| Literature DB >> 27299960 |
Hester C van Wyk1, James H Park1, Joanne Edwards2, Paul G Horgan1, Donald C McMillan1, James J Going3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tumour budding has been reported to reflect invasiveness, metastasis and unfavourable prognosis in colorectal cancer. The aim of the study was to examine the relationship between tumour budding and clinicopathological characteristics, tumour microenvironment and survival in patients with primary operable colorectal cancer.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27299960 PMCID: PMC4947698 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.173
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Figure 1Assessment of tumour budding. (A) The 10 HPF method showing placement grid (1 HPF), (B) distribution of tumour buds and (C) ROC analysis.
The relationship between tumour budding and clinicopathological characteristics in patients with primary operable colorectal cancer (n=303)
| Host characteristics | ||||
|
| ||||
| <65 | 103 (34) | 63 (34) | 40 (34) | 0.423 |
| 65–74 | 101 (33) | 67 (36) | 34 (29) | |
| >75 | 99 (33) | 55 (30) | 44 (37) | |
|
| ||||
| Male | 158 (52) | 93 (50) | 53 (45) | 0.414 |
| Female | 145 (48) | 92 (50) | 65 (55) | |
|
| ||||
| No | 227 (75) | 147 (80) | 80 (68) | 0.030 |
| Yes | 76 (25) | 38 (20) | 38 (32) | |
| Tumour characteristics | ||||
|
| ||||
| Colon | 230 (76) | 138 (75) | 92 (78) | 0.504 |
| Rectum | 73 (24) | 47 (25) | 26 (22) | |
|
| ||||
| I | 21 (7) | 17 (9) | 4 (3) | <0.001 |
| II | 176 (58) | 125 (68) | 51 (43) | |
| III | 106 (35) | 43 (23) | 63 (54) | |
|
| ||||
| 1 | 6 (2) | 5 (3) | 1 (1) | <0.001 |
| 2 | 22 (7) | 16 (8) | 6 (5) | |
| 3 | 188 (62) | 129 (70) | 59 (50) | |
| 4 | 87 (29) | 35 (19) | 52 (44) | |
|
| ||||
| 0 | 197 (65) | 142 (77) | 55 (47) | <0.001 |
| 1 | 85 (28) | 36 (19) | 49 (41) | |
| 2 | 21 (7) | 7 (4) | 14 (12) | |
|
| ||||
| Well/moderate | 264 (87) | 165 (89) | 99 (84) | 0.181 |
| Poor | 39 (13) | 20 (11) | 19 (16) | |
|
| ||||
| Absent | 289 (95) | 176 (95) | 113 (96) | 0.800 |
| Present | 14 (5) | 9 (5) | 5 (4) | |
|
| ||||
| Absent | 224 (74) | 153 (83) | 71 (60) | <0.001 |
| Present | 79 (26) | 32 (17) | 47 (40) | |
|
| ||||
| Clear | 281 (93) | 174 (94) | 107 (91) | 0.270 |
| Involved | 22 (7) | 11 (6) | 11 (9) | |
|
| ||||
| <12 Nodes | 205 (68) | 129 (70) | 76 (64) | 0.335 |
| >12 Nodes | 98 (32) | 56 (30) | 42 (36) | |
|
| ||||
| Absent | 179 (59) | 126 (64) | 53 (50) | 0.013 |
| Present | 124 (41) | 71 (36) | 53 (50) | |
|
| ||||
| Absent | 167 (55) | 104 (56) | 63 (53) | 0.630 |
| Present | 136 (45) | 81 (44) | 55 (47) | |
|
| ||||
| MMR competent | 187 (87) | 124 (88) | 63 (85) | 0.562 |
| MMR deficient | 28 (13) | 17 (12) | 11 (15) | |
| Tumour microenvironment | ||||
|
| ||||
| Weak | 197 (65) | 111 (60) | 86 (73) | 0.022 |
| Strong | 106 (35) | 32 (40) | 32 (27) | |
|
| ||||
| Low | 226 (75) | 158 (85) | 68 (58) | <0.001 |
| High | 77 (25) | 27 (15) | 50 (42) | |
|
| ||||
| 0 | 106 (35) | 74 (40) | 32 (27) | <0.001 |
| 1 | 140 (46) | 92 (50) | 48 (41) | |
| 2 | 57 (19) | 19 (10) | 38 (32) | |
Abbreviations: GMS=Glasgow Microenvironment Score; KM grade= Klintrup–Makinen grade; MMR=mismatch repair; TNM=tumour, node, metastasis.
The relationship between tumour budding, clinicopathological characteristics and cancer-specific survival in patients with primary operable colorectal cancer (n=303)
| Age (<65/65–75 years/>75 years) | 1.37 (1.06–1.78) | 0.018 | 1.47 (1.13–1.90) | 0.004 |
| Sex (male/female) | 0.97 (0.64–1.47) | 0.890 | ||
| Site (colon/rectum) | 0.74 (0.44–1.26) | 0.270 | ||
| T stage (1/2/3/4) | 1.98 (1.38–2.85) | <0.001 | – | |
| N stage (0/1/2) | 1.71 (1.27–2.29) | <0.001 | – | |
| TNM (I/II/III) | 2.25 (1.54–3.30) | <0.001 | 1.52 (1.02–2.25) | 0.040 |
| Venous invasion (absent/present) | 2.22 (1.46–3.39) | <0.001 | 1.73 (1.13–2.64) | 0.012 |
| Tumour necrosis (absent/present) | 1.43 (0.94–2.16) | 0.095 | ||
| MMR status | 1.02 (0.49–2.15) | 0.952 | ||
| Tumour microenvironment | ||||
| GMS (0/1/2) | 1.99 (1.48–2.67) | <0.001 | 1.54 (1.15–2.07) | 0.004 |
| Tumour budding (low/high) | 5.97 (3.73–9.56) | <0.001 | 4.03 (2.50–6.52) | <0.001 |
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; GMS=Glasgow Microenvironment Score; HR=hazard ratio; MMR=mismatch repair; TNM=tumour, node, metastasis.
Figure 2Relationship between budding and clinicopathological factors. (A and B) Relationship between high- and low-grade tumour budding and cancer-specific survival in patients with TNM stage II and III primary operable colorectal cancer (P<0.001). (C and D) Relationship between tumour budding, venous invasion and cancer-specific survival in patients with primary operable colorectal cancer (P<0.001).
Figure 3Relationship between tumour budding, Glasgow Prognostic Score (GMS) and cancer-specific survival in patients with primary operable colorectal cancer (
Figure 4Relationship between combined score of Glasgow Prognostic Score and tumour budding and cancer-specific survival in patients with primary operable colorectal cancer (