Spatial immune cell architecture after gastric cancer surgery predicts prognosis

Table 