Background: The prognostic significance of tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) in patients with lung cancer (LCa) remains controversial. We therefore conducted the present study to systematically evaluate the role of different TAMs markers and histologic locations on the prognosis of LCa.

Methods: Searches of Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE databases were performed up to 28 February 2022. The pooled analysis was conducted in random-effect or fixed-effects model with hazard risk (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for survival data including overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) from raw or adjusted measures, according to different TAMs markers and histologic locations.

Results: Including a total of 5105 patients from 30 eligible studies, the results indicated that the total count of CD68+ TAMs was negatively associated with OS and DFS, which was also observed in the relationship of CD68+ or CD204+ TAMs in tumor stroma (TS) with OS and DFS (all P<0.05). Conversely, higher CD68+ TAMs density in tumor nest (TN) or TN/TS ratio of CD68+ TAMs predicted better OS (all P<0.05). Similarly, higher HLA-DR+ TAMs density was correlated with better OS in TN and TS (all P<0.05). Besides, neither nest CD163+ TAM density nor stromal CD163+ TAM density was a prognostic factor in LCa patients (all P>0.05).

Conclusion: Our study indicated that different TAMs markers and histologic locations could bring about different prognostic effects in LCa patients. Great understanding of the infiltration modes of TAMs may contribute to improve outcomes of LCa patients.

Keywords:
lung cancer, pooled analysis, prognosis, Tumor-associated macrophages
Subjects:
Cancer, Diagnostics & Biomarkers, Respiratory System

Lung cancer (LCa), one of the most common cancer among malignant diseases, is the leading cause of cancer death in the world [1]. With the growth of geriatric population, LCa, a risk to human health, further aggravates global disease burden [2]. Although encouraging advances have been made in the diagnosis and treatment of LCa, the overall survival (OS) is still not optimistic, especially for patients with advanced tumors [3]. Some established prognostic indicators, including TNM classification scheme, histological grade, and epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR), remain not unsatisfactory for revealing the biological characteristics and prognosis of LCa [4–6]. Therefore, new biomarkers are essential to investigate for reflecting tumor progression and prognosis in LCa patients.

Recently, it is reported that tumor microenvironment (TME), which is regarded as a prognostic biomarker, plays an important part in LCa progression, invasion, and metastasis [7]. Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) are the main component in TME, accounting for approximately 50% of TME cells [8]. Moreover, TAMs are identified as two main functional subtypes based on their immune responses, of which M1 TAMs could activate antitumor immunity and exert cytotoxic effects on cancer cells, and M2 TAMs could promote tumor cell growth, invasion, and metastasis [9]. Several studies have demonstrated the prognostic value of TAMs in various cancers, including lung [10,11], breast [12], and gastric cancer [13]. In general, high infiltration of TAMs indicates a poor prognosis; however, the conclusions vary across different subsets and distribution of TAMs. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to perform a pooled analysis to evaluate the effect of different TAMs markers and histologic locations on the prognosis of LCa.

Search strategy

The present study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022323957). The present study was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [14]. Two investigators (W.Z. and H.T.) independently searched the Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE databases for potential studies published in journals until 28 February 2022. The following Mesh terms were used: ‘macrophage,’ ‘tumor-associated macrophage,’ ‘TAM,’ ‘pulmonary,’ and ‘lung.’ We also undertaken forward and backward citation tracking for avoiding miss any possible literature. No language or country limitations were applied to the present pooled analysis. All studies reporting TAMs and LCa were included and screened by two authors independently based on the inclusion criteria.

Inclusion criteria

We included the study reporting TAMs associated with LCa. Studies were eligible for inclusion met all of the following criteria: (1) patients with LCa were diagnosed by pathology; (2) patients included in the study should not diagnosed with any previous cancer history; (3) TAMs had to be measured at the primary tumor site using immunohistochemistry (IHC) with the markers, such as CD68, HLA-DR, CD163, and CD204; (4) the study design was a cohort study, either prospective, retrospective, or case control studies, evaluating the association of TAMs with OS or disease-free survival (DFS).

Exclusion criteria

We excluded the study measuring TAMs at metastases or local relapse site. In addition, a study in specific types of literature, such as reviews, comments, and conference abstracts, was also excluded from our study.

Data extraction and quality assessment

Two reviewers independently extracted relevant data from the original studies using standardized data extraction form and clarified discrepancies by re-evaluation and discussion with the other authors. We extracted the following data for analysis: name of the first author, publication year, country, demographic characteristics of patients, study period, macrophage markers, macrophage distribution [tumor nest (TN) or tumor stroma (TS)], tumor type, tumor stage, OS, and DFS with adjusted or unadjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (CI). TAMs in the TN were defined as intraepithelial tumor-infiltrating macrophages, and TS was defined as the stromal tissue surrounding the tumor nest. We also collected the prognostic information from study only reported with a Kaplan–Meier (KM) plot and a P-value derived from log-rank analysis. HRs and 95% CI were extracted from KM plot using Engauge Digitizer version 4.1 (free software downloaded from http://sourceforge.net) and calculated as previously described [15]. We used the low macrophage-infiltrating group as a reference to calculate HR. If the high macrophage-infiltrating group was used as reference in the article, then the association measure and CI were inverted. The corresponding author of study was contacted to request any unclear or missing data.

Two experienced researchers independently assessed the quality for each included study using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) based on the current PRISMA guidelines [16]. The researchers focused on measurement and selection bias because most studies included in the present review were cross-sectionally designed. Studies obtained a score based on three evaluation indicator including patient selection, study comparability, and outcome assessment. The included study was graded as high quality with an NOS score ≥ 6. Disagreements were resolved by a third person who served as an intermediary and made the final decision.

Statistical analysis

The statistical analysis was performed according to the recommendations from the Cochrane Collaboration. The HRs with 95% CI were used to evaluate the correlation between the TAMs density and survival. Heterogeneity across studies was assessed by the I2 statistic. If I2≥50%, which indicates significant differences, a random effects model was utilized. Conversely, a fixed effects model was used if I2<50%, which indicates no significant differences.

