The Prognostic Value of CD206 in Solid Malignancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

An increased presence of CD206-expressing tumor associated macrophages in solid cancers was proposed to be associated with worse outcomes in multiple types of malignancies, but contradictory results are published. We performed a reproducible systematic review and meta-analysis to provide increased evidence to confirm or reject this hypothesis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. The Embase, Web of Science, and MEDLINE-databases were systematically searched for eligible manuscripts. A total of 27 papers studying the prognostic impact of CD206 in 14 different tumor types were identified. Meta-analyses showed a significant impact on the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). While no significant differences were revealed in progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS), a shift towards negative survival was correlated with increased CD206-expresion. As a result of the different tumor types, large heterogeneity was present between the different tumor types. Subgroup analysis of hepatocellular carcinoma and gastric cancers revealed no heterogeneity, associated with a significant negative impact on OS in both groups. The current systematic review displays the increased presence CD206-expressing macrophages as a significant negative prognostic biomarker for both OS and DFS in patients diagnosed with solid cancers. Because a heterogenous group of tumor types was included in the meta-analysis, the results cannot be generalized. These results can, however, be used to further lead follow-up research to validate the specific prognostic value of CD206 in individual tumor types and therapeutic approaches.

Nontoxic Fluorescent Nanoprobes for Multiplexed Detection and 3D Imaging of Tumor Markers in Breast Cancer

“…For example, clusters of macrophages that actively express the macrophage mannose receptor (MMR) and have a proangiogenic effect are found in hypoxic regions of tumors. Data reported by Debacker et al [ 79 ] confirm these conclusions. They analyzed 27 clinical cases and found that patients with high levels of MMR expression in tumor microenvironment macrophages exhibited a significantly lower survival rate than patients without overexpression of this biomarker.…”

TAM-targeted reeducation for enhanced cancer immunotherapy: Mechanism and recent progress

“…CD206 is a membrane-bound protein consisting of distinct extracellular structural domains, a transmembrane fragment and a cytoplasmic tail, and is normally expressed on macrophages and dendritic cells ( 49 ). CD206 can recognize and bind to a variety of ligands such as peptide hormones, lysosomal hydrolases and mannose and their derivatives, and is regulated by these ligands to initiate its clearance process ( 50 ).…”

Targeted xCT‐mediated Ferroptosis and Protumoral Polarization of Macrophages Is Effective against HCC and Enhances the Efficacy of the Anti‐PD‐1/L1 Response

“…Given that the phenotype of macrophages is often characterized by differences in the expression of various surface receptors, and CD206 macrophage mannose receptor is usually overexpressed on M2 polarized macrophages and TAMs, it is allowed to construct mannose modified nanocarrier to target M2 and TAMs. [ 36 , 37 ] In this study, we further explored and prepared mannose‐functionalized porous silicon nanoparticles (Man@pSiNPs), a functional nanocarrier that can specifically target TAMs. Figure 7 A depicts the schematic illustration of the Man@pSiNP preparation.…”