| Literature DB >> 24504370 |
Z Mei1, Y Liu1, C Liu1, A Cui1, Z Liang1, G Wang1, H Peng1, L Cui1, C Li2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of tumour-infiltrating inflammation in the prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) has not been fully evaluated. The primary objective of our meta-analysis was to determine the impact of tumour-infiltrating inflammation on survival outcomes.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24504370 PMCID: PMC3960618 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.46
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Figure 1Flowchart of the study selection.
Design variables of included studies for the T lymphocyte subsets analysed
| Chew | IM, ST, CC | Median | SPARC+, FOXP3+, CD8+, CD45RO+ | Unclear | OS |
| Chiba | CC | Median | CD8+ | Age, sex, tumour grade, invasive pattern, location, MMR protein, TILs, stage | CS |
| Correale | ST | >30/HPF | FOXP3+ | Sex, performance status, basal lymphocytes number, DFS, grading | OS, DFS |
| Correale | ST | Median (>20/HPF) | CCR7+ | Performance status, sex, age, tumour grading, presence or absence of liver metastases | OS, DFS |
| Deschoolmeester | IM, ST, CC | <20/HPF, >50/HPF | CD3+, CD8+, GRB+ | Age, sex, location, stage, tumour grade, adjuvant treatment, other T-cell subsets | OS, DFS |
| Frey | CC | Median | FOXP3+ | Age, sex, stage, tumour grade, vascular invasion, tumour border, configuration | CS |
| Galon | IM, CC | 75th percentile | CD3+ | Stage | OS, DFS |
| Guidoboni | CC | Median | CD3+ | Age, sex, stage | OS, RFR |
| Lee | ST, CC | Mean | CD3+ | Vascular invasion, neural invasion, other T-cell subsets | OS, DFS |
| Menon | IM | 75th percentile | CD8+ | Age, sex, location, stage, tumour grade | DFS |
| Naito | IM, ST, CC | Median | CD8+ | Inflammatory cells, invasive pattern, stage, tumour grade | OS |
| Nosho | CC | All quartiles | CD3+ | Age, sex, BMI, family history, year of diagnosis, location, stage, tumour grade, LINE-1, CIMP, MSI, BRAF, KRAS, PIK3CA, other T-cell subsets | OS, CS |
| Simpson | CC | Mean | CD3+ | Stage and extramural vascular invasion | CS |
| Sinicrope | CC, ST | Bottom quartile | CD3+/FOXP3+ratio | Age, lymph node, MSI, stage, tumour grade | OS, DFS |
| Suzuki | CC | Mean | CD8+/FOXP3+ratio | Stage, venous invasion | OS |
| Yoon | CC, ST | Median | FOXP3+ | Age, stage and tumour grade | OS |
Abbreviations: BRAF, KRAS and PIK3CA=BRAF, KRAS and PIK3CA gene mutations; CC=tumour centre; CIMP=CpG island methylator phenotype; CS=cancer-specific survival; DFS=disease-free survival; HPF=high-power fields; IM=invasive tumour margin; LINE-1=long interspersed nucleotide element-1 methylation; MMR=mismatch repair; MSI=microsatellite instability; OS=overall survival; RFR=relapse-free rate; ST=tumour stroma; TILs=tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes.
Impact of study design variables on heterogeneity tests (I test) and overall effect according to the subgroup analysis
| | | | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS | 9 | 0.59 | 0.48–0.72 | 26.8 | 0.206 | Gao, Buckowitz, Cianchi, Klintrup, Nielsen, Ogino, Ropponen, Nagtegaal, Huh | |
| CS | 3 | 0.40 | 0.27–0.61 | 0 | 0.731 | Richards, Ogino, Roxburgh | |
| | DFS | 3 | 0.72 | 0.57–0.91 | 0 | 0.943 | Huh, Ropponen, Szynglarewicz |
| CC | OS | 5 | 0.59 | 0.31–1.12 | 82.5 | <0.001 | Deschoolmeester, Galon, Guidoboni, Lee, Nosho |
| CS | 2 | 0.89 | 0.44–1.82 | 81.7 | 0.019 | Simpson, Nosho | |
| DFS | 4 | 0.50 | 0.35–0.72 | 32.2 | 0.219 | Deschoolmeester, Galon, Guidoboni, Sinicrope | |
| ST | OS | 3 | 1.20 | 0.76–1.89 | 0 | 0.493 | Deschoolmeester, Lee, Sinicrope |
| DFS | 3 | 0.72 | 0.24–2.10 | 65 | 0.058 | Deschoolmeester, Lee, Sinicrope | |