Sensitivity analysis was conducted through observing the impact of changing the statistical method and analysis model. When the number of articles available was >5, potential publication bias was assessed by the symmetry of funnel plot. Review Manager Version 5.3 (The Nordic Cochrane Center, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014, Copenhagen) software was used to analyze the pooled data. A two-tailed P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Search results

A total of 6221 articles were found during our initial search. After electronically removing 5145 duplicated articles and irrelevant studies, 1004 studies were excluded by reading the title and abstract, and 72 articles were evaluated in detail. Then, 42 articles were excluded after reviewing the full text, 30 unique articles were ultimately included in this pooled analysis [10,11,17–44]. The study searching and inclusion procedure is presented in Figure 1.

Flow diagram of the studies’ selection

Figure 1
Figure 1
View largeDownload slide
Flow diagram of the studies’ selection
Figure 1
Figure 1
View largeDownload slide
Flow diagram of the studies’ selection
Close modal

Basic characteristics and quality assessment

The main characteristics of the included studies are summarized in Table 1. We included 30 studies in our pooled analysis [10,11,17–44], which published between 1999 and 2021 and conducted in ten countries from 1978 to 2018 (Finland, Japan, China, UK, Republic of Korea, Norway, Brazil, Denmark, France, Germany). A total of 5105 patients were included, with the reported age from 19 to 91 years across eligible studies.

