↓ Skip to main content

Vascular hyperpermeability as a hallmark of phacomatoses: is the etiology angiogenesis related to or comparable with mechanisms seen in inflammatory pathways? Part II: angiogenesis- and inflammation-re…

Overview of attention for article published in Neurosurgical Review, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Vascular hyperpermeability as a hallmark of phacomatoses: is the etiology angiogenesis related to or comparable with mechanisms seen in inflammatory pathways? Part II: angiogenesis- and inflammation-related molecular pathways, tumor-associated macrophages, and possible therapeutic implications: a comprehensive review
Published in
Neurosurgical Review, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10143-017-0837-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yosef Laviv, Burkhard Kasper, Ekkehard M. Kasper

Abstract

Phacomatoses are a special group of familial hamartomatous syndromes with unique neurocutaneous manifestations as well as characteristic tumors. Neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) and tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) are representatives of this family. A vestibular schwannoma (VS) and subependymal giant cell tumor (SGCT) are two of the most common intracranial tumors associated with these syndromes, related to NF2 and TSC, respectively. These tumors can present with an obstructive hydrocephalus due to their location adjacent to or in the ventricles. Remarkably, both tumors are also known to have a unique association with elevated protein concentrations in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), sometimes in association with a non-obstructive (communicating) hydrocephalus. Of the two, SGCT has been shown to be associated with a predisposition to CSF clotting, causing a debilitating recurrent shunt obstruction. However, the exact relationship between high protein levels and clotting of CSF remains unclear, nor do we understand the precise mechanism of CSF clotting observed in SGCT. Elevated protein levels in the CSF are thought to be caused by increased vascular permeability and dysregulation of the blood-brain barrier. The two presumed underlying pathophysiological processes for that in the context of tumorigenesis are angiogenesis and inflammation. Both these processes are correlated to the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin pathway which is tumorigenesis related in many neoplasms and nearly all phacomatoses. In this review, we discuss the influence of angiogenesis and inflammation pathways on vascular permeability in VSs and SGCTs at the phenotypic level as well as their possible genetic and molecular determinants. Part I described the historical perspectives and clinical aspects of the relationship between vascular permeability, abnormal CSF protein levels, clotting of the CSF, and communicating hydrocephalus. Part II hereafter describes the different cellular and molecular pathways involved in angiogenesis and inflammation observed in both tumors and explores the existing metabolic overlap between inflammation and coagulation. Interestingly, while increased angiogenesis can be observed in both tumors, inflammatory processes seem significantly more prominent in SGCT. Both SGCT and VS are characterized by different subgroups of tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs): the pro-inflammatory M1 type is predominating in SGCTs, while the pro-angiogenetic M2 type is predominating in VSs. We suggest that a lack of NF2 protein in VS and a lack of TSC1/TSC2 proteins in SGCT significantly influence this fundamental difference between the two tumor types by changing the dominant TAM type. Since inflammatory reactions and coagulation processes are tightly connected, the pro-inflammatory state of SGCT may also explain the associated tendency for CSF clotting. The underlying cellular and molecular differences observed can potentially serve as an access point for direct therapeutic interventions for tumors that are specific to certain phacomatoses or others that also carry such genetic changes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 24%
Other 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 10 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 13 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 March 2017.
All research outputs
#20,410,007
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Neurosurgical Review
#548
of 631 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,678
of 308,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurosurgical Review
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 631 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,253 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.