| Literature DB >> 32884946 |
Jingjing Chen1,2, Ping Gu1,2, Haibo Wu1,2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) coupled with CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILS) and the clinicopathological features, along with prognosis of cervical squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32884946 PMCID: PMC7455844 DOI: 10.1155/2020/8164365
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Microscopical image of PD-L1 protein expression in poorly differentiated CSCC (×100) (EnVision assay).
Figure 2Microscopical image of PD-L1 protein expression in highly moderately differentiated CSCC (×100) (EnVision assay).
Figure 3Microscopical image of PD-L1 protein expression in a high-density group of CD8+ TILS in CSCC (×100).
Figure 4Microscopical image of PD-L1 protein expression in a low-density group of CD8+ TILS in CSCC (×100).
The links between PD-L1 and CD8+ TILS expression in CSCC and clinical pathological profile.
| Clinicopathological features | PD-L1 in tumor cell | Intraepithelial CD8+ TILS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive (≥1%), | Negative (<1%), |
| Highly expressed (≥17.6/HPF), | Lowly expressed (<17.6/HPF), |
| |
| Age (years) | ||||||
| ≤47 | 32 (62.7) | 19 (37.3) | 0.750 | 30 (58.8) | 21 (41.2) | 0.083 |
| >47 | 29 (65.9) | 15 (34.1) | 18 (40.9) | 26 (59.1) | ||
| Tumor size (cm) | ||||||
| <3 cm | 25 (49.0) | 26 (51.0) | 0.001 | 28 (54.9) | 23 (45.1) | 0.361 |
| ≥3 cm | 36 (81.8) | 8 (18.2) | 20 (45.5) | 24 (54.5) | ||
| Interstitial infiltration | ||||||
| <1/2 | 11 (37.9) | 18 (62.1) | 0.001 | 15 (51.7) | 14 (48.3) | 0.878 |
| ≥1/2 | 50 (75.8) | 16 (24.2) | 33 (50.0) | 33 (50.0) | ||
| FIGO stage | ||||||
| I~II | 44 (57.1) | 33 (42.9) | 0.003 | 45 (58.4) | 32 (41.6) | 0.002 |
| III~IV | 17 (94.4) | 1 (5.6) | 3 (16.7) | 15 (83.3) | ||
| Degree of differentiation | ||||||
| Moderately high differentiation | 45 (59.2) | 31 (40.8) | 0.043 | 44 (57.9) | 32 (42.1) | 0.004 |
| Low differentiation | 16 (84.2) | 2 (15.8) | 4 (21.1) | 15 (78.9) | ||
| Vascular invasion | ||||||
| No | 25 (52.1) | 23 (47.9) | 0.013 | 23 (47.9) | 25 (52.1) | 0.609 |
| Yes | 36 (76.6) | 11 (23.4) | 25 (53.2) | 22 (46.8) | ||
| Lymph node metastasis | ||||||
| No | 36 (52.2) | 33 (47.8) | 0.001 | 41 (59.4) | 28 (40.6) | 0.005 |
| Yes | 25 (96.2) | 1 (3.8) | 7 (26.9) | 19 (73.1) | ||
The relationship between PD-L1/CD8+ TILS density groups and clinicopathological features.
| Clinicopathological features |
| A group | B group | C group | D group |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | ||||||
| ≤47 | 51 | 13 (25.5) | 19 (37.3) | 17 (33.3) | 2 (3.9) | 0.473 |
| >47 | 44 | 8 (18.2) | 21 (47.7) | 10 (22.7) | 5 (11.4) | |
| Tumor size (cm) | ||||||
| ≤3 | 51 | 7 (13.7) | 18 (35.3) | 21 (41.2) | 5 (9.8) | 0.473 |
| >3 | 44 | 14 (31.8) | 22 (50.0) | 6 (13.6) | 2 (4.5) | |
| Depth of interstitial infiltration (cm) | ||||||
| <1/2 | 29 | 2 (6.9) | 9 (31.0) | 13 (44.8) | 5 (17.2) | 0.001 |
| ≥1/2 | 66 | 19 (28.8) | 31 (47.0) | 14 (21.2) | 2 (3.0) | |
| FIGO stage | ||||||
| I~II | 77 | 19 (24.7) | 25 (32.5) | 26 (33.8) | 7 (9.1) | 0.001 |
| III~IV | 18 | 2 (11.1) | 15 (83.3) | 1 (5.6) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Degree of differentiation | ||||||
| Moderately high differentiation | 76 | 19 (25.0) | 26 (34.2) | 25 (32.9) | 6 (7.9) | 0.001 |
| Low differentiation | 19 | 2 (10.5) | 14 (73.7) | 2 (10.5) | 1 (5.3) | |
| Vascular invasion | ||||||
| No | 48 | 7 (14.6) | 18 (37.5) | 16 (33.3) | 7 (14.6) | 0.918 |
| Yes | 47 | 14 (29.8) | 22 (46.8) | 11 (23.4) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Lymph node metastasis | ||||||
| No | 69 | 15 (21.7) | 21 (30.4) | 26 (37.7) | 7 (10.1) | 0.006 |
| Yes | 26 | 6 (23.1) | 19 (73.1) | 1 (3.8) | 0 (0.0) |
Figure 5Survival analysis of patients with different immunotypes based on CD8+ TILS density and PD-L1 expression in tumors. (a) The influence curve of PD-L1 expression on OS of CSCC patients. (b) The influence curve of CD8+ TILS density on OS of CSCC patients. (c) The influence curve of PD-L1/CD8+ TILS density on OS of CSCC patients.
Multivariate analysis of COX regarding OS in CSCC patients.
| Parameters | OS | |
|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) |
| |
| Size (≤3 cm vs. >3 cm) | 0.680 (0.287~1.615) | 0.382 |
| Degree of differentiation (moderately high differentiation vs. low differentiation) | 0.369 (0.155~0.879) | 0.024 |
| Depth of infiltration (superficial muscular layer vs. deep muscular layer) | 0.327 (0.073~1.466) | 0.144 |
| Lymph node metastasis (metastasis vs. nonmetastasis) | 0.220 (0.091~0.534) | 0.001 |
| FIGO stage (I~II vs. III~IV) | 0.331 (0.145~0.759) | 0.009 |
P < 0.05, significant difference; HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; OS: overall survival.