Table 1
Characteristics of studies included in the pooled analysis
Author (published year)CountryStudy periodSample sizeMaleAgeMarkersTissue distributionTypeStageOutcome assessmentNOS
Eerola (1999) [17] Finland 1978–1995 38 35 39–78 y CD68 Tumor nest LCLC I–III OS 7 
Takanami (1999) [18] Japan 1986–1992 113 66 Mean 62 y (30–79 y) CD68 Unavailable ADC I–IV OS 7 
Chen (2003) [19] Taiwan 1994.05–1994.12 35 24 Mean 60.3 y CD68 Unavailable ADC,SCC I–IIIA OS 7 
Chen (2005) [20] Taiwan 1994.09–1996.09 41 27 Mean 60 y CD68 Unavailable ADC,SCC I–IV DFS 7 
Welsh (2005) [21] UK 1991–1994; 1999.01–1999.12 175 116 Mean 67.7 y (39–91 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 9 
Ho (2008) [22] Taiwan 1996.09–1998.09 68 40 Unavailable TREM-1, CD68 Unavailable NSCLC I–III OS, DFS 7 
Kawai (2008) [23] Japan 1996.01–2004.12 199 139 Mean 62 y (39–79 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC IV OS 8 
Kim (2008) [24] Korea 1997.01–1998.12 144 106 Mean 60.4 y CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 9 
Al-Shibli (2009) [25] Norway 1990–2004 335 253 Mean 67 y (28–85 y) CD68 Tumor stroma NSCLC I–III OS 8 
Ohri (2009) [26] UK 1991–1994; 1999.01–1999.12 40 16 Unavailable CD68, CD163, HLA-DR Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 8 
Dai (2010) [27] China 1999.08–2001.08 99 80 66 y (37–80 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 8 
Ma (2010) [28] China 1999.06–2001.08 100 81 Unavailable CD68, CD163, HLA-DR Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 9 
Ohtaki (2010) [29] Japan 1996.01-1998.03 170 85 Mean 62 y (33–85 y) CD68, CD204 Tumor stroma ADC I–IIIA OS 8 
Zhang (2011) [30] China 2003–2006 65 38 Mean 51.5 y (32–76 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma ADC I–IV OS 9 
Hirayama (2012) [31] Japan 2000.01–2006.12 208 188 Unavailable CD204 Tumor nest and stroma SCC I–IIIA OS, DFS 8 
Souza (2012) [32] Brazil Unavailable 65 39 Mean 62 y (34–82 y) CD68 Unavailable NSCLC I–III OS 6 
Carus (2013) [33] Denmark 2003.01–2006.12 335 194 Unavailable CD163 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IIIA OS, DFS 7 
Feng (2014) [34] Taiwan 2005–2008 28 15 Mean 59 y (41–78 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IIIA OS, DFS 8 
Pei (2014) [35] China 2003–2008 417 231 Unavailable CD68 Tumor stroma NSCLC I–IIIA OS, DFS 7 
Li (2014) [36] China 2007.01–2008.06 132 86 Mean 58.5 y (38–74 y) CD163 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 8 
Li (2015) [37] China 2003–2006 159 109 Median 61 y (44–77 y) CD68 Unavailable NSCLC I–III OS, DFS 8 
Mansuet-Lupo (2016) [38] France 2001.06–2005.06 316 225 Median 61 y (19–84 y) CD68 Unavailable ADC I–IV OS 8 
Li (2018) [39] Japan 2005–2013 297 184 Unavailable CD68
CD204 		Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 8 
Cao (2019) [40] China 2012–2014 137 77 Median 59 y (34–75 y) CD68
CD163 		Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–III OS, DFS 7 
Rakaee (2019) [41] Norway 1990–2010 553 Unavailable Unavailable CD68, CD163, CD204, HLA-DR Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–III OS 8 
Thielmann(A) (2019) [42] Germany 2001.04.18–2001.12.04 53 45 Mean 61.7 y CD68 Unavailable SCC I–IV OS 7 
Thielmann(B) (2019) [42] Germany 2001.04.18–2001.12.04 49 29 Mean 59.9 y CD68 Unavailable ADC I–IV OS 7 
Chen (2020) [43] China 2006.06–2012.12 213 184 Unavailable CD163 Tumor stroma ADC I–IV OS 7 
Hang (2020) [44] China 2008.04–2014.01 92 71 Median 61 y (39–75 y) CD68 Unavailable NSCLC I–III OS 6 
Hwang (2020) [10] Korea 1993–2004; 2010.01–2012.12 349 241 Mean 65.5 y (35–90 y) CD68
CD163 		Tumor stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 7 
Amemiya (2021) [11] Japan 1998.11–2018.09 80 68 Mean 67 y (43–84 y) CD204 Unavailable NSCLC I–IV OS, DFS 7 
Author (published year)CountryStudy periodSample sizeMaleAgeMarkersTissue distributionTypeStageOutcome assessmentNOS
Eerola (1999) [17] Finland 1978–1995 38 35 39–78 y CD68 Tumor nest LCLC I–III OS 7 
Takanami (1999) [18] Japan 1986–1992 113 66 Mean 62 y (30–79 y) CD68 Unavailable ADC I–IV OS 7 
Chen (2003) [19] Taiwan 1994.05–1994.12 35 24 Mean 60.3 y CD68 Unavailable ADC,SCC I–IIIA OS 7 
Chen (2005) [20] Taiwan 1994.09–1996.09 41 27 Mean 60 y CD68 Unavailable ADC,SCC I–IV DFS 7 
Welsh (2005) [21] UK 1991–1994; 1999.01–1999.12 175 116 Mean 67.7 y (39–91 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 9 
Ho (2008) [22] Taiwan 1996.09–1998.09 68 40 Unavailable TREM-1, CD68 Unavailable NSCLC I–III OS, DFS 7 
Kawai (2008) [23] Japan 1996.01–2004.12 199 139 Mean 62 y (39–79 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC IV OS 8 
Kim (2008) [24] Korea 1997.01–1998.12 144 106 Mean 60.4 y CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 9 
Al-Shibli (2009) [25] Norway 1990–2004 335 253 Mean 67 y (28–85 y) CD68 Tumor stroma NSCLC I–III OS 8 
Ohri (2009) [26] UK 1991–1994; 1999.01–1999.12 40 16 Unavailable CD68, CD163, HLA-DR Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 8 
Dai (2010) [27] China 1999.08–2001.08 99 80 66 y (37–80 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 8 
Ma (2010) [28] China 1999.06–2001.08 100 81 Unavailable CD68, CD163, HLA-DR Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 9 
Ohtaki (2010) [29] Japan 1996.01-1998.03 170 85 Mean 62 y (33–85 y) CD68, CD204 Tumor stroma ADC I–IIIA OS 8 
Zhang (2011) [30] China 2003–2006 65 38 Mean 51.5 y (32–76 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma ADC I–IV OS 9 
Hirayama (2012) [31] Japan 2000.01–2006.12 208 188 Unavailable CD204 Tumor nest and stroma SCC I–IIIA OS, DFS 8 
Souza (2012) [32] Brazil Unavailable 65 39 Mean 62 y (34–82 y) CD68 Unavailable NSCLC I–III OS 6 
Carus (2013) [33] Denmark 2003.01–2006.12 335 194 Unavailable CD163 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IIIA OS, DFS 7 
Feng (2014) [34] Taiwan 2005–2008 28 15 Mean 59 y (41–78 y) CD68 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IIIA OS, DFS 8 
Pei (2014) [35] China 2003–2008 417 231 Unavailable CD68 Tumor stroma NSCLC I–IIIA OS, DFS 7 
Li (2014) [36] China 2007.01–2008.06 132 86 Mean 58.5 y (38–74 y) CD163 Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 8 
Li (2015) [37] China 2003–2006 159 109 Median 61 y (44–77 y) CD68 Unavailable NSCLC I–III OS, DFS 8 
Mansuet-Lupo (2016) [38] France 2001.06–2005.06 316 225 Median 61 y (19–84 y) CD68 Unavailable ADC I–IV OS 8 
Li (2018) [39] Japan 2005–2013 297 184 Unavailable CD68
CD204 		Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 8 
Cao (2019) [40] China 2012–2014 137 77 Median 59 y (34–75 y) CD68
CD163 		Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–III OS, DFS 7 
Rakaee (2019) [41] Norway 1990–2010 553 Unavailable Unavailable CD68, CD163, CD204, HLA-DR Tumor nest and stroma NSCLC I–III OS 8 
Thielmann(A) (2019) [42] Germany 2001.04.18–2001.12.04 53 45 Mean 61.7 y CD68 Unavailable SCC I–IV OS 7 
Thielmann(B) (2019) [42] Germany 2001.04.18–2001.12.04 49 29 Mean 59.9 y CD68 Unavailable ADC I–IV OS 7 
Chen (2020) [43] China 2006.06–2012.12 213 184 Unavailable CD163 Tumor stroma ADC I–IV OS 7 
Hang (2020) [44] China 2008.04–2014.01 92 71 Median 61 y (39–75 y) CD68 Unavailable NSCLC I–III OS 6 
Hwang (2020) [10] Korea 1993–2004; 2010.01–2012.12 349 241 Mean 65.5 y (35–90 y) CD68
CD163 		Tumor stroma NSCLC I–IV OS 7 
Amemiya (2021) [11] Japan 1998.11–2018.09 80 68 Mean 67 y (43–84 y) CD204 Unavailable NSCLC I–IV OS, DFS 7 

Abbreviations: ADC, adenocarcinoma; DFS, disease-free survival; LCLC, large cell lung cancer; NOS: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale checklist; NSCLC, non-small-cell lung cancer; OS, overall survival; SCC, squamous cell carcinoma.

View Large

As for TAMs identification, 25 out of 30 studies used CD68 [10,17–30,32,34,35,37–42,44], three studies used HLA-DR [26,28,41], eight used CD163 [10,26,28,33,40,41,43,44], and five studies used CD204 [11,29,31,39,41] macrophages marker to detect TAMs by IHC. Fourteen articles investigated the role of TAMs in both TN and TS [21,23,24,26–28,30,31,33,34,39–41,44], one studies only detected TAMs in TN [17], and five articles only reported TAMs in TS [10,25,29,35,43]. Moreover, 29 studies provided OS data [10,11,17–19,21–44], and nine studies reported DFS data [11,20,22,31,33–35,37,40]. The NOS scores of these studies were ranged from 6 to 9 (Table 1).

