Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 10, 2026
Studying the Effects of Tumor-Secreted Paracrine Ligands on Macrophage Activation using Co-Culture with Permeable Membrane Supports
Published on: November 28, 2019
The prognostic value of tumor-associated macrophages in leiomyosarcoma: a single institution study
Kristen N Ganjoo1, Daniela Witten, Manisha Patel
1Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA. kganjoo@stanford.edu
Introduction:
High numbers of tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) have been associated with poor outcome in several solid tumors. In 2 previous studies, we showed that colony stimulating factor-1 (CSF1) is secreted by leiomyosarcoma (LMS) and that the increase in macrophages and CSF1 associated proteins are markers for poor prognosis in both gynecologic and nongynecologic LMS in a multicentered study. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcome of patients with LMS from a single institution according to the number of TAMs evaluated through 3 CSF1 associated proteins.
Methods:
Patients with LMS treated at Stanford University with adequate archived tissue and clinical data were eligible for this retrospective study. Data from chart reviews included tumor site, size, grade, stage, treatment, and disease status at the time of last follow-up. The 3 CSF1 associated proteins (CD163, CD16, and cathepsin L) were evaluated by immunohistochemistry on tissue microarrays. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and univariate Cox proportional hazards models were fit to assess the association of clinical predictors as well as CSF1 associated proteins with overall survival.
Results:
A total of 52 patients diagnosed from 1983 to 2007 were evaluated. Univariate Cox proportional hazards models were fit to assess the significance of grade, size, stage, and the 3 CSF1 associated proteins in predicting OS. Grade, size, and stage were not significantly associated with survival in the full patient cohort, but grade and stage were significant predictors of survival in the gynecologic (GYN) LMS samples (P = 0.038 and P = 0.0164, respectively). Increased cathepsin L was associated with a worse outcome in GYN LMS (P = 0.049). Similar findings were seen with CD16 (P < 0.0001). In addition, CSF1 response enriched (all 3 stains positive) GYN LMS had a poor overall survival when compared with CSF1 response poor tumors (P = 0.001). These results were not seen in non-GYN LMS.
Conclusions:
Our data form an independent confirmation of the prognostic significance of TAMs and the CSF1 associated proteins in LMS. More aggressive or targeted therapies could be considered in the subset of LMS patients that highly express these markers.