4.7 Article

High expression of macrophage colony-stimulating factor in peritumoral liver tissue is associated with poor survival after curative resection of hepatocellular carcinoma

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 26, Issue 16, Pages 2707-2716

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.6521

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To investigate prognostic values of the intratumoral and peritumoral expression of macrophage colony-stimulating factors (M-CSF) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after curative resection. Patients and Methods Expression of M-CSF and density of macrophages ( M Phi) were assessed by immunohistochemistry in tissue microarrays containing paired tumor and peritumoral liver tissue from 105 patients who had undergone hepatectomy for histologically proven HCC. Prognostic value of these and other clinicopathologic factors was evaluated. Results Neither intratumoral M-CSF nor M Phi density was associated with overall survival ( OS) or disease-free survival (DFS). High peritumoral M-CSF and M Phi density, which correlated with large tumor size, presence of intrahepatic metastasis, and high TNM stage, were independent prognostic factors for both OS ( P =.001 and P =.001, respectively) and DFS ( P =.001 and P =.003, respectively) and affected incidence of early recurrence. In a small HCC subset, peritumoral M-CSF was also correlated with both OS and DFS ( P =.038 and P =.001, respectively). The combination of peritumoral M-CSF and M Phi had a better power to predict the patients' death and disease recurrence ( P =.001 for both). Conclusion High peritumoral M-CSF and M Phi were associated with HCC progression, disease recurrence, and poor survival after hepatectomy, highlighting the importance of peritumoral tissue in the recurrence and metastasis of HCC. M-CSF and M Phi may be targets of postoperative adjuvant therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available