Prognostic significance of CD68+ TAMs

A total of 25 studies were included in the analysis of CD68+ TAMs on survival data in patients with LCa [10,17–30,32,34,35,37–42,44]. Compared with low density of total CD68+ TAMs, high density of total CD68+ TAMs was significantly associated with poor OS (HR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.08–1.86, P=0.01; I2 = 71%; Figure 2A) and DFS (HR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.25–2.71, P=0.002; I2 = 1%; Figure 2B). Similarly, high CD68+ TAMs density in TS indicated poor OS (HR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.07–1.75, P=0.01; I2 = 71%; Figure 2C) and DFS (HR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.06–1.71, P=0.02; I2 = 0%; Figure 2D).

Forest plots comparing the survival of CD68+ TAMs in the tumor and TS for LCa patients

Figure 2
(A) HR of OS for CD68+ TAMs in the tumor; (B) HR of DFS for CD68+ TAMs in the tumor; (C) HR of OS for CD68+ TAMs in TS; (D) HR of DFS for CD68+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of CD68+ TAMs in the tumor and TS for LCa patients

(A) HR of OS for CD68+ TAMs in the tumor; (B) HR of DFS for CD68+ TAMs in the tumor; (C) HR of OS for CD68+ TAMs in TS; (D) HR of DFS for CD68+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TS, tumor stroma.

Figure 2
(A) HR of OS for CD68+ TAMs in the tumor; (B) HR of DFS for CD68+ TAMs in the tumor; (C) HR of OS for CD68+ TAMs in TS; (D) HR of DFS for CD68+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of CD68+ TAMs in the tumor and TS for LCa patients

(A) HR of OS for CD68+ TAMs in the tumor; (B) HR of DFS for CD68+ TAMs in the tumor; (C) HR of OS for CD68+ TAMs in TS; (D) HR of DFS for CD68+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TS, tumor stroma.

Close modal

However, higher CD68+ TAMs density in TN was significantly associated with better OS (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.48–0.84, P=0.001; I2 = 64%; Figure 3A). Moreover, greater TN/TS ratio of CD68+ TAMs predicted better OS (HR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.19–0.79, P=0.008; I2 = 77%; Figure 3B). As for adjusted measurements to OS, the results also supported the significant correlations of better OS with higher CD68+ TAMs density in TN (HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.9–1.0, P=0.04; I2 = 84%; Figure 3C) and TN/TS ratio of CD68+ TAMs (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.57–1.0, P=0.05; I2 = 90%; Figure 3D).

Forest plots comparing the survival of nest and TN/TS CD68+ TAMs for LCa patients

Figure 3
(A) HR of OS in raw data for CD68+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS in raw data for TN/TS CD68+ TAMs; (C) HR of OS with adjusted measures for CD68+ TAMs in TN; (D) HR of OS with adjusted measures for TN/TS CD68+ TAMs. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of nest and TN/TS CD68+ TAMs for LCa patients

(A) HR of OS in raw data for CD68+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS in raw data for TN/TS CD68+ TAMs; (C) HR of OS with adjusted measures for CD68+ TAMs in TN; (D) HR of OS with adjusted measures for TN/TS CD68+ TAMs. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.

Figure 3
(A) HR of OS in raw data for CD68+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS in raw data for TN/TS CD68+ TAMs; (C) HR of OS with adjusted measures for CD68+ TAMs in TN; (D) HR of OS with adjusted measures for TN/TS CD68+ TAMs. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of nest and TN/TS CD68+ TAMs for LCa patients

(A) HR of OS in raw data for CD68+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS in raw data for TN/TS CD68+ TAMs; (C) HR of OS with adjusted measures for CD68+ TAMs in TN; (D) HR of OS with adjusted measures for TN/TS CD68+ TAMs. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.

Close modal

Prognostic significance of HLA-DR+ TAMs

Given the different heterogeneity, the random-effect model was used in assessing HLA-DR+ TAMs in TN (I2 ≥ 50%), and the fixed effect model was used in assessing HLA-DR+ TAMs in TS (I2 < 50%). The present pooled analysis indicated that a high HLA-DR+ TAMs density was significantly associated with better OS than a low HLA-DR+ TAMs density in TN with a pooled HR of 0.41 (95% CI = 0.20–0.85, P=0.02; I2 = 80%; Figure 4A). In addition, a high HLA-DR+ TAMs density in TS also indicated better OS (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.50–0.80, P=0.0001; I2 = 0; Figure 4B).

Forest plots comparing the survival of HLA-DR+ TAMs in TN and TS for LCa patients

Figure 4
(A) HR of OS for HLA-DR+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS for HLA-DR+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of HLA-DR+ TAMs in TN and TS for LCa patients

(A) HR of OS for HLA-DR+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS for HLA-DR+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.

Figure 4
(A) HR of OS for HLA-DR+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS for HLA-DR+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of HLA-DR+ TAMs in TN and TS for LCa patients

(A) HR of OS for HLA-DR+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS for HLA-DR+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.

Close modal

Prognostic significance of CD204+ TAMs

This pooled analysis was performed in fixed-effect model for the absent of heterogeneity in the followed results (all I2 < 50%). Relative to low CD204+ TAMs density, high CD204+ TAMs density in TN predicted poor OS in patients with LCa (HR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.31–2.32, P=0.0001; I2 = 0; Figure 5A). Furthermore, the result showed that a high CD204+ TAMs density was significantly associated with poor DFS than a low CD204+ TAMs density in TS with a pooled HR of 1.93 (95% CI = 1.38-2.7, P=0.0001; I2 = 0; Figure 5B).

Forest plots comparing the survival of CD204+ TAMs in TS for LCa patients

Figure 5
(A) HRs of OS in raw data for CD204+ TAMs in TS; (B) HRs of OS with adjusted measures for CD204+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of CD204+ TAMs in TS for LCa patients

(A) HRs of OS in raw data for CD204+ TAMs in TS; (B) HRs of OS with adjusted measures for CD204+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TS, tumor stroma.