| IM | OS | 2 | 0.63 | 0.42–0.93 | 22.1 | 0.257 | Galon, Deschoolmeester |
| | DFS | 2 | 0.48 | 0.35–0.68 | 0.045 | 0.306 | Deschoolmeester, Galon |
| CC | OS | 6 | 0.72 | 0.54–0.96 | 56.1 | 0.044 | Deschoolmeester, Guidoboni, Naito, Nosho, Chew, Yoon |
| CS | 2 | 0.75 | 0.56–0.99 | 0 | 0.655 | Chiba, Nosho | |
| DFS | 2 | 0.41 | 0.20–0.82 | 0 | 0.43 | Deschoolmeester, Guidoboni | |
| ST | OS | 3 | 0.78 | 0.67–0.92 | 0 | 0.379 | Deschoolmeester, Yoon, Naito |
| DFS | 1 | 1.95 | 0.66–5.76 | Deschoolmeester | |||
| IM | OS | 2 | 0.91 | 0.85–0.99 | 0 | 0.448 | Deschoolmeester, Naito |
| | DFS | 2 | 0.61 | 0.37–1.00 | 0 | 0.53 | Menon, Deschoolmeester |
| CC | OS | 4 | 0.88 | 0.69–1.12 | 46.2 | 0.134 | Chew, Nosho, Sinicrope, Yoon |
| CS | 2 | 0.77 | 0.59–1.01 | 0 | 0.362 | Frey, Nosho | |
| DFS | 2 | 0.45 | 0.04–4.69 | 80.5 | 0.024 | Lee, Sinicrope | |
| ST | OS | 3 | 0.54 | 0.28–1.03 | 57.6 | 0.095 | Correale, Yoon, Sinicrope |
| | DFS | 3 | 0.48 | 0.21–1.07 | 59.1 | 0.087 | Correale, Lee, Sinicrope |
| general | OS | 3 | 0.51 | 0.30–0.89 | 0 | 0.537 | Correale, Günther, Schimanski |
| | DFS | 1 | 0.54 | 0.28–1.03 | — | — | Correale |
| CC | OS | 3 | 0.79 | 0.51–1.22 | 69.4 | 0.038 | Chew, Nosho, Lee |
| CS | 1 | 0.51 | 0.32–0.81 | Nosho | |||
| DFS | 1 | 0.25 | 0.08–0.78 | Lee | |||
| ST | OS | 1 | 0.13 | 0.02–1.18 | Lee | ||
| | DFS | 1 | 0.20 | 0.06–0.71 | | | Lee |
| CC | OS | 2 | 0.51 | 0.10–2.53 | 84.5 | 0.011 | Deschoolmeester, Guidoboni |
| DFS | 2 | 0.63 | 0.06–6.52 | 89.8 | 0.002 | Deschoolmeester, Guidoboni | |
| ST | OS | 1 | 0.86 | 0.37–2.00 | Deschoolmeester | ||
| DFS | 1 | 0.53 | 0.17–1.65 | Deschoolmeester | |||
| IM | OS | 1 | 0.59 | 0.24–1.45 | Deschoolmeester | ||
| DFS | 1 | 1.14 | 0.37–3.52 | Deschoolmeester | |||
Abbreviations: CC=tumour centre; CI=confidence interval; CS=cancer-specific survival; DFS=disease-free survival; HR=hazard ratio; IM=invasive tumour margin; OS=overall survival; ST=tumour stroma.
Figure 2Forest plots of the random-effect meta-analysis for the efficacy of tumour-infiltrating inflammatory cells for generalised tumour inflammatory infiltrate (A) and the CD3 The horizontal bars indicate the 95% CIs. The size of the square around each effect estimate indicates the weight of the individual study in the meta-analysis. Note: (A) Generalised tumour inflammatory infiltrate; (B1) CD3+ (CC); (B2) CD3+ (ST); (B3) CD3+ (IM); (C1) CD8+ (CC); (C2) CD8+ (ST); (C3) CD8+ (IM); (D1) FoxP3+ (CC); (D2) FoxP3+ (ST); (E) CCR7+.
Figure 3Funnel plots of the relationship between the size of the effect in individual studies and the precision of the study estimate (log HR, horizontal axis; s.e., vertical axis) for generalised tumour inflammatory infiltrate (A) and T lymphocyte subgroups for OS (B).
Subgroup analyses of the relationships between generalised tumour inflammatory infiltrate subsets and OS
| Total | 0.59 | 0.48–0.72 | 26.8 | 0.206 | 9 |
| Score>4 | 0.55 | 0.43–0.71 | 45 | <0.001 | 6 |
| ⩽4 | 0.78 | 0.49–1.23 | 0 | 0.285 | 3 |
| I–III | 0.43 | 0.26–0.72 | 44.9 | 0.001 | 3 |
| I–IV | 0.66 | 0.55–0.79 | 0 | <0.001 | 6 |
| Prospective | 0.54 | 0.37–0.78 | 55.2 | 0.001 | 5 |
| Retrospective | 0.64 | 0.51–0.81 | 0 | <0.001 | 4 |
| ⩾200 | 0.56 | 0.44–0.71 | 46.8 | <0.001 | 6 |
| <200 | 0.84 | 0.46–1.56 | 0 | 0.586 | 3 |
| Standard | 0.57 | 0.39–0.84 | 43.0 | 0.004 | 6 |
| Others | 0.64 | 0.52–0.78 | 0 | <0.001 | 3 |
| ⩾60 | 0.66 | 0.54–0.82 | 0 | <0.001 | 3 |
| <60 | 0.54 | 0.39–0.76 | 42.2 | <0.001 | 6 |
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; HR=hazard ratio; OS=overall survival.
Standard cutoff criteria included Jass classification, K–M criteria and Crohn's like reaction criteria.