Vascular endothelial growth factor is elevated in ocular fluids of eyes harbouring uveal melanoma: identification of a potential therapeutic window
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improved local treatment of uveal melanoma makes it possible for many patients to retain the affected eye, but a proportion will develop secondary complications such as neovascularisation of the iris (NVI) and require enucleation. Although vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) is known to correlate with NVI and can cause NVI in experimental models, this pro-angiogenic cytokine is consistently reported to be absent in uveal melanoma. Novel anti-VEGF therapies are now in clinical trial, and the authors therefore wished to determine whether VEGF-A was indeed elevated in melanoma bearing eyes. METHODS: VEGF-A concentrations were measured in aqueous and vitreous from 19 and 30 enucleated eyes respectively. RESULTS: Elevated VEGF-A concentrations (up to 21.6 ng/ml) were found in melanoma bearing eyes compared with samples from patients undergoing routine cataract extraction (all had values below 0.96 ng/ml). Immunohistochemistry showed VEGF-A protein in the iris and/or ciliary body of 54% and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) in 82% of the eyes examined. VEGF was found to a limited extent and at very low levels in only 9% of these tumours. Aqueous or vitreous VEGF levels showed no apparent correlation with retinal detachment, tumour size, vascularity, or immunohistochemistry. Though limited in number, the highest VEGF levels correlated with previous radiation therapy, and with the presence neovascularisation of the iris or optic nerve head. bFGF was not significantly elevated in ocular fluids: it is known to be a pro-angiogenic agent and was detected in the majority of primary uveal melanomas. CONCLUSION: Based on this study, though the source of VEGF within eyes harbouring uveal melanoma is not clear, these data suggest that anti-VEGF therapy might prove useful in the management of some patients with NVI secondary to uveal melanoma.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".