Figure 5
(A) HRs of OS in raw data for CD204+ TAMs in TS; (B) HRs of OS with adjusted measures for CD204+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of CD204+ TAMs in TS for LCa patients

(A) HRs of OS in raw data for CD204+ TAMs in TS; (B) HRs of OS with adjusted measures for CD204+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TS, tumor stroma.

Close modal

Prognostic significance of CD163+ TAMs

This pooled analysis was performed in random-effect model for the significant heterogeneity in the followed results (all I2 ≥ 50%). Three studies were included in the analysis of CD163+ TAMs in TN, and six studies were included to analyze the effect of CD163+ TAMs in TS on survival. Similar to CD163+ TAMs in TN (HR = 1.43, 95% CI = 0.65–3.13, P=0.37; I2 = 87%; Figure 6A), the pooled HR of these studies showed that CD163+ TAMs infiltration was not associated with OS in TS (HR = 1.11, 95% CI = 0.86–1.42, P=0.42; I2 = 78%; Figure 6B).

Forest plots comparing the survival of CD163+ TAMs in TN and TS for LCa patients

Figure 6
(A) HR of OS for CD163+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS for CD163+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of CD163+ TAMs in TN and TS for LCa patients

(A) HR of OS for CD163+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS for CD163+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.

Figure 6
(A) HR of OS for CD163+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS for CD163+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.
View largeDownload slide
Forest plots comparing the survival of CD163+ TAMs in TN and TS for LCa patients

(A) HR of OS for CD163+ TAMs in TN; (B) HR of OS for CD163+ TAMs in TS. Abbreviations: HR, hazard risk; LCa, lung cancer; OS, overall survival; TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages; TN, tumor nest; TS, tumor stroma.

Close modal

Sensitivity analysis and publication bias

Due to the significant heterogeneity, we performed sensitivity analysis. Our analyses were robust in terms of the selection of the models and statistical methods. When the random-effect model was transformed into the fixed-effect model, the result showed that high CD68+ TAMs density in TS still predicted poor OS (HR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.16–1.48, P<0.0001; I2 = 71%). According to the funnel plot of the standard error by log RR, there was no significant publication bias in our study (Supplementary Figure S1).

Despite great developments in the rate of early diagnosis, the mortality of LCa has not been significantly improved, which calls for novel therapeutic modalities. TAMs, a hot topic in cancer researches, might become a promising target for LCa therapy [45]. Recent studies suggest that TAMs are closely linked to prognosis in patients with LCa [10,11,43]. However, few results have translated into clinical practice for the different conclusions among the previous studies. Hence, the present study seeks to assess the correlation of different markers and histologic locations for TAMs with LCa prognosis through pooling data from 30 eligible studies.

A total of 5105 patients were included in the present study. Our results suggested that the high CD68+ TAMs infiltration in TME was significantly associated with poor OS and DFS, whether identified in the tumor or TS. Likely, greater CD204+ TAMs density in TS suggested worse OS and DFS. On the contrary, high CD68+ TAMs density in TN predicted better OS, which was proved by the positive correlation between TN/TS ratio of CD68+ TAMs and OS. Besides, high HLA-DR+ TAMs density indicated better OS in TN and TS. However, neither nest CD163+ TAM density nor stromal CD163+ TAM density was correlated with OS in patients with LCa.

Traditionally, TAMs have been subdivided into two distinct macrophage phenotypes, proinfammatory M1 (classically activated macrophage) and anti-infammatory M2 (alternatively activated macrophage) [9]. M1 macrophages, which function as immune surveillance, exhibit antitumoral effects by serving as the antigen-presenting cell, secreting proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines, and largely express MHC class II (such as HLA-DR) [46]. This may explain that higher HLA-DR+ TAMs density indicated better OS in TI and TS in our study. In contrast, M2 macrophages, identified by the expression of CD204 (macrophage scavenger receptor class A) or CD163 (macrophage scavenger receptor class B), are considered to promote tumor progression by secreting multiple growth factors, proteolytic enzymes, and proangiogenic molecules [47,48]. It is the reason why greater CD204+ TAMs density in TS suggested worse OS and DFS. However, due to the limited studies included in our analysis, neither nest nor stromal CD163+ TAM density was correlated with OS.

CD68 is the most common biomarkers of TAMs. As for TAMs identification, 25 out of 30 included studies used CD68. Although CD68+ TAMs infiltration in the tumor was significantly associated with poor OS and DFS, the survival data of CD68+ TAMs in TS and TN were reversed. It is reported that the percentage of M1 TAMs was significantly lower than that of M2 TAMs in the LCa stroma [28]. Furthermore, a recent study revealed that more than half of TAMs in TN were M1 macrophages in the LCa [26]. The distinct distributions of M2 and M1 TAMs were in line with the different prognostic effects, namely, tumor promotors and tumor suppressors, which also could account for the positive correlation between TN/TS ratio of CD68+ TAMs and OS through pooled HR from univariate survival analysis and multivariate analysis.

In the present study, several important strengths should be acknowledged. We have extensively included studies about the TAMs on LCa prognosis to ensure that our results are more reliable. Moreover, the pooled analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of distinct TAMs markers (CD68, HLA-DR, CD163, and CD204) and histologic locations (TN +TS, TN, TS, and TN/TS) on the prognosis of LCa, including OS or DFS, as well as raw or adjusted measures, which made our study as comprehensive and persuasive as possible. Furthermore, the NOS scores of included studies were ranged from 6 to 9, and no publication bias has been detected, which ensured the validity of our results. Besides, our results found that TAMs were associated with LCa prognosis, which suggests that the TAMs may be a useful target for LCa.

The present study has the following limitations. For one thing, we strictly conducted the pooled analysis as detailed as possible to avoid confounding factors, including distinct TAMs markers, different histologic locations, OS or DFS, as well as raw or adjusted measures; therefore, the included studies were limited in some analyses. For another, some analyses could not be carried out further due to the limited data, such as pathological types of LCa, TAMs markers detection methods, therapies for LCa, the co-expression of markers for M1 or M2, the definition of TN and TS. Moreover, all included studies were retrospective study, which may lead to selection bias in the pooled results. In addition, the heterogeneity was significant in the present study, which required further studies with larger sample size to confirm the findings.

