Data from The Anatomical Location Shapes the Immune Infiltrate in Tumors of Same Etiology and Affects Survival
Le résumé fourni par la source
AbstractPurpose: The tumor immune microenvironment determines clinical outcome. Whether the original tissue in which a primary tumor develops influences this microenvironment is not well understood. Experimental Design: We applied high-dimensional single-cell mass cytometry [Cytometry by Time-Of-Flight (CyTOF)] analysis and functional studies to analyze immune cell populations in human papillomavirus (HPV)–induced primary tumors of the cervix (cervical carcinoma) and oropharynx (oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, OPSCC). Results: Despite the same etiology of these tumors, the composition and functionality of their lymphocytic infiltrate substantially differed. Cervical carcinoma displayed a 3-fold lower CD4:CD8 ratio and contained more activated CD8+CD103+CD161+ effector T cells and less CD4+CD161+ effector memory T cells than OPSCC. CD161+ effector cells produced the highest cytokine levels among tumor-specific T cells. Differences in CD4+ T-cell infiltration between cervical carcinoma and OPSCC were reflected in the detection rate of intratumoral HPV-specific CD4+ T cells and in their impact on OPSCC and cervical carcinoma survival. The peripheral blood mononuclear cell composition of these patients, however, was similar. Conclusions: The tissue of origin significantly affects the overall shape of the immune infiltrate in primary tumors.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Data from The Anatomical Location Shapes the Immune Infiltrate in Tumors of Same Etiology and Affects Survival
- Date Crossref
- 31/03/2023
- Éditeur
- American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.