4.7 Article

Circulating neutrophil subsets in advanced lung cancer patients exhibit unique immune signature and relate to prognosis

期刊

FASEB JOURNAL
卷 34, 期 3, 页码 4204-4218

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1096/fj.201902467R

关键词

lung cancer; mass cytometry; neutrophils; phenotypic modulation

资金

  1. Israel Cancer Research Fund
  2. Israel Science Foundation
  3. Israel Lung Association
  4. Hebrew University
  5. Hadassah Medical Center
  6. COST Action [BM1404]
  7. EU

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The accumulation of circulating low-density neutrophils (LDN) has been described in cancer patients and associated with tumor-supportive properties, as opposed to the high-density neutrophils (HDN). Here we aimed to evaluate the clinical significance of circulating LDN in lung cancer patients, and further assessed its diagnostic vs prognostic value. Using mass cytometry (CyTOF), we identified major subpopulations within the circulating LDN/HDN subsets and determined phenotypic modulations of these subsets along tumor progression. LDN were highly enriched in the low-density (LD) fraction of advanced lung cancer patients (median 7.0%; range 0.2%-80%, n = 64), but not in early stage patients (0.7%; 0.05%-6%; n = 35), healthy individuals (0.8%; 0%-3.5%; n = 15), or stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients (1.2%; 0.3%-7.4%, n = 13). Elevated LDN (>10%) remarkably related with poorer prognosis in late stage patients. We identified three main neutrophil subsets which proportions are markedly modified in cancer patients, with CD66b(+)/CD10(low)/CXCR4(+)/PDL1(inter) subset almost exclusively found in advanced lung cancer patients. We found substantial variability in subsets between patients, and demonstrated that HDN and LDN retain a degree of inherent spontaneous plasticity. Deep phenotypic characterization of cancer-related circulating neutrophils and their modulation along tumor progression is an important advancement in understanding the role of myeloid cells in lung cancer.

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

4.7
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