4.5 Article

Impact of tumor-associated macrophages on invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas head

期刊

CANCER SCIENCE
卷 103, 期 11, 页码 2012-+

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2012.02411.x

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) are candidate histological factors in invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) of the pancreas. Tumor-associated macrophages can be affected by cancer-related inflammation and pancreatitis and interact with important invasive behavior in a recurrent manner in pancreatic IDC. These features may help elucidate the aggressiveness of pancreatic IDC. The aim of this study was to characterize TAMs in pancreatic IDC in comparison with chronic pancreatitis (CP) and to reveal TAM-related factors and the clinical impact of TAMs. CD68 (a pan-macrophage marker) and CD204 (an M2 macrophage marker) immunohistochemistry was carried out in pancreas head specimens from 107 IDC cases and 11 CP cases. Immunopositive cell areas were calculated at the periphery and center of the tumor. The distributions of macrophages in IDC and CP and the relationship between TAMs and histological tumor factors, survival, and recurrence were evaluated. Macrophages were more frequently observed in the lesion periphery than the center in IDC and CP. The density of macrophages was elevated in IDC compared to CP. Dense M2 macrophages at the tumor periphery were frequently seen in large tumors and showed an independent impact on overall survival and disease-free time. Early recurrence in the liver or the local manipulated area was associated with high accumulation of peripheral M2 macrophages. More M2 macrophages were seen in IDC than in CP in both the periphery and the center. High numbers of peripheral M2 macrophages were associated with large tumor size, early recurrence in the liver, local recurrence, and shortened survival time in patients with pancreatic IDC. (Cancer Sci 2012, 103: 2012-2020)

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

4.5
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