Summary The intensity of angiogenesis as measured by the density of microvessels has been reported to be associated with a poor prognosis in invasive breast cancer in some, but not all, studies. The reasons for these discrepancies may be variations in the methodologies used. The monoclonal antibody used to identify the microvessels, the number of high-density areas or 'hotspots' counted and the type of value taken for statistical analysis (highest count or mean count) have varied between the different studies. We have assessed which of the three commonly used monoclonal antibodies provides the best visualization of microvessels in invasive breast cancer and have used methods that give reproducible data for the optimum number of 'hotspots' to count for each reagent. Thus, microvessels in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens from 174 primary breast cancers were immunohistochemically stained with monoclonal antibodies to FVIIIRAg, CD31 and CD34 and ten fields counted at 200 x magnification for each antibody. The highest count and the mean value of the highest of three, five and ten counts were used to examine the relationship between the density of microvessels and overall survival of patients with a median follow-up time of 7.1 years. Antibodies to CD31 and CD34 identified more vessels than antibodies to FVIIIRAg (median highest count per mm2: CD31 = 100, CD34 = 100, FVIIIRAg = 81). The monoclonal antibody to CD31, however, was the least reliable antibody, immunohistochemically staining only 87% of sections compared with 98% for the monoclonal to CD34 and 99% for the monoclonal to FVIIIRAg. There was a high degree of correlation between the number of vessels stained by the different antibodies, though there were some considerable differences in actual counts for serial sections of the same specimen stained by the different antibodies. Patients could be divided into two groups corresponding to those with high microvessel densities and those with low microvessel densities. Using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, there was a close association for all three antibodies between vessel density and survival whichever method of recording the highest vessel densities was used. Using log-rank tests and Cox's regression analysis, anti-CD34 gave the most significant results of the three antibodies, whereas a simple cut-off at the 75th percentile for the high and low groups produced the best association with patient survival. For anti-CD34 the highest microvessel density (P = 0.0014) and the mean value of the highest three microvessel densities (P= 0.004) showed a good correlation with patient death, whereas for anti-CD31 (P= 0.008) and anti-FVIIIRAg (P= 0.007) the highest count gave the best correlation using Cox's regression analysis.
BACKGROUND: Studies from around the world have shown that suicide risk is increased in cancer patients, but no previous detailed analysis has been carried out in England. METHODS: We calculated standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) for suicide in 206 129 men and 211 443 women diagnosed with cancer in South East England between 1996 and 2005, relative to suicide rates in the general population. RESULTS: We found a significantly increased risk of suicide in men (SMR 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20 -1.73) and a moderately increased risk in women (SMR 1.19, 95% CI 0.88 -1.57). In both sexes, relative risk of suicide was greatest in the first year after cancer diagnosis (SMR for men 2.42, 95% CI 1.84 -3.13; SMR for women 1.44, 95% CI 0.82 -2.33), and was also greater in individuals diagnosed with types of cancer with high fatality (SMR for men 2.67, 95% CI 1.71 -3.97; SMR for women 2.17, 95% CI 0.80 -4.73). CONCLUSION: There is a critical period immediately after the diagnosis of cancer during which the excess risk of suicide is particularly high. Carers need to be aware of the importance of attending to both the physical and emotional needs of cancer patients and cancer survivors.
BackgroundBreast screening uptake in London is below the Government's target of 70% and we investigate whether ethnicity affects this. Information on the ethnicity for the individual women invited is unavailable, so we use an area-based method similar to that routinely used to derive a geographical measure for socioeconomic deprivation.MethodsWe extracted 742,786 observations on attendance for routine appointments between 2004 and 2007 collected by the London Quality Assurance Reference Centre. Each woman was assigned to a lower super output (LSOA) based on her postcode of residence. The proportions of the ethnic groups within each LSOA are known, so that the likelihood of a woman belonging to White, Black and Asian groups can be assigned. We investigated screening attendance by age group, socioeconomic deprivation using the Index of Deprivation 2004 income quintile, invitation type and breast screening service. Using logistic regression analysis we calculated odds ratios for attendance based on ethnic composition of the population, adjusting for age, socioeconomic status, the invitation type and screening service.ResultsThe unadjusted attendance odds ratios were high for the White population (OR: 3.34 95% CI [3.26-3.42]) and low for the Black population (0.13 [0.12-0.13]) and the Asian population (0.55 [0.53-0.56]). Multivariate adjustment reduced the differences, but the Black population remained below unity (0.47 [0.44-0.50]); while the White (1.30 [1.26-1.35]) and Asian populations (1.10 [1.05-1.15]) were higher. There was little difference in the attendance between age groups. Attendance was highest for the most affluent group and fell sharply with increasing deprivation. For invitation type, the routine recall was higher than the first call. There were wide variations in the attendance for different ethnic groups between the individual screening services.ConclusionsOverall breast screening attendance is low in communities with large Black populations, suggesting the need to improve participation of Black women. Variations in attendance for the Asian population require further investigation at an individual screening service level.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.