In summary, this pooled analysis demonstrated the prognostic effect of TAMs on LCa patients. the high CD68+ TAMs infiltration in the tumor or TS indicated poor OS and DFS, while the higher CD68+ TAMs in TN or TN/TS ratio of CD68+ TAMs was associated with better prognosis. Besides, LCa patients with a high HLA-DR+ and low CD204+ TAMs density both had a long survival. Additional large-scale randomized controlled trials are remain needed to further investigate the clinical benefit.

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

The authors declare that there are no competing interests associated with the manuscript.

This research was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 82172655]; Project Program of National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Disorders [grant number 2021LNJJ17]; Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province [grant number 2022JJ30925]; and National Multidisciplinary Cooperative Diagnosis and Treatment Capacity Building Project for Major Diseases [Lung Cancer grant number z027002].

Bin Yi: Software, Formal Analysis, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing—original draft. Yuanda Cheng: Software, Formal Analysis, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing—original draft. Ruimin Chang: Software, Formal Analysis, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing—original draft. Wolong Zhou: Resources, Data curation. Huili Tang: Resources, Data curation. Yang Gao: Conceptualization, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Writing—review & editing. Chunfang Zhang: Conceptualization, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Writing—review & editing.

The authors are grateful to the works by the authors of included 30 studies, and all the reviewers and editors for reviewing the present work.

