Oncotarget

Research Papers:

Local immune response depends on p16INK4a status of primary tumor in vulvar squamous cell carcinoma

PDF  |  Full Text  |  Supplementary Files  |  How to cite

Oncotarget. 2017; 8:46204-46210. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.17581

Metrics: PDF 2231 views  |  Full Text 3202 views

Jacek J. Sznurkowski1, Anton Żawrocki2 and Wojciech Biernat2

1Department of Oncological Surgery, The Medical University, Gdańsk, Poland

2Department of Pathology, The Medical University, Gdańsk, Poland

Correspondence to:

Jacek J. Sznurkowski, email: [email protected]

Keywords: vulvar SCC, p16, TILs, TAMs, prognosis

Received: December 29, 2016     Accepted: April 04, 2017     Published: May 03, 2017

ABSTRACT

Background: The p16Ink4a is not a surrogate marker for high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) genotypes but indicates better prognosis in vulvar squamous cell carcinoma patients. Our recent study confirmed substantial mismatch between p16Ink4a and high-risk HPV-status as well as revealed that p16Ink4a-overexpression itself is an independent prognostic factor for vulvar cancer.

Aim: To determine significance of the tumor infiltrating immune cells and p16Ink4a–status for better outcome of patients with vulvar cancer.

Methods: Intraepithelial tumor infiltrating lymphocytes: CD8+, CD4+, FOXP3+, CD56+, tumor associated macrophages: CD68+, and GZB+ cells were calculated in 85 vulvar squamous cell carcinomas with previously defined p16Ink4a and high-risk HPV-status. Number of intraepithelial CD8+, CD4+, FOXP3+, CD56+, CD68+ and GZB+ cells were compared between tumors with different p16INK4a status and overlapping high-risk HPV-status separately. Survival analyses included the Kaplan–Meier method, log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model.

Results: p16Ink4a-negative tumors were more infiltrated by intraepithelial CD8+, CD4+ and GZB+ cells than p16Ink4a-positive tumors (p=0.032, p=0.016 and p=0.007 respectively). High-risk HPV-status did not correlate with the infiltration of immune cells. Median follow up was 89.20 months (range 1.7-189.5). High CD4+ and CD56+ indices were correlated with prognosis in p16Ink4a–positive cases (p=0.039 and p=0.013 respectively). Low CD68+ infiltrates were correlated with prognosis in p16Ink4a-negative cases (p=0.018). Conclusion: p16Ink4a-status impacts local immune surveillance as represented by tumor infiltrating immune cells. Immunologic effects contributing to clinical outcome might depend on p16Ink4a-overexpression.