Skip to main content
. 2016 Jul 1;12(4):828–843. doi: 10.5114/aoms.2016.60970

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Expression of VEGFA, VEGFR1 and VEGFR2 in UCD-200 comb biopsies. A, B – This figure presents the staining of VEGFA (1), VEGFR1 (2), their MERGED (3) and the staining of VEGFA (4), VEGFR2 (5), their MERGED (6), in hHC (A) and in SSc (B) patients. Expression of both VEGFA and VEGFRs was considerably higher in SSc patients than in hHC. F, G, H, I – This figure presents the staining of VEGFA (1), VEGFR1 (2), their MERGED (3) and the staining of VEGFA (4), VEGFR2 (5), their MERGED (6), in cHC (F) and in UCD-200 combs with erythema (G), edema (H) and necrosis (I). The VEGFA and VEGFRs expression was considerably higher in both the edematous and the necrotic combs of UCD-200 than in both cHC and erythematous conditions. C, J – Densitometric analysis of the immunofluorescence intensity of human (C) and chicken (J) VEGFA. Each open square (□) represents the VEGFA value of both 1 hHC and 1 cHC; each solid square (■) represents the VEGFA value of 1 SSc patient and 1 UCD-200, respectively. Our results are expressed as median (range) of the immunofluorescence optical density (arbitrary units). The expression of VEGFA in SSc patients was significantly higher than in hHC (VEGFA, hHC vs. SSc: ***p < 0.0001). No difference was observed between cHC and UCD-200 erythematous samples. However, significantly higher VEGFA optical density was observed in erythematous UCD-200 samples than in both edematous and necrotic UCD-200 samples (VEGFA, erythema vs. edema: **p = 0.0002; edema vs. necrosis: **p = 0.0002). D and K – Densitometric analysis of the immunofluorescence intensity of human (D) and chicken (K) VEGFR1. Each open dot (○) represents the VEGFR1 value of both 1 hHC and 1 cHC; each solid dot (●) represents the VEGFR1 value of 1 SSc patient and 1 UCD-200 sample respectively. Our results are expressed as median (range) of the immunofluorescence optical density (arbitrary units). The VEGFR1 expression was significantly higher in SSc patients than in hHC (VEGFR1, hHC vs. SSc: ***p < 0.0001). No difference was observed between cHC and UCD-200 erythematous samples. However, significantly higher VEGFR1 optical density was observed in the erythematous UCD-200 samples than in the edematous and necrotic UCD-200 samples (VEGFR1, erythema vs. edema: ***p < 0.0001; edema vs. necrosis: **p = 0.0002), paralleling the severity of comb involvement. E, L – Densitometric analysis of immunofluorescence intensity of human (E) and chicken (L) VEGFR2. Each open rhombus (◊) represents the VEGFR2 value of both 1 hHC and 1 cHC; each solid rhombus (♦) represents the VEGFR2 value of 1 SSc patient and 1 UCD-200 sample respectively. Our results are expressed as median (range) of the immunofluorescence optical density (arbitrary units). The expression of VEGFR2 was significantly higher in SSc patients than in hHC (VEGFR2, hHC vs. SSc: ***p < 0.0001). No difference was observed between cHC and UCD-200 erythematous samples. However, significantly higher VEGFR2 optical density was observed in the erythematous UCD-200 samples than in the edematous and the necrotic UCD-200 samples (VEGFR2, erythema vs. edema: **p = 0.0002; edema vs. necrosis: **p = 0.0002)