ArticleJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025
Circulating Levels of VEGF, mTOR and MAPK in Patients With Port-Wine Stains.
Article in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Diagnosis and Treatment Technology of Port-Wine Stain, and the Prospect of Future Treatment.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways play important roles in the pathogenesis of port-wine stains (PWS). However, reports on circulating levels of VEGF, mTOR, and MAPK in PWS patients are rare.
objectiveTo investigate the circulating levels of VEGF, mTOR, and MAPK in PWS patients compared to healthy controls.
methodsThirty patients with PWS (15 with hypertrophic PWS and 15 with flat PWS) and 15 healthy controls were included. Human VEGF, mTOR, and MAPK enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kits were used to test plasma samples, and concentration values were calculated. Differences in the concentrations of VEGF, mTOR, or MAPK between the two groups were analyzed using t-tests or analysis of variance.
resultsThe circulating levels of VEGF, mTOR, and MAPK in the PWS group were significantly higher than in the healthy control group, with concentration values of 1159.76 ± 162.83 pg/mL vs. 762.18 ± 199.88 pg/mL, 219.26 ± 54.25 ng/L vs. 108.93 ± 52.47 ng/L, 11.41 ± 2.53 ng/L vs. 6.35 ± 2.42 ng/L (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001; respectively). VEGF circulating levels in the hypertrophic PWS group were significantly higher than in the flat PWS group (1217.97 ± 141.17 pg/mL vs. 1101.55 ± 166.52 pg/mL, p = 0.04). However, the circulating levels of mTOR or MAPK between the hypertrophic PWS and flat PWS groups were no significant differences (p = 0.87, p = 0.42; respectively).
conclusionThe circulating levels of VEGF, mTOR, and MAPK were significantly higher in PWS patients than healthy controls, with VEGF levels being higher in hypertrophic PWS than in flat PWS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.