| Literature DB >> 31516251 |
G Deepthi1, Pavan G Kulkarni2, S R K Nandan2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inflammation in tumor microenvironment assists in both promotion and growth of tumor. Tumor-associated tissue eosinophilia (TATE) is the term used when eosinophils are observed in a tumor tissue with inflammatory infiltrate. Although carcinogenesis with inflammation is one of the important hallmarks, the exact role of eosinophils remains unclear. Various studies on oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) that focused on eosinophils reported both favorable and unfavorable prognosis in cancer tissue, because of which the exact function of eosinophils still remains uncertain. AIMS ANDEntities:
Keywords: Congo red stain; malignant transformation; oral leukoplakia; oral squamous cell carcinoma; tumor-associated tissue eosinophilia
Year: 2019 PMID: 31516251 PMCID: PMC6714271 DOI: 10.4103/jomfp.JOMFP_111_19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Pathol ISSN: 0973-029X
Distribution of study sample
| Groups | Sample size ( | Description of groups |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | 20 | WDSCC |
| Group 2 | 20 | MDSCC |
| Group 3 | 10 | PDSCC |
| Group 4 | 20 | OED |
WDSCC: Well-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, MDSCC: Moderately differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, PDSCC: Poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, OED: Oral epithelial dysplasia
Figure 1The section showing tissue eosinophils in a case of well-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma (Congo red stain, ×400)
Figure 3The section showing tissue eosinophils in a case of poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma (Congo red stain, ×400)
The mean and standard deviation of total eosinophil counts among different groups
| WDSCC | MDSCC | PDSCC | OED | SS | Df | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | 20 | 10 | 20 | 113.6412 | 3 | 12.36627 | 0.00001 | |
| Mean | 3.36 | 4.43 | 5.96 | 2.12 | 202.1715 | 66 | ||
| SD | 1.402 | 2.1723 | 2.1996 | 1.29 | 315.8127 | 69 |
The result is significant at P<0.05. SD: Standard deviation, SS: Sum of squares, Df: Degrees of freedom. F- value: ANOVA value
Graph 1Box plot analysis of oral epithelial dysplasia and different grades of oral squamous cell carcinoma showing total eosinophil count. WDSCC: Well-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, MDSCC: Moderately differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, PDSCC: Poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, OED: Oral epithelial dysplasia
Comparison of total eosinophil counts between oral epithelial dysplasia and oral squamous cell carcinoma
| Group | Mean | SD | Result | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oral epithelial dysplasia | 20 | 2.12 | 1.66 | −4.32281 | 0.000026 | <0.05 (significant) |
| OSCC | 50 | 4.31 | 4.41 |
OSCC: Oral squamous cell carcinoma, SD: Standard deviation
Comparison of total eosinophil counts between three groups using unpaired t-test
| Group | Mean | SD | Result | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WDSCC | 20 | 3.36 | 1.97 | −1.85079 | 0.035 | <0.05 (significant) |
| MDSCC | 20 | 4.43 | 4.72 | |||
| MDSCC | 20 | 4.43 | 4.72 | −1.81119 | 0.040427 | <0.05 (significant) |
| PDSCC | 10 | 5.96 | 4.84 | |||
| WDSCC | 20 | 3.36 | 1.97 | −3.94961 | 0.00024 | <0.05 (significant) |
| PDSCC | 10 | 5.96 | 4.84 |
SD: Standard deviation, WDSCC: Well-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, MDSCC: Moderately differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, PDSCC: Poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma
Figure 4The mechanism of immune evasion by eosinophils in tumor microenvironment