4.2 Article

Neutrophilic inflammation in gallbladder carcinoma correlates with patient survival: A case-control study

Journal

ANNALS OF DIAGNOSTIC PATHOLOGY
Volume 56, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2021.151845

Keywords

Gallbladder carcinoma; Neutrophilic inflammation; Cholecystitis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, a high number of tumor-associated neutrophils in gallbladder carcinoma patients was associated with shorter survival, independent of patient age and cancer stage. Inflammation response may have prognostic significance in gallbladder carcinoma patients, and further studies with larger case numbers are needed to confirm these findings.
Gallbladder carcinoma is an uncommon malignancy with an overall 5-year survival of less than 5%. Gallbladder carcinoma has been strongly linked with cholelithiasis and chronic inflammation. Case reports and series have described cholecystitis with acute (neutrophilic) inflammation in association with gallbladder carcinoma, although a clear relationship to patient outcome has not been established. Our series included 8 cases of gall -bladder carcinoma with high tumor-associated neutrophils (>25 per high power field) that were associated with shorter patient survival (Cox regression coefficient 6.2, p = 0.004) than age-and stage-matched controls. High tumor-associated neutrophils were not associated with gallbladder rupture/perforation or increased bacterial load measured by 16S PCR. Neutrophilic inflammation with gallbladder carcinoma correlates to shorter survival, independent of patient age and stage of carcinoma. The findings suggest that the degree of neutrophilic inflammation may have prognostic significance in specimens from patients with gallbladder carcinoma after cholecystectomy. Further studies with larger case numbers are needed to confirm and generalize these findings.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available