CI

confidence interval

DFS

disease-free survival

EGFR

epidermal growth-factor receptor

HLA-DR

human leukocyte antigen DR

HR

hazard ratio

IHC

immunohistochemistry

KM

Kaplan–Meier

LCa

lung cancer

MHC

major histocompatibility complex

NOS

Newcastle–Ottawa Scale

OS

overall survival

PRISMA

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses

TAM

tumor-associated macrophage

TME

tumor microenvironment

TN

tumor nest

TNM

tumor-node-metastasis

TS

tumor stroma

1.
Siegel
R.L.
,
Miller
K.D.
,
Fuchs
H.E.
 and
Jemal
A.
(
2022
)
Cancer statistics, 2022
.
CA Cancer J. Clin.
72
,
7
–
33
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21708
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
2.
Hazell
S.Z.
,
Fu
W.
,
Hu
C.
,
Voong
K.R.
,
Lee
B.
,
Peterson
V.
 et al.
(
2020
)
Financial toxicity in lung cancer: an assessment of magnitude, perception, and impact on quality of life
.
Ann. Oncol.
31
,
96
–
102
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2019.10.006
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
3.
Perlikos
F.
,
Harrington
K.J.
 and
Syrigos
K.N.
(
2013
)
Key molecular mechanisms in lung cancer invasion and metastasis: a comprehensive review
.
Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol.
87
,
1
–
11
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2012.12.007
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
4.
Yasukawa
M.
,
Sawabata
N.
,
Kawaguchi
T.
,
Kawai
N.
,
Nakai
T.
,
Ohbayashi
C.
 et al.
(
2018
)
Histological grade: analysis of prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer after complete resection
.
In Vivo
32
,
1505
–
1512
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.11407
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
5.
Rami-Porta
R.
(
2021
)
Future perspectives on the TNM staging for lung cancer
.
Cancers (Basel)
13
,
2211
–
2223
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13081940
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
6.
Meador
C.B.
,
Sequist
L.V.
 and
Piotrowska
Z.
(
2021
)
Targeting EGFR Exon 20 insertions in non-small cell lung cancer: recent advances and clinical updates
.
Cancer Discov.
11
,
2145
–
2157
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-0226
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
7.
Zheng
X.
,
Weigert
A.
,
Reu
S.
,
Guenther
S.
,
Mansouri
S.
,
Bassaly
B.
 et al.
(
2020
)
Spatial density and distribution of tumor-associated macrophages predict survival in non-small cell lung carcinoma
.
Cancer Res.
80
,
4414
–
4425
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-20-0069
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
8.
Petty
A.J.
 and
Yang
Y.
(
2017
)
Tumor-associated macrophages: implications in cancer immunotherapy
.
Immunotherapy-UK
9
,
289
–
302
https://doi.org/10.2217/imt-2016-0135
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
9.
Murray
P.J.
,
Allen
J.E.
,
Biswas
S.K.
,
Fisher
E.A.
,
Gilroy
D.W.
,
Goerdt
S.
 et al.
(
2014
)
Macrophage activation and polarization: nomenclature and experimental guidelines
.
Immunity
41
,
14
–
20
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2014.06.008
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
10.
Hwang
I.
,
Kim
J.W.
,
Ylaya
K.
,
Chung
E.J.
,
Kitano
H.
,
Perry
C.
 et al.
(
2020
)
Tumor-associated macrophage, angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis markers predict prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer patients
.
J. Transl. Med.
18
,
443
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02618-z
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
11.
Amemiya
R.
,
Miyoshi
T.
,
Aokage
K.
,
Suzuki
J.
,
Hoshino
H.
,
Udagawa
H.
 et al.
(
2021
)
Prognostic impact of the tumor immune microenvironment in pulmonary pleomorphic carcinoma
.
Lung Cancer
153
,
56
–
65
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2021.01.007
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
12.
Huang
X.
,
Cao
J.
 and
Zu
X.
(
2022
)
Tumor-associated macrophages: an important player in breast cancer progression
.
Thorac. Cancer
13
,
269
–
276
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.14268
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
13.
Li
W.
,
Zhang
X.
,
Wu
F.
,
Zhou
Y.
,
Bao
Z.
,
Li
H.
 et al.
(
2019
)
Gastric cancer-derived mesenchymal stromal cells trigger M2 macrophage polarization that promotes metastasis and EMT in gastric cancer
.
Cell Death Dis.
10
,
918
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-019-2131-y
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
14.
Moher
D.
,
Liberati
A.
,
Tetzlaff
J.
 and
Altman
D.G.
(
2009
)
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
.
PLoS Med.
6
,
e1000097
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
15.
Altman
D.G.
 and
Bland
J.M.
(
2011
)
How to obtain the confidence interval from a P value
.
BMJ
343
,
d2090
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d2090
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
16.
Stang
A.
(
2010
)
Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses
.
Eur. J. Epidemiol.
25
,
603
–
605
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
17.
Eerola
A.K.
,
Soini
Y.
 and
Pääkkö
P.
(
1999
)
Tumour infiltrating lymphocytes in relation to tumour angiogenesis, apoptosis and prognosis in patients with large cell lung carcinoma
.
Lung Cancer
26
,
73
–
83
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5002(99)00072-0
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
18.
Takanami
I.
,
Takeuchi
K.
 and
Kodaira
S.
(
1999
)
Tumor-associated macrophage infiltration in pulmonary adenocarcinoma: association with angiogenesis and poor prognosis
.
Oncology
57
,
138
–
142
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1159/000012021
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
19.
Chen
J.J.
,
Yao
P.L.
,
Yuan
A.
,
Hong
T.M.
,
Shun
C.T.
,
Kuo
M.L.
 et al.
(
2003
)
Up-regulation of tumor interleukin-8 expression by infiltrating macrophages: its correlation with tumor angiogenesis and patient survival in non-small cell lung cancer
.
Clin. Cancer Res.
9
,
729
–
737
[PubMed]
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
20.
Chen
J.J.
,
Lin
Y.C.
,
Yao
P.L.
,
Yuan
A.
,
Chen
H.Y.
,
Shun
C.T.
 et al.
(
2005
)
Tumor-associated macrophages: the double-edged sword in cancer progression
.
J. Clin. Oncol.
23
,
953
–
964
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.12.172
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
21.
Welsh
T.J.
,
Green
R.H.
,
Richardson
D.
,
Waller
D.A.
,
O'Byrne
K.J.
 and
Bradding
P.
(
2005
)
Macrophage and mast-cell invasion of tumor cell islets confers a marked survival advantage in non-small-cell lung cancer
.
J. Clin. Oncol.
23
,
8959
–
8967
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.01.4910
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
22.
Ho
C.C.
,
Liao
W.Y.
,
Wang
C.Y.
,
Lu
Y.H.
,
Huang
H.Y.
,
Chen
H.Y.
 et al.
(
2008
)
TREM-1 expression in tumor-associated macrophages and clinical outcome in lung cancer
.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.
177
,
763
–
770
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200704-641OC
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
23.
Kawai
O.
,
Ishii
G.
,
Kubota
K.
,
Murata
Y.
,
Naito
Y.
,
Mizuno
T.
 et al.
(
2008
)
Predominant infiltration of macrophages and CD8(+) T Cells in cancer nests is a significant predictor of survival in stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer
.
Cancer-Am. Cancer Soc.
113
,
1387
–
1395
https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23712
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
24.
Kim
D.W.
,
Min
H.S.
,
Lee
K.H.
,
Kim
Y.J.
,
Oh
D.Y.
,
Jeon
Y.K.
 et al.
(
2008
)
High tumour islet macrophage infiltration correlates with improved patient survival but not with EGFR mutations, gene copy number or protein expression in resected non-small cell lung cancer
.
Br. J. Cancer
98
,
1118
–
1124
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604256
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
25.
Al-Shibli
K.
,
Al-Saad
S.
,
Donnem
T.
,
Persson
M.
,
Bremnes
R.M.
 and
Busund
L.T.
(
2009
)
The prognostic value of intraepithelial and stromal innate immune system cells in non-small cell lung carcinoma
.
Histopathology
55
,
301
–
312
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2009.03379.x
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
26.
Ohri
C.M.
,
Shikotra
A.
,
Green
R.H.
,
Waller
D.A.
 and
Bradding
P.
(
2009
)
Macrophages within NSCLC tumour islets are predominantly of a cytotoxic M1 phenotype associated with extended survival
.
Eur. Respir. J.
33
,
118
–
126
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00065708
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
27.
Dai
F.
,
Liu
L.
,
Che
G.
,
Yu
N.
,
Pu
Q.
,
Zhang
S.
 et al.
(
2010
)
The number and microlocalization of tumor-associated immune cells are associated with patient's survival time in non-small cell lung cancer
.
BMC Cancer
10
,
220
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-10-220
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
28.
Ma
J.
,
Liu
L.
,
Che
G.
,
Yu
N.
,
Dai
F.
 and
You
Z.
(
2010
)
The M1 form of tumor-associated macrophages in non-small cell lung cancer is positively associated with survival time
.
BMC Cancer
10
,
112
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-10-112
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
29.
Ohtaki
Y.
,
Ishii
G.
,
Nagai
K.
,
Ashimine
S.
,
Kuwata
T.
,
Hishida
T.
 et al.
(
2010
)
Stromal macrophage expressing CD204 is associated with tumor aggressiveness in lung adenocarcinoma
.
J. Thorac. Oncol.
5
,
1507
–
1515
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181eba692
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
30.
Zhang
B.
,
Yao
G.
,
Zhang
Y.
,
Gao
J.
,
Yang
B.
,
Rao
Z.
 et al.
(
2011
)
M2-polarized tumor-associated macrophages are associated with poor prognoses resulting from accelerated lymphangiogenesis in lung adenocarcinoma
.
Clinics (Sao Paulo)
66
,
1879
–
1886
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1807-59322011001100006
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
31.
Hirayama
S.
,
Ishii
G.
,
Nagai
K.
,
Ono
S.
,
Kojima
M.
,
Yamauchi
C.
 et al.
(
2012
)
Prognostic impact of CD204-positive macrophages in lung squamous cell carcinoma: possible contribution of Cd204-positive macrophages to the tumor-promoting microenvironment
.
J. Thorac. Oncol.
7
,
1790
–
1797
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e3182745968
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
32.
Da
C.S.P.
,
Parra
E.R.
,
Atanazio
M.J.
,
Da
S.O.
,
Noleto
G.S.
,
Ab'Saber
A.M.
 et al.
(
2012
)
Different morphology, stage and treatment affect immune cell infiltration and long-term outcome in patients with non-small-cell lung carcinoma
.
Histopathology
61
,
587
–
596
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2012.04318.x
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
33.
Carus
A.
,
Ladekarl
M.
,
Hager
H.
,
Pilegaard
H.
,
Nielsen
P.S.
 and
Donskov
F.
(
2013
)
Tumor-associated neutrophils and macrophages in non-small cell lung cancer: no immediate impact on patient outcome
.
Lung Cancer
81
,
130
–
137
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2013.03.003
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
34.
Feng
P.H.
,
Yu
C.T.
,
Wu
C.Y.
,
Lee
M.J.
,
Lee
W.H.
,
Wang
L.S.
 et al.
(
2014
)
Tumor-associated macrophages in stage IIIA pN2 non-small cell lung cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery
.
Am. J. Transl. Res.
6
,
593
–
603
[PubMed]
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
35.
Pei
B.X.
,
Sun
B.S.
,
Zhang
Z.F.
,
Wang
A.L.
 and
Ren
P.
(
2014
)
Interstitial tumor-associated macrophages combined with tumor-derived colony-stimulating factor-1 and interleukin-6, a novel prognostic biomarker in non-small cell lung cancer
.
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.
148
,
1208
–
1216
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.05.003
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
36.
Li
Y.G.
,
Han
Y.
,
Shi
Y.
,
Fu
X.L.
 and
Wang
J.C.
(
2014
)
Prognostic significance of M2 macrophages in non-small cell lung cancer
.
Tumor
4
,
349
–
356
Google Scholar
 
