| Literature DB >> 29698402 |
Yasuhito Iseki1, Masatsune Shibutani1, Kiyoshi Maeda1, Hisashi Nagahara1, Tatsunari Fukuoka1, Shinji Matsutani1, Shinichiro Kashiwagi1, Hiroaki Tanaka1, Kosei Hirakawa1, Masaichi Ohira1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Numerous reports indicate that tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are a prognostic factor in various cancers and that they must be good biomarkers. However, the methods of evaluating TILs differ in each study; thus, there is not yet a standardized methodology for evaluating TILs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the prognostic significance of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) using the new method proposed by the International TILs Working Group in breast cancer and to standardize the method of evaluating TILs in CRC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29698402 PMCID: PMC5919485 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192744
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Examples of the evaluation of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes.
Examples of the evaluation of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes(TILs) in the present study. The mean percentage of the area occupied by TILs in 5 areas per section was reported as the density of TILs.
Fig 2The method of identifying the area of TILs by the automated imaging software program.
(A) A hematoxylin and eosin-stained section (×200). (B) Examples of the evaluating the area of TILs using the automated imaging software program (×400). The area in the square in Figure (A) was subjected to an image analysis and is shown in Figure (B). We set the depth of color of TILs. The cells of the same color were then extracted. The ratio of the white area to the extracted area was determined.
The patient characteristics.
| Sex (male | 84 (52.5%) |
| Age (years) median(range) | 67 (26–90) |
| Tumor size (cm) median(range) | 4.7 (1.0–11.0) |
| Tumor location (colon | 86 (53.8%) |
| Preoperative CEA level (ng/ml) median(range) | 3.5 (0.8–349.3) |
| Preoperative CA19-9 level (U/ml) median(range) | 8.0 (1.0–1979) |
| Histology (low grade | 147 (91.9%) |
| Depth of tumor invasion (T1, 2, 3 | 106 (66.3%) |
| Lymphatic vessel invasion (negative | 38 (23.8%) |
| Venous invasion (negative | 128 (80.6%) |
| Lymph node metastasis (negative | 90 (56.3%) |
| Adjuvant chemotherapy (negative | 56 (35.2%) |
| Mismatch repair status (proficient | 147 (94.2%) |
CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19–9.
Fig 3The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the density of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs).
We treated the five-year relapse-free survival as the state variable and the percentage of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) as the test variable. The most appropriate cut-off value for the percentage of TILs to be 42% was shown by the investigation of the cut-off value of percentage of TILs using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC, 0.5781; sensitivity, 0.8636; specificity, 0.3103).
The correlations between the clinicopathological factors and the area of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes.
| The density of TILs | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| High (N = 42) | Low (N = 118) | p-value | |
| Sex | |||
| Male | 19 (11.9%) | 65 (40.6%) | 0.2726 |
| Female | 23 (14.4%) | 53 (33.1%) | |
| Age (years) | |||
| Median(range) | 68 (34–89) | 65 (26–90) | 0.1594 |
| Tumor location | |||
| Colon | 22 (13.8%) | 64 (40.0%) | 0.8359 |
| Rectum | 20 (12.5%) | 54 (33.8%) | |
| Tumor size (cm) | |||
| Median(range) | 5.1 (1.0–10.0) | 4.5 (1.0–11.0) | 0.1874 |
| Depth of tumor invasion | |||
| T1,2,3 | 33 (20.6%) | 73 (45.6%) | 0.0435 |
| T4 | 9 (5.6%) | 45 (28.1%) | |
| Lymph node metastasis | |||
| Negative | 27 (16.9%) | 63 (39.4%) | 0.2187 |
| Positive | 15 (9.4%) | 55 (34.4%) | |
| Lymphatic vessel invasion | |||
| Negative | 15 (9.4%) | 23 (14.4%) | 0.0391 |
| Positive | 27 (16.9%) | 95 (59.4%) | |
| Venous invasion | |||
| Negative | 38 (23.9%) | 90 (56.6%) | 0.0135 |
| Positive | 3 (1.9%) | 28 (17.6%) | |
| Preoperative CEA level | |||
| ≤5 ng/ml | 30 (18.8%) | 73 (45.6%) | 0.2609 |
| >5 ng/ml | 12 (7.5%) | 45 (28.1%) | |
| Preoperative CA19-9 level | |||
| ≤ 37 U/ml | 39 (24.8%) | 99 (63.1%) | 0.2273 |
| >37 U/ml | 3 (1.9%) | 16 (10.2%) | |
| Histology | |||
| Moderately or Well | 40 (25.0%) | 107 (66.9%) | 0.3282 |
| Other | 2 (1.3%) | 11 (6.9%) | |
| Adjuvant chemotherapy | |||
| Negative | 15 (6.3%) | 41 (25.8%) | 0.8321 |
| Positive | 26 (16.4%) | 77 (48.4%) | |
| Mismatch repair status | |||
| Proficient | 40 (25.6%) | 107 (68.6%) | 0.7385 |
| Deficient | 2 (1.3%) | 7 (4.5%) | |
TILs, tumor infiltrating lymphocyte; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19–9.
Fig 4Survival curves.
(A)The survival curves for relapse-free survival. The relapse-free survival rates of the low-TIL group were significantly worse in comparison to the high-TIL group (p = 0.0251). (B)The survival curves for overall survival. The overall survival rates in the low-TIL group were significantly worse in comparison to the high-TIL group (p = 0.0059).
The results of the univariate and multivariate analyses of the prognostic factors for relapse-free survival.
| Univariate | Multivariate | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95%CI | p-value | OR | 95%CI | p-value | |
| Sex (male) | 1.881 | 1.029–3.561 | 0.0442 | 2.223 | 1.176–4.345 | 0.0137 |
| Age (≥67years) | 2.201 | 1.187–4.286 | 0.0118 | 2.556 | 1.345–5.079 | 0.0039 |
| Tumor location (Rectum) | 1.115 | 0.614–2.024 | 0.7186 | |||
| Tumor size (≥4cm) | 0.962 | 0.530–1.746 | 0.8989 | |||
| Depth of tumor (T4) | 1.030 | 0.529–1.910 | 0.9275 | |||
| Lymphatic vessel invasion (positive) | 2.362 | 1.074–6.233 | 0.0313 | 1.219 | 0.506–3.404 | 0.6734 |
| Venous invasion (positive) | 1.721 | 0.851–3.256 | 0.1256 | |||
| Lymph node metastasis (positive) | 2.389 | 1.313–4.472 | 0.0043 | 1.944 | 0.989–3.930 | 0.0539 |
| Preoperative CEA level (≥5ng/ml) | 1.740 | 0.951–3.150 | 0.0718 | 0.774 | 0.357–1.588 | 0.4918 |
| Preoperative CA19-9 level (≥ 37U/ml) | 3.837 | 1.826–7.505 | 0.0008 | 3.967 | 1.667–9.137 | 0.0023 |
| The density of TILs (High) | 2.585 | 1.177–6.813 | 0.0160 | 2.342 | 1.031–6.311 | 0.0414 |
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19–9; TILs, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes
The results of the univariate and multivariate analyses of the prognostic factors for overall survival.
| Univariate | Multivariate | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95%CI | p-value | OR | 95%CI | p-value | |
| Sex (male) | 1.575 | 0.724–3.595 | 0.2537 | |||
| Age (≥67 years) | 3.606 | 1.532–9.876 | 0.0026 | 4.153 | 1.762–11.386 | 0.0008 |
| Tumor location (Rectum) | 1.141 | 0.524–2.486 | 0.7366 | |||
| Tumor size (≥4cm) | 0.603 | 0.264–1.310 | 0.2029 | |||
| Depth of tumor (T4) | 0.620 | 0.227–1.457 | 0.2859 | |||
| Lymphatic vessel invasion (positive) | 1.134 | 0.482–3.105 | 0.7849 | |||
| Venous invasion (positive) | 3.060 | 1.339–6.664 | 0.0093 | 2.249 | 0.979–4.932 | 0.0558 |
| Lymph node metastasis (positive) | 1.904 | 0.880–4.256 | 0.1020 | |||
| Preoperative CEA level (≥5ng/ml) | 1.746 | 0.793–3.784 | 0.1626 | |||
| Preoperative CA19-9 level (≥37U/ml) | 2.329 | 0.774–5.766 | 0.1223 | |||
| The density of TILs (High) | 9.784 | 2.074–174.751 | 0.0012 | 11.617 | 2.453–207.707 | 0.0004 |
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19–9; TILs, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes
Fig 5The correlation between the density of TILs assessed by an observer and that assessed by an automated imaging software program.
The correlation between the density of TILs assessed by an observer and the density of TILs assessed by the imaging software program are shown. A significant positive correlation was observed (r = 0.7071, p<0.0001).