Table 2 Characteristic distribution of TILs in CCA
From: The role of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in cholangiocarcinoma
Ref | Author | Year | Country | Sample(n) | Location of TILs | Subtypes of TILs | Assessment of TILs | Distribution (number or density of TILs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[31] | Zhou G | 2019 | China | CCA (26) | IT vs. PT | CD8+ / FoxP3+ / CD4+ / CD56+ | IHC | CD8+, CD4+: PT > IT; Foxp3+, CD56: no difference |
[17] | Asahi Y | 2020 | Japan | iCCA (78) | IT vs. PT | CD8+ / FoxP3+ | IHC | CD8+: PT > IT (91.0±89.9 vs. 41.1±54.1) Foxp3+: PT > IT (18.9±21.5 vs. 11.5±15.7) |
[23] | Lu JC | 2019 | China | iCCA (320) | IT vs. PT | PD1(+)T | IHC | PT < IT (40±5 VS 60.1±6.5; p< 0.01) |
[32] | Kasper HU | 2009 | China | CCA (27) | IT vs. PT | CD3+ / CD4+ / CD8+/CD20 | IHC | PT > IT CD3: 52.6±28.5 vs 310.4± 202.0, p=0.008 CD4: 18.0±22.3 vs 223.1±43.2, p=0.043 CD8: 40.7± 30.5 vs 118.7± 35.5, p≤ 0.001 CD20: 11.1 (± 11.8) vs 0.1 (± 0.3), P = 0.035 |
[27] | Ueno T | 2018 | Japan | eCCA (117) | IT vs. PT | CD4+ / CD8+ / FoxP3+ | IHC | No difference CD4+(median 77 vs 59, p=0.16) CD8+(median 52 vs 55, p=0.94) Foxp3+(median 9 vs 9, p=0.62) |
[18] | Goeppert B | 2013 | Germany | eCCA (149) iCCA (157) GBAC (69) | IT vs. PT | CD4+ / CD8+ / FoxP3+/CD20 | IHC | CD4+: PT > IT CD8+: PT > IT CD20: No foud Foxp3+: PT < IT |
[30] | Xu YP | 2021 | China | iCCA (140) | IT vs. PT | CD8+ | IHC | PT > IT |
[26] | Tian L | 2020 | China | iCCA (322) | IT vs. PT | CD8+ | mIHC | PT > IT (p<0.001) |
[29] | Wu H | 2021 | China | iCCA (50) | IT vs. PT | CD8+ / CD3+ | IHC | PT > IT (p=0.009, p=0.047) |
[20] | Kim HD | 2021 | Korea | CCA (52) | IT vs. PT | CD8+ / CD4+ / FoxP3+ | mIHC | PT > IT (p<0.001, p<0.001, p<0.001) |
[33] | Kim HD | 2021 | Korea | iCCA (33) | IT vs. PT | CD103+CD8+ | mIHC | PT < IT (mean 1.4/mm2 vs 1.8/mm2) |