Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26557777›Full record

ArticleContemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland)2015

Comparative study of various subpopulations of cytotoxic cells in blood and ascites from patients with ovarian carcinoma.

Sarka Lukesova, Vladimira Vroblova, Jindrich Tosner, Jindrich Kopecky, Iva Sedlakova, Eva Čermáková, Doris Vokurkova, Otakar Kopecky

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Immunostaining of stromal CD56 cells in ovarian malignancies.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2023
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Immune Tumor Microenvironment in Ovarian Cancer Ascites.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sarka LukesovaDepartment of Oncology, District Hospital Nachod, Department of Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Vladimira VroblovaDepartment of Clinical Immunology and Allergology, University Hospital in Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Jindrich TosnerDepartment of Obsterics, University Hospital in Hradec Kralove; Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Jindrich KopeckyDepartment of Oncology and Radiotherapy, University Hospital in Hradec Kralove; Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Iva SedlakovaDepartment of Obsterics, University Hospital in Hradec Kralove; Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Eva ČermákováDepartment of Medical Biophysics, Computer Technology Center; Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Doris VokurkovaDepartment of Obsterics, University Hospital in Hradec Kralove; Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Otakar KopeckyDepartment of Oncology, District Hospital Nachod, Department of Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic ; Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Charles University · CZUniversity Hospital Hradec Králové · CZYork District Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aim of the studyA number of observations have indicated that the immune system plays a significant role in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). In cases of EOC, the prognostic significance of tumour infiltrating lymphocytes has not been clearly explained yet. The aim is to determine the phenotype and activation molecules of cytotoxic T cell and NK cell subpopulations and to compare their representation in malignant ascites and peripheral blood in patients with ovarian cancer. MATERIAL AND

methodsCytotoxic cells taken from blood samples of the cubital vein and malignant ascites were obtained from 53 patients with EOC. Their surface and activation characteristics were determined by means of a flow cytometer. Immunophenotype multiparametric analysis of peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBLs) and tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) was carried out.

resultsCD3(+) T lymphocytes were the main population of TILs (75.9%) and PBLs (70.9%). The number of activating T cells was significantly higher in TILs: CD3(+)/69(+) 6.7% vs. 0.8% (p < 0.001). The representation of (CD3(-)/16(+)56(+)) NK cells in TILs was significantly higher: 11.0% vs. 5.6% (p = 0.041); likewise CD56(bright) and CD-56(bright) from CD56(+) cells were higher in TILs (both p < 0.001). The activation receptor NKG2D was present in 45.1% of TILs vs. 32.3% of PBLs (p = 0.034), but we did not find a significant difference in the numbers of CD56(+)/NKG2D(+) in TILs and PBLs.

conclusionsThese results prove that the characteristics and intensity of anti-tumour responses are different in compared compartments (ascites/PBLs). The knowledge of phenotype and functions of effector cells is the basic precondition for understanding the anti-tumour immune response.

Indexed as

flow cytometryNK cellsNKG2Dovarian cancertumour-infiltrating lymphocytes

Identifiers

PMID26557777
PMCPMC4631306
OpenAlexW2419504809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.