, Harada T, Ishigami S, Toda Y, Nakayama H, Fukumoto M. Clinical significance of vascular endothelial growth factor and basic fibroblast growth factor gene expression in liver tumor. Hepatology. 1996;23:455-464.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 225]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 227]  [Article Influence: 8.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
17.  An FQ, Matsuda M, Fujii H, Matsumoto Y. Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in surgical specimens of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2000;126:153-160.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 52]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 60]  [Article Influence: 2.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
18.  El-Assal ON, Yamanoi A, Soda Y, Yamaguchi M, Igarashi M, Yamamoto A, Nabika T, Nagasue N. Clinical significance of microvessel density and vascular endothelial growth factor expression in hepatocellular carcinoma and surrounding liver: possible involvement of vascular endothelial growth factor in the angiogenesis of cirrhotic liver. Hepatology. 1998;27:1554-1562.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 251]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 240]  [Article Influence: 9.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
19.  Ng IO, Lai EC, Fan ST, Ng MM, So MK. Prognostic significance of pathologic features of hepatocellular carcinoma. A multivariate analysis of 278 patients. Cancer. 1995;76:2443-2448.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
20.  Arii S, Tanaka J, Yamazoe Y, Minematsu S, Morino T, Fujita K, Maetani S, Tobe T. Predictive factors for intrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after partial hepatectomy. Cancer. 1992;69:913-919.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
21.  Shirabe K, Kanematsu T, Matsumata T, Adachi E, Akazawa K, Sugimachi K. Factors linked to early recurrence of small hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy: univariate and multivariate analyses. Hepatology. 1991;14:802-805.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 247]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 254]  [Article Influence: 7.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
22.  Jwo SC, Chiu JH, Chau GY, Loong CC, Lui WY. Risk factors linked to tumor recurrence of human hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatic resection. Hepatology. 1992;16:1367-1371.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 134]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 138]  [Article Influence: 4.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
23.  Nagao T, Inoue S, Goto S, Mizuta T, Omori Y, Kawano N, Morioka Y. Hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Clinical features and long-term prognosis. Ann Surg. 1987;205:33-40.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 214]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 227]  [Article Influence: 6.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
24.  Sasaki Y, Imaoka S, Masutani S, Ohashi I, Ishikawa O, Koyama H, Iwanaga T. Influence of coexisting cirrhosis on long-term prognosis after surgery in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Surgery. 1992;112:515-521.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
25.  Hsu HC, Wu TT, Wu MZ, Sheu JC, Lee CS, Chen DS. Tumor invasiveness and prognosis in resected hepatocellular carcinoma. Clinical and pathogenetic implications. Cancer. 1988;61:2095-2099.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
26.  Hsu HC, Sheu JC, Lin YH, Chen DS, Lee CS, Hwang LY, Beasley RP. Prognostic histologic features of resected small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Taiwan. A comparison with resected large HCC. Cancer. 1985;56:672-680.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
27.  el-Assal ON, Yamanoi A, Soda Y, Yamaguchi M, Yu L, Nagasue N. Proposal of invasiveness score to predict recurrence and survival after curative hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Surgery. 1997;122:571-577.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 52]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 54]  [Article Influence: 2.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
28.  Yamamoto J, Kosuge T, Takayama T, Shimada K, Yamasaki S, Ozaki H, Yamaguchi N, Makuuchi M. Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after surgery. Br J Surg. 1996;83:1219-1222.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 195]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 198]  [Article Influence: 7.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
29.  Jeng KS, Sheen IS, Chen BF, Wu JY. Is the p53 gene mutation of prognostic value in hepatocellular carcinoma after resection? Arch Surg. 2000;135:1329-1333.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 39]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 45]  [Article Influence: 1.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
30.  Jeng KS, Sheen IS, Tsai YC. Gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase messenger RNA may serve as a diagnostic aid in hepatocellular carcinoma. Br J Surg. 2001;88:986-987.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 6]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6]  [Article Influence: 0.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
31.  Yamaguchi R, Yano H, Iemura A, Ogasawara S, Haramaki M, Kojiro M. Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in human hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 1998;28:68-77.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 258]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 261]  [Article Influence: 10.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
32.  Suzuki K, Hayashi N, Miyamoto Y, Yamamoto M, Ohkawa K, Ito Y, Sasaki Y, Yamaguchi Y, Nakase H, Noda K. Expression of vascular permeability factor/vascular endothelial growth factor in human hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Res. 1996;56:3004-3009.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
33.  Miura H, Miyazaki T, Kuroda M, Oka T, Machinami R, Kodama T, Shibuya M, Makuuchi M, Yazaki Y, Ohnishi S. Increased expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in human hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 1997;27:854-861.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 115]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 128]  [Article Influence: 4.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
34.  Akiyoshi F, Sata M, Suzuki H, Uchimura Y, Mitsuyama K, Matsuo K, Tanikawa K. Serum vascular endothelial growth factor levels in various liver diseases. Dig Dis Sci. 1998;43:41-45.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 54]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 56]  [Article Influence: 2.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
35.  Chow NH, Hsu PI, Lin XZ, Yang HB, Chan SH, Cheng KS, Huang SM, Su IJ. Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in normal liver and hepatocellular carcinoma: an immunohistochemical study. Hum Pathol. 1997;28:698-703.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 85]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 87]  [Article Influence: 3.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
36.  Li XM, Tang ZY, Zhou G, Lui YK, Ye SL. Significance of vascular endothelial growth factor mRNA expression in invasion and metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 1998;17:13-17.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
37.  Qin LX, Tang ZY. The prognostic molecular markers in hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2002;8:385-392.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
38.  Chao Y, Li CP, Chau GY, Chen CP, King KL, Lui WY, Yen SH, Chang FY, Chan WK, Lee SD. Prognostic significance of vascular endothelial growth factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, and angiogenin in patients with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma after surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:355-362.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 154]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 170]  [Article Influence: 8.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
39.  Motoo Y, Sawabu N, Nakanuma Y. Expression of epidermal growth factor and fibroblast growth factor in human hepatocellular carcinoma: an immunohistochemical study. Liver. 1991;11:272-277.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 31]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30]  [Article Influence: 0.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
40.  Torimura T, Sata M, Ueno T, Kin M, Tsuji R, Suzaku K, Hashimoto O, Sugawara H, Tanikawa K. Increased expression of vascular endothelial growth factor is associated with tumor progression in hepatocellular carcinoma. Hum Pathol. 1998;29:986-991.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 137]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 145]  [Article Influence: 5.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
41.  Yoshiji H, Kuriyama S, Yoshii J, Yamazaki M, Kikukawa M, Tsujinoue H, Nakatani T, Fukui H. Vascular endothelial growth factor tightly regulates in vivo development of murine hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Hepatology. 1998;28:1489-1496.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 69]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 75]  [Article Influence: 2.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]