37.
Li
Y.
,
Sun
B.S.
,
Pei
B.
,
Li
C.G.
,
Zhang
Z.F.
,
Yin
Y.S.
 et al.
(
2015
)
Osteopontin-expressing macrophages in non-small cell lung cancer predict survival
.
Ann. Thorac. Surg.
99
,
1140
–
1148
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.11.054
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
38.
Mansuet-Lupo
A.
,
Alifano
M.
,
Pécuchet
N.
,
Biton
J.
,
Becht
E.
,
Goc
J.
 et al.
(
2016
)
Intratumoral immune cell densities are associated with lung adenocarcinoma gene alterations
.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.
194
,
1403
–
1412
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201510-2031OC
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
39.
Li
Z.
,
Maeda
D.
,
Yoshida
M.
,
Umakoshi
M.
,
Nanjo
H.
,
Shiraishi
K.
 et al.
(
2018
)
The intratumoral distribution influences the prognostic impact of CD68- and CD204-positive macrophages in non-small cell lung cancer
.
Lung Cancer
123
,
127
–
135
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.07.015
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
40.
Cao
L.
,
Che
X.
,
Qiu
X.
,
Li
Z.
,
Yang
B.
,
Wang
S.
 et al.
(
2019
)
M2 macrophage infiltration into tumor islets leads to poor prognosis in non-small-cell lung cancer
.
Cancer Manag. Res.
11
,
6125
–
6138
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S199832
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
41.
Rakaee
M.
,
Busund
L.R.
,
Jamaly
S.
,
Paulsen
E.E.
,
Richardsen
E.
,
Andersen
S.
 et al.
(
2019
)
Prognostic value of macrophage phenotypes in resectable non-small cell lung cancer assessed by multiplex immunohistochemistry
.
Neoplasia
21
,
282
–
293
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neo.2019.01.005
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
42.
Thielmann
C.M.
,
Costa
D.S.M.
,
Muley
T.
,
Meister
M.
,
Herpel
E.
 and
Muckenthaler
M.U.
(
2019
)
Iron accumulation in tumor-associated macrophages marks an improved overall survival in patients with lung adenocarcinoma
.
Sci. Rep.
9
,
11326
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-47833-x
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
43.
Chen
L.
,
Cao
M.F.
,
Xiao
J.F.
,
Ma
Q.H.
,
Zhang
H.
,
Cai
R.L.
 et al.
(
2020
)
Stromal PD-1(+) tumor-associated macrophages predict poor prognosis in lung adenocarcinoma
.
Hum. Pathol.
97
,
68
–
79
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2019.12.007
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
44.
Hang
Q.
,
Ying
H.
,
Cheng
G.
,
Yang
S.
,
Jin
J.
,
Chen
Y.
 et al.
(
2020
)
Prognostic analysis of NSCLC based on the tumor-associated macrophages, tumor neo-vessels and PD-L1 expression in tumor microenvironment
.
Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi
23
,
837
–
844
[PubMed]
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
45.
Tang
X.
,
Mo
C.
,
Wang
Y.
,
Wei
D.
 and
Xiao
H.
(
2013
)
Anti-tumour strategies aiming to target tumour-associated macrophages
.
Immunology
138
,
93
–
104
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1111/imm.12023
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
46.
Rakaee
M.
,
Busund
L.R.
,
Jamaly
S.
,
Paulsen
E.E.
,
Richardsen
E.
,
Andersen
S.
 et al.
(
2019
)
Prognostic value of macrophage phenotypes in resectable non-small cell lung cancer assessed by multiplex immunohistochemistry
.
Neoplasia
21
,
282
–
293
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neo.2019.01.005
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
47.
Mantovani
A.
,
Sozzani
S.
,
Locati
M.
,
Allavena
P.
 and
Sica
A.
(
2002
)
Macrophage polarization: tumor-associated macrophages as a paradigm for polarized M2 mononuclear phagocytes
.
Trends Immunol.
23
,
549
–
555
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1471-4906(02)02302-5
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
48.
Qian
B.Z.
 and
Pollard
J.W.
(
2010
)
Macrophage diversity enhances tumor progression and metastasis
.
Cell
141
,
39
–
51
[PubMed]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2010.03.014
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
PubMed
 
© 2023 The Author(s).
2023
This is an open access article published by Portland Press Limited on behalf of the Biochemical Society and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY).

Supplementary data

Supplementary Figure S1
- pdf file