English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

PURPOSE Vessel co-option and vascular mimicry are important resistant factors with ant-angiogenic treatment for glioblastoma, but those precise evaluation is not clear. We had three types of glioblastoma surgically removed specimens treated with / without bevacizumab (Bev). Using these samples, pathogenesis of co-option and mimicry was morphometrically clarified. MATERIALS / METHODS Three types of glioblastoma specimens were analyzed; 1) Bev naive (N group, n 14), 2) Bev effective that was treated preoperative neoadjuvant Bev (E group, n 5), 3) Bev refractory that recurred with continuous Bev treatment for paired E group (R group, n 5). Vascular density was defined as a number of type IV collagen covered lumen. Vascular mimicry was measured as a ratio of CD34 negative / type IV collagen positive lumen. Vessel co-option was graded to 3 degrees (-), (+), (++) at tumor margin. RESULTS (1)Vascular density was significantly lower with E group (p&amp;lt;0.01) and R gr up (p&amp;lt;0.02) compared to N group. (2)Mimicry was significantly higher with R group compared to N and E group (p&amp;lt;0.01). Between paired samples, refractory case was constantly higher than effective sample. (3) Co-option was increases with R group compared to N group. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION The effect of Bev for glioblastoma was investigated on three points (vascular density, vascular mimicry and vessel co-option) and two pathogeneses were clarified. In Bev refractory case, density was decreased, but mimicry and co-option were increased compared to Bev naive case. In Bev effective case, density was decreased, but mimicry and co-option were unchanged. Anti-angiogenic treatment for initial and Bev refractory glioblastoma should consider targeting co-option and mimicry in addition to Bev.

ANGI-05 PATHOGENESIS OF RESISTANCE (MIMICRY AND CO-OPTION) TO ANTI-ANGIOGENIC TREATMENT FOR GLIOBLASTOMA