ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Heterogeneity and plasticity of tumor-associated macrophages in oral squamous cell carcinoma: implications for diagnosis and tumor microenvironment characterization.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is the predominant histological subtype of oral cavity cancers, with a 5-year survival rate of approximately 50%. The tumour microenvironment, particularly macrophage infiltration and polarization, plays a critical role in tumour progression and patient prognosis. Models describing macrophages as either M1 (pro-inflammatory) or M2 (anti-inflammatory) are increasingly recognized as oversimplified, given the functional heterogeneity and plasticity of tumour-associated macrophages (TAMs). This study aims to evaluate the expression of macrophage markers CD68, CD163, CD11c, and CD115 in OSCC compared to normal oral mucosa (NOM), to assess their diagnostic and prognostic value. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 179 tissue samples (111 OSCC, 68 controls) analysed macrophage markers (CD68, CD163, CD11c, CD115) via real-time qPCR. Statistical tests included Mann-Whitney U, ROC analysis for diagnostic utility, Spearman's ρ for correlations, and assessments of associations with prognosis and recurrence. Cut-offs for gene overexpression were based on ROC results and evaluated clinically. Results: All four markers showed significantly higher expression in OSCC compared to NOM (p < 0.001 for CD68, CD163, CD11c; p = 0.001 for CD115). ROC analyses demonstrated diagnostic AUCs of 0.69 (CD68), 0.78 (CD163), 0.81 (CD11c), and 0.66 (CD115), indicating poor, fair and good discriminative capacity, respectively. Overexpression of the genes defined by COP was significantly associated with malignancy (p < 0.01). Elevated CD68 and CD163 levels correlated with higher tumour grading (G2/G3), while increased CD11c expression was linked to nodal metastasis (p = 0.04). Strong positive correlations existed between CD115 and the other markers (ρ > 0.61, p < 0.001), supporting a model of macrophage heterogeneity and plasticity. Concurrent upregulation of pro-inflammatory (CD11c) and M2-associated (CD163) markers suggests a complex, dynamic TAM landscape rather than a simple M1/M2 dichotomy. Conclusions: Altered RNA expression of the macrophage cell surface markers CD115, CD68, CD163 and CD11c in OSCC, and their respective association with tumour grading, N-status and perineural sheath infiltration, may serve as a basis for future single-cell sequencing or immunohistological - multiplex immunofluorescence - studies. Further investigation of these markers could lead to promising insights into the modulation of the tumour immune microenvironment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.