4.6 Article

Regional immunity in melanoma: immunosuppressive changes precede nodal metastasis

期刊

MODERN PATHOLOGY
卷 24, 期 4, 页码 487-494

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2010.227

关键词

angiogenesis; cytotoxic T cells; lymph nodes; melanoma; regional immunity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In order to characterize the degree of immunosuppression in regional immunity in patients with melanoma, we used immunohistochemistry to analyze markers of T-cell subtype and polarity, costimulation, dendritic cell maturation, monocytes, lymphatic vasculature, and angiogenesis. Specifically, we analyzed expression of CD4, CD8, CD14, CD40, CD86, CD123, HLA-DR, IL-10, LYVE, VEGFR3, and VEGF-C in lymph nodes. We compared sentinel lymph nodes with and without metastasis from patients with melanoma with both infection inflamed (reactive) and dormant human lymph nodes. There were no differences demonstrated between sentinel lymph nodes with or without metastasis from patients with melanoma in any of the markers that were tested. Both groups of sentinel lymph nodes had fewer CD8(+) T cells than either set of control nodes. Whereas the infection inflamed lymph nodes demonstrated Th2 polarity, the dormant lymph nodes demonstrated Th1 polarity. In conclusion, changes in regional immunity appeared to precede metastasis in melanoma. Whether there was tumor present in sentinel lymph nodes or not, these nodes demonstrated a marked decrease in cytotoxic T cells compared with both sets of controls. Furthermore, the control lymph nodes used for comparison can significantly impact interpretation, as the dormant and reactive lymph nodes markedly varied in their immune profiles. These immunologic changes may explain the successful metastasis of melanoma in the midst of the immune environment of the sentinel lymph node, and lend insights into the mechanisms of lymphatic metastases in other solid malignancies. Modern Pathology (2011) 24, 487-494; doi:10.1038/modpathol.2010.227; published online 10 December 2010

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据