Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To examine the potential effect of tumour-induced lymphangiogenesis in squamous cell carcinoma of the penis as a possible mechanism responsible for lymphatic spread.
Patients And Methods: Specimens from 65 patients with invasive tumours (31 with and 34 without metastases) were evaluated for lymphatic vessel density (LVD) by the 'hot-spot' method as the density of lymphatic endothelium hyaluronan receptor (LYVE-1)-positive lymphatic vessels per unit area of tissue. LVD was examined in peritumoral, intratumoral and normal tissue areas. The LVD of each tumour in these locations was calculated as the mean of the three highest lymph vessel counts in three to five hot-spots. The nodal status was based on histopathological examination or an uneventful follow-up of >or=2 years.
Results: In all patients the mean (SD) peritumoral LVD of 8.05 (3.14)/0.75 mm(2) was significantly higher than for intratumoral and normal tissue, of 4.67 (2.58) and 5.20 (1.87), respectively (P < 0.001). The slightly lower intratumoral LVD than in normal tissue was not significant. The peritumoral LVD was 8.07 (3.29) in metastatic and 8.03 (3.03) in non-metastatic carcinomas. The intratumoral LVD was 5.13 (3.01) in node-positive carcinomas and 4.28 (2.15) in tumours with no lymphatic node metastasis (LNM). Comparing tumours with and without LNM, there was no statistically significant difference between intra- and peritumoral LVD.
Conclusion: Increased LVD does not significantly affect the lymphatic spread in penile carcinomas, indicating that there must be alternative mechanisms that selectively enable tumour cells to invade lymph vessels and to metastasize into the lymph nodes.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08365.x | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!