Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Felisbina Luisa Queiroga
 -- 1707 2023-07-10 23:20:56 |
2 layout
Camila Xu
 Meta information modification 1707 2023-07-11 03:15:14 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Torres-Juárez, K.V.; Queiroga, F.L.; Romero-Romero, L.P. The Nervous System in Cancer Hallmarks. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/46616 (accessed on 12 August 2024).
Torres-Juárez KV, Queiroga FL, Romero-Romero LP. The Nervous System in Cancer Hallmarks. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/46616. Accessed August 12, 2024.
Torres-Juárez, Karla V., Felisbina Luisa Queiroga, Laura P. Romero-Romero. "The Nervous System in Cancer Hallmarks" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/46616 (accessed August 12, 2024).
Torres-Juárez, K.V., Queiroga, F.L., & Romero-Romero, L.P. (2023, July 10). The Nervous System in Cancer Hallmarks. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/46616
Torres-Juárez, Karla V., et al. "The Nervous System in Cancer Hallmarks." Encyclopedia. Web. 10 July, 2023.
The Nervous System in Cancer Hallmarks
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/cancers14184372

The nervous system communicates with the whole organism, regulating several physiological pathways. The modification of nerve activity could deregulate the state of cellular and tissue homeostasis which could drive cancer development.

nervous system cancer hallmarks tumor innervation neurotumoral communication

1. A Bit of History

The neurobiology of cancer is not a new concept. For a long time, it was claimed that tumors were devoid of innervation, but in the nineteenth century, Young [1], through histological preparations of impregnation with methylene blue, managed to observe nerve fibers in the parenchyma of different tumor types, such as mammary carcinomas and small round cell sarcomas. At that time, the accepted belief was that the nerves found in neoplastic tissues were there due to their entrapment from their pre-existence in healthy tissue. The transformation of healthy tissue and the accelerated cellular proliferation of the malignant cells would cause the invasion of adjacent tissues and thus confine the nerves within the neoplastic tissue. This being the case, when nerves are deprived of their function and invaded by neoplastic cells, they would eventually atrophy and disappear. In 1933, Ryrie [2] explained different theories about the anatomical and physiological relationship of nerve fibers in a neoplasm. His work highlights the thought of the existence of nerve fibers in tumors, the possibility that these are newly formed, perineural invasion (PI), fibrosis after damage as a result of PI and neural regeneration similar to peripheral damage within the neoplastic tissue. However, he concluded that there is no reason to assume any trophic influence on malignant cells [2]. In 1949, Shapiro published the results of his research regarding the relationship between nerves and tumor cells, and their possible physiological role in mesotheliomas and carcinomas in the anterior chamber of the eye, transplanted in mice and rabbits, respectively. In his conclusion, he supports the suggestion that the variation in the growth rate of tumors may be due to vasomotor changes caused by the alteration in the innervation present in each tumor [3].
On the other hand, during the 1950s, some studies were conducted to show the relationship between psychosomatic problems and the development of the disease. The organism is considered as a whole, so psychosocial problems may be more associated with the cause than with the effect of the disease, which is why it is suggested that the personality structure could play a role in the pathogenesis of cancer in individuals predisposed [4]. Psychological therapy, until then, was little used as a palliative practice in cancer patients and when exploring the benefit of intensive deep psychotherapy, a significant reduction in the size of the tumors presented by the patients was reported, when recognizing and working on traumatic events of their past [5]. On the contrary, it has been seen that patients suffering from cancer and manifesting problems of depression, anxiety, chronic stress, or social isolation, have poor prognoses, which include an accelerated progression of the disease, higher rates of recurrences, and low response to treatments, compared to those patients who do not have these disorders [6][7]. In other studies, when examining the association of social stress with relapse and mortality rates in some hormone-sensitive or lifestyle-related tumors, these have been found to be increased mainly in patients with breast [6], colorectal, pancreatic [8], and gastric tumors [7], a fact that is currently being corroborated in experimental works in vivo [9][10].
Until now, the role of the emotional factors in the carcinogenesis process is not entirely clear, however, the balance seems to tilt towards active participation in the cancer initiation and progression [11][12].
Some authors support that cancer is a disease of cellular differentiation, communication and tissue organization [13][14], and the environmental factor is described as one of the most important elements in the progression stage. The emotional state, in many cases, depends on the environment and has the ability to generate important biological modifications which can cause the prolonged release of molecules that could stimulate the formation of a tumor due to the signals it transmits and the processes it activates [10]. In addition, modifications or interruptions in the interactions between the nervous system and tissues are likely to transform the microenvironment and create the appropriate conditions for tumor development [9].
Over the years, cancer research has taken a reductionist approach, neglecting the complex functioning of a complete organism with all its component parts. Until now, the cancer study model has excluded important mechanisms, such as cellular communication through gap junctions, stem cells, mechanical damage [13][15], dysbiosis [16][17], ion channels [18][19][20], and the neurobiology of the oncological process.

2. Emotional State, Personality and Cancer

Several studies support that people who present different stress-generating situations, such as a hostile family environment, a compromised economic situation or conditions of neglect or isolation, present accelerated progression of the disease with an ineffective response to treatment [6][21]. On the other hand, in different studies in which patients, in addition to pharmacological treatment, receive group and/or individual emotional therapy, coupled with physical exercise, or another type of social support and in some cases nutritional control, it was possible to observe an evident improvement, obtaining favorable results with a better response to treatments, prolonging disease-free survival, and notably improving quality of life [22][23]. Similarly, it has been proposed that character and personality, which define how we face adversity, could predispose to the development of breast cancer in women [24]. Studies in animals have produced results that support the fact that type of behavior at an early age causes differences in the production of endogenous glucocorticoids associated with the variation in the natural function of the Hypothalamic Pituitary Adrenal (HPA) axis, causing oscillation in the function of the immune system and generating individuals potentially susceptible to specific processes of disease at the end of life [25]. Therefore, if personality and character can predispose to the appearance of diseases due to the variations it causes in the functioning of the immune system, generally causing a suppressive effect, this could be the basis of the individual differences in the disease stages.

3. Participation of the Nervous System in Physiological Proliferative Processes

In support of the concept that the nervous system could play a central role in the pathophysiology of cancer, there is evidence that in healthy tissues, nerves and some of their products regulate various mechanisms deeply involved in the carcinogenesis process, such as: control stem cell proliferation [26][27], angiogenesis [28], cell migration [29], cell translocation [30], cell differentiation [31], recruitment and activation of immune cells [32], and energy metabolism [33]. All of them are necessary mechanisms in proliferative physiological processes such as embryogenesis, healing or epimorphic regeneration. In addition, these normal physiological proliferative processes, are nerve-dependent. When nerves are absent, they alter, delay, or these processes simply do not occur [27][34].
In the case of angiogenesis, it is known that nerves and blood vessels are closely related in structure and organization, both during embryonic development as in response to damage, and both depend on bidirectional signals for self-regulation [35]. In various tumors, it has been possible to identify areas with intratumoral nerve fibers, located by immunohistochemistry [36][37][38][39]. These fibers are frequently found on the periphery of tumors, some in the stroma and others in a perivascular manner, however, some blood vessels are devoid of innervation, in our opinion this could cause failure in cellular communication between both elements. Consequently, the angiogenic process would be deregulated and this could partially explain the irregular formation of blood vessels and their heterogeneity within a tumor [40].

4. Evidence of the Involvement of the Nervous System in Cancer

Research on the neurobiology of cancer is so far scant. However, today there is greater interest and acceptance due to the evidence that is now available. For instance, epidemiological studies report a correlation between neuroactive therapies (benzodiazepines, lithium, or tricyclic antidepressants) with a reduced risk of cancer [41]. There is also an inverse correlation between neurodegenerative diseases and cancer. A good example is the case of patients with Parkinson’s disease or Alzheimer’s disease, where a low risk of cancer was identified, both before and after diagnosis [42].
Cognitive damage is a frequent event in cancer patients, and in some cases, diffuse brain damage has been identified through imaging studies. It is not clear whether this damage can occur as an adverse effect of anti-cancer therapies or neurodegeneration due to oxidative damage, inflammation and/or age effect associated with the oncologic disease [43]. Another interesting finding is the one that has been seen in patients with spinal cord damage and prostate denervation, who have a lower incidence of prostate cancer [44].
Other studies in patients with breast cancer have reported that women who use beta-blockers incidentally for some cardiovascular disease, before and/or during the year of breast cancer diagnosis, show a reduction in progression and mortality or remain free of the disease for a longer period, compared to patients who did not undergo beta-blocker treatment [45][46][47]. It is relevant to highlight that the use of beta-blockers seems to be more efficient in triple-negative breast tumors, which represents an option to be studied as a therapeutic target for this subtype of breast tumor, which has a highly aggressive biological behavior and so far, and does not show fully efficient treatment options [47].
The parallel benefit of the use of beta-blockers has been observed in complementary treatments in patients with other types of cancer, such as melanoma [48], pancreatic [49] and lung cancer [50]. In addition, it has been experimentally observed that treatments with beta-blockers in conjunction with other therapies, such as chemotherapeutics [51], immunotherapies with αPD-1 [48], or metformin [52], experimentally prevent the tumor growth and its progression. On the contrary, the action of catecholamines, when using adrenergic agonists such as isoproterenol, increases the occurrence of metastases to distant tissues compared to control tissues [9].
The development of metastases, via the hematogenous and/or lymphatic pathways, has long been considered the most relevant mechanism in malignancy and the leading cause of mortality in cancer patients. More recently, the neural pathway of metastasis was described and called perineural invasion (PI). Perineural invasion is considered a strong factor indicative of malignancy and has been associated with the worst prognosis [53].
Infiltration of neural tissues has been observed in various types of tumors, such as pancreatic [54][55], squamous cell carcinomas [56], and colorectal carcinoma [57][58][59], among others. Although the mechanisms by which this phenomenon occurs are not entirely clear, in vitro studies have shown that nervous and tumor tissue can have mutual tropism and exert chemoattraction, since the nervous tissue releases signaling molecules that guide tumor cells towards them [60][61].

References

  1. Young, H.H. On the Presence of Nerves in Tumors and of Other Structures in Them as Revealed by a Modification of Ehrlich’s Method of “Vital Staining” with Methylene Blue. J. Exp. Med. 1897, 2, 1–12.
  2. Ryrie, G.M. On the significance of nerve fibres in human malignant neoplasms. J. Pathol. Bacteriol. 1933, 36, 13–18.
  3. Shapiro, D.M.; Warren, S. Cancer Innervation. Cancer Res. 1949, 9, 707–711.
  4. Tarlau, M.; Smalheiser, I. Personality patterns in patients with malignant tumors of the breast and cervix; an exploratory study. Psychosom. Med. 1951, 13, 117–121.
  5. Leshan, L.L.; Gassmann, M.L. Some Observations on Psychotherapy with Patients Suffering from Neoplastic Disease. Am. J. Psychother. 1958, 12, 723–734.
  6. Hinzey, A.; Gaudier-Diaz, M.M.; Lustberg, M.B.; DeVries, A.C. Breast cancer and social environment: Getting by with a little help from our friends. Breast Cancer Res. 2016, 18, 54.
  7. Kim, G.M.; Kim, S.J.; Song, S.K.; Kim, H.R.; Kang, B.D.; Noh, S.H.; Chung, H.C.; Kim, K.R.; Rha, S.Y. Prevalence and prognostic implications of psychological distress in patients with gastric cancer. BMC Cancer 2017, 17, 283.
  8. Batty, G.D.; Russ, T.C.; MacBeath, M.; Stamatakis, E.; Kivimäki, M. Psychological distress in relation to site specific cancer mortality: Pooling of unpublished data from 16 prospective cohort studies. BMJ 2017, 356, j108.
  9. Sloan, E.K.; Priceman, S.J.; Cox, B.F.; Yu, S.; Pimentel, M.A.; Tangkanangnukul, V.; Arevalo, J.M.; Morizono, K.; Karanikolas, B.D.; Wu, L.; et al. Sympathetic nervous system induces a metastatic switch in primary breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2010, 70, 7042–7052.
  10. Azpiroz, A.; De Miguel, Z.; Fano, E.; Vegas, O. Relations between different coping strategies for social stress, tumor development and neuroendocrine and immune activity in male mice. Brain Behav. Immun. 2008, 22, 690–698.
  11. Fox, B.H. The role of psychological factors in cancer incidence and prognosis. Oncology 1995, 9, 245–253, discussion 253–256.
  12. Chida, Y.; Hamer, M.; Wardle, J.; Steptoe, A. Do stress-related psychosocial factors contribute to cancer incidence and survival? Nat. Clin. Pract. Oncol. 2008, 5, 466–475.
  13. Trosko, J.E.; Chang, C.C.; Upham, B.L.; Tai, M.H. Ignored hallmarks of carcinogenesis: Stem Cells and Cell-Cell communication. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2004, 1028, 192–201.
  14. Soto, A.; Sonnenschein, C. The tissue organization field theory of cancer: A testable replacement for the somatic mutation theory. Bioessays 2011, 33, 332–340.
  15. Levin, M. Morphogenetic fields in embryogenesis, regeneration, and cancer: Non-local control of complex patterning. BioSystems 2012, 109, 243–261.
  16. Xuan, C.; Shamonki, J.M.; Chung, A.; Dinome, M.L.; Chung, M.; Sieling, P.A.; Lee, D.J. Microbial dysbiosis is associated with human breast cancer. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e83744.
  17. Schwabe, R.F.; Jobin, C. The microbiome and cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2013, 13, 800–812.
  18. Lobikin, M.; Chernet, B.; Lobo, D.; Levin, M. Resting Potential, Oncogene-induced Tumorigenesis, and Metastasis: The Bioelectric Basis of Cancer in vivo. Phys. Biol. 2012, 9, 065002.
  19. Prevarskaya, N.; Skryma, R.; Shuba, Y. Ion channels and the hallmarks of cancer. Trends Mol. Med. 2010, 16, 107–121.
  20. Huber, S.M. Oncochannels. Cell Calcium. 2013, 53, 241–255.
  21. Kruk, J.; Aboul-Enein, B.H.; Bernstein, J.; Gronostaj, M. Psychological Stress and Cellular Aging in Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2019, 2019, 1270397.
  22. Betof, A.S.; Dewhirst, M.W.; Jones, L.W. Effects and potential mechanisms of excercise training on cancer progression: A translational perspective. Brain Behav. Immun. 2013, 30, S75–S87.
  23. Adam, A.; Koranteng, F. Availability, accessibility, and impact of social support on breast cancer treatment among breast cancer patients in Kumasi, Ghana: A qualitative study. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0231691.
  24. Montes-Nogueira, I.; Gutiérrez-Ospina, G.; Romo-González, T. Towards a Psychoneuroimmunendocrine Hypothesis of Breast Cancer. Adv. Neuroimmune Biol. 2017, 6, 153–160.
  25. Cavigelli, S.A.; Bennett, J.M.; Michael, K.C.; Cousino, L. Female temperament, tumor development and life span: Relation to glucocorticoid and tumor necrosis factor α levels in rats. Brain Behav. Immun. 2008, 727–735.
  26. Heidt, T.; Sager, H.B.; Courties, G.; Dutta, P.; Iwamoto, Y.; Zaltsman, A.; von Zur Muhlen, C.; Bode, C.; Fricchione, G.L.; Denninger, J.; et al. Chronic variable stress activates hematopoietic stem cells. Nat. Med. 2014, 20, 754–758.
  27. Martínez-Martínez, E.; Galván-Hernández, C.I.; Toscano-Márquez, B.; Gutiérrez-Ospina, G. Modulatory Role of Sensory Innervation on Hair Follicle Stem Cell Progeny during Wound Healing of the Rat Skin. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e36421.
  28. Sharifpanah, F.; Saliu, F.; Bekhite, M.M.; Wartenberg, M.; Sauer, H. β-Adrenergic receptor antagonists inhibit vasculogenesis of embryonic stem cells by downregulation of nitric oxide generation and interference with VEGF signalling. Cell Tissue Res. 2014, 358, 443–452.
  29. Spiegel, A.; Shivtiel, S.; Kalinkovich, A.; Ludin, A.; Netzer, N.; Goichberg, P.; Azaria, Y.; Resnick, I.; Hardan, I.; Ben-Hur, H.; et al. Catecholaminergic neurotransmitters regulate migration and repopulation of immature human CD34+ cells through Wnt signaling. Nat. Immunol. 2007, 8, 1123–1131.
  30. Katayama, Y.; Battista, M.; Kao, W.M.; Hidalgo, A.; Peired, A.J.; Thomas, S.A.; Frenette, P.S. Signals from the sympathetic nervous system regulate hematopoietic stem cell egress from bone marrow. Cell 2006, 124, 407–421.
  31. Liang, W.; Zhuo, X.; Tang, Z. Calcitonin gene-related peptide stimulates proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of osteoporotic rat-derived bone mesenchymal stem cells. Mol. Cell. Biochem. 2015, 402, 101–110.
  32. Powell, N.D.; Sloan, E.K.; Bailey, M.T.; Arevalo, J.M.; Miller, G.E.; Chen, E.; Kobor, M.S.; Reader, B.F.; Sheridan, J.F.; Cole, S.W. Social stress up-regulates inflammatory gene expression in the leukocyte transcriptome via β-adrenergic induction of myelopoiesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 16574–16579.
  33. Collins, S.; Sarzani, R.; Bordicchia, M. Coordinate control of adipose ‘browning’ and energy expenditure by β-adrenergic and natriuretic peptide signalling. Int. J. Obes. Suppl. 2014, 4 (Suppl. 1), S17–S20.
  34. Boilly, B.; Faulknerx, S.; Jobling, P.; Hondermarck, H. Nerve dependence: From regeneration to cancer. Cancer Cell 2017, 31, 342–354.
  35. Makita, T.; Sucov, H.M.; Gariepy, C.E.; Yanagisawa, M.; Ginty, D.D. Endothelins are vascular-derived axonal guidance cues for developing sympathetic neurons. Nature 2008, 452, 759–763.
  36. Mitchell, B.S.; Schumacher, U.; Stauber, V.V.; Kaiserling, E. Are breast tumours innervated? Immunohistological investigations using antibodies against the neuronal marker protein gene product 9.5 (PGP 9.5) in benign and malignant breast lesions. Eur. J. Cancer 1994, 30, 1100–1103.
  37. Zhao, Q.; Yang, Y.; Liang, X.; Du, G.; Liu, L.; Lu, L.; Dong, J.; Han, H.; Zhang, G. The clinicopathological significance of neurogenesis in breast cancer. BMC Cancer 2014, 14, 484.
  38. Lü, S.H.; Zhou, Y.; Que, H.P.; Liu, S.J. Peptidergic innervation of human esophageal and cardiac carcinoma. World J. Gastroenterol. 2003, 9, 399–403.
  39. Chamary, V.L.; Robson, T.; Loizidou, M.; Boulos, P.B.; Burnstock, G. Progressive loss of perivascular nerves adjacent to colorectal cancer. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2000, 26, 588–593.
  40. Nagy, J.A.; Chang, S.H.; Shih, S.C.; Dvorak, A.M.; Dvorak, H.F. Heterogeneity of the tumor vasculature. Semin. Thromb. Hemost. 2010, 36, 321–331.
  41. Saloman, J.L.; Albers, K.M.; Rhim, A.D.; Davis, B.M. Can Stopping Nerves, Stop Cancer? Trends Neurosci. 2016, 39, 880–889.
  42. Driver, J.A. Inverse association between cancer and neurodegenerative disease: Review of the epidemiologic and biological evidence. Biogerontology 2014, 15, 547–557.
  43. Wefel, J.S.; Vardy, J.; Ahles, T.; Schagen, S.B. International Cognition and Cancer Task Force recommendations to harmonise studies of cognitive function in patients with cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2011, 12, 703–708.
  44. Rutledge, A.; Jobling, P.; Walker, M.M.; Denham, J.W.; Hondermarck, H. Spinal Cord Injuries and Nerve Dependence in Prostate Cancer. Trends Cancer 2017, 3, 812–815.
  45. Raimondi, S.; Botteri, E.; Munzone, E.; Cipolla, C.; Rotmensz, N.; DeCensi, A.; Gandini, S. Use of beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers and breast cancer survival: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Cancer 2016, 139, 212–219.
  46. Barron, T.I.; Connolly, R.M.; Sharp, L.; Bennett, K.; Visvanathan, K. Beta blockers and breast cancer mortality: A population- based study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011, 29, 2635–2644.
  47. Melhem-Bertrandt, A.; Chavez-Macgregor, M.; Lei, X.; Brown, E.N.; Lee, R.T.; Meric-Bernstam, F.; Sood, A.K.; Conzen, S.D.; Hortobagyi, G.N.; Gonzalez-Angulo, A.M. Beta-blocker use is associated with improved relapse-free survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011, 29, 2645–2652.
  48. Kokolus, K.M.; Zhang, Y.; Sivik, J.M.; Schmeck, C.; Zhu, J.; Repasky, E.A.; Drabick, J.J.; Schell, T.D. Beta blocker use correlates with better overall survival in metastatic melanoma patients and improves the efficacy of immunotherapies in mice. Oncoimmunology 2017, 7, e1405205.
  49. Renz, B.W.; Takahashi, R.; Tanaka, T.; Macchini, M.; Hayakawa, Y.; Dantes, Z.; Maurer, H.C.; Chen, X.; Jiang, Z.; Westphalen, C.B.; et al. β2 Adrenergic-Neurotrophin Feedforward Loop Promotes Pancreatic Cancer. Cancer Cell 2018, 33, 75–90.e7, Erratum in: Cancer Cell. 2018, 34, 863–867.
  50. Nilsson, M.B.; Sun, H.; Diao, L.; Tong, P.; Liu, D.; Li, L.; Fan, Y.; Poteete, A.; Lim, S.O.; Howells, K.; et al. Stress hormones promote EGFR inhibitor resistance in NSCLC: Implications for combinations with β-blockers. Sci. Transl. Med. 2017, 9, eaao4307.
  51. Pasquier, E.; Street, J.; Pouchy, C.; Carre, M.; Gifford, A.J.; Murray, J.; Norris, M.D.; Trahair, T.; Andre, N.; Kavallaris, M. β-blockers increase response to chemotherapy via direct antitumour and anti-angiogenic mechanisms in neuroblastoma. Br. J. Cancer 2013, 108, 2485–2494.
  52. Rico, M.; Baglioni, M.; Bondarenko, M.; Laluce, N.C.; Rozados, V.; André, N.; Carré, M.; Scharovsky, O.G.; Menacho Márquez, M. Metformin and propranolol combination prevents cancer progression and metastasis in different breast cancer models. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 2874–2889.
  53. Marchesi, F.; Piemonti, L.; Mantovani, A.; Allavena, P. Molecular mechanisms of perineural invasion, a forgotten pathway of dissemination and metastasis. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 2010, 21, 77–82.
  54. Chen, J.W.; Bhandari, M.; Astill, D.S.; Wilson, T.G.; Kow, L.; Brooke-Smith, M.; Toouli, J.; Padbury, R.T. Predicting patient survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for malignancy: Histopathological criteria based on perineural infiltration and lymphovascular invasion. HPB J. 2010, 12, 101–108.
  55. Yao, J.; Li, W.Y.; Li, S.G.; Feng, X.S.; Gao, S.G. Midkine promotes perineural invasion in human pancreatic cancer. WJG 2014, 20, 3018–3024.
  56. Qian, X.; Nguyen, D.T.; Dong, Y.; Sinikovic, B.; Kaufmann, A.M.; Myers, J.N.; Albers, A.E.; Graviss, E.A. Prognostic Score Predicts Survival in HPV-Negative Head and Neck Squamous Cell Cancer Patients. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2019, 15, 1336–1344.
  57. Seefeld, P.H.; Bargen, J.A. The spread of carcinoma of the rectum: Invasion of lymphatics, veins and nerves. Ann. Surg. 1943, 118, 76–90.
  58. Chablani, P.; Nguyen, P.; Pan, X.; Robinson, A.; Walston, S.; Wu, C.; Frankel, W.L.; Chen, W.; Bekaii-Saab, T.; Chakravarti, A.; et al. Perineural Invasion Predicts for Distant Metastasis in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation and Surgery. Am. J. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 40, 561–568.
  59. Mirkin, K.A.; Hollenbeak, C.S.; Mohamed, A.; Jia, Y.; El-Deiry, W.S.; Messaris, E. Impact of perineural invasion on survival in node negative colon cancer. Cancer Biol. Ther. 2017, 18, 740–745.
  60. Ceyhan, G.O.; Demir, I.E.; Altintas, B.; Rauch, U.; Thiel, G.; Müller, M.W.; Giese, N.A.; Friess, H.; Schäfer, K.H. Neural invasion in pancreatic cancer: A mutual tropism between neurons and cancer cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2008, 374, 442–447.
  61. Liebig, C.; Ayala, G.; Wilks, J.A.; Berger, D.H.; Albo, D. Perineural invasion in cancer: A review of the literature. Cancer 2009, 115, 3379–3391.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Oncology
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Karla V. Torres-Juárez
,
Felisbina Luisa Queiroga
,
Laura P. Romero-Romero
View Times: 367
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 11 Jul 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback