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.

Table 2 The relationship between the expression of iNOS, VEGF, MVD and TNM staging of gastric carcinoma

Clinical staging	n	Expression of iNOS (%)	Expression of VEGF (%)	MVD (¯x ± s)
Stage I	2	1 (50.0)	1 (50.0)	51.00 ± 7.0d
Stage II	6	2 (33.33)	3 (50.0)	47.66 ± 8.71e
Stage III	25	13 (52.0)	19 (76.0)b	64.72 ± 14.96f
Stage IV	13	11 (84.62)a	12 (92.31)c	76.09 ± 18.29g

^aP < 0.05, (Fish exact probabilities test, P = 0.019, 0.023 and0.033), vs the rate of expression of iNOS in stage I, II and III, recpectively;

^bP < 0.05 (Fish exact probabilities test, P = 0.031 and 0.017), vs the rates of expression of VEGF in stage Iand II, recpectively;

^cP < 0.05 (Fish exact probabilities test, P = 0.022 and 0.019), vs the rates of expression of VEGF in stage I and II, recpectively;

^dP < 0.05 (t = 2.378, vs MVD in stage III;

^eP < 0.001 (t = 4.015), vs MVD in stage IV;

^fP < 0.001 (t = 2.503), vs MVD in stage II;

^gP < 0.05 (t = 2.450), vs MVD in stage I.

Table 3 The relationship between the expressions of iNOS and VEGF and the prognosis of gastric carcinoma

	n	survival period		rate of five-year surviva (%)
		< 5 years	> 5 years
iNOS expession
Positive	27	22	5	18.52a
Negative	19	10	9	47.37
VEGF expession
Positive	35	30	5	14.29b
Negative	11	5	6	54.55

^aP < 0.05, (χ² = 4.3842), vs the iNOS-negative gastric cancer patients;

^bP < 0.05, (χ² = 5.4073, vs the VEGF-negative gastric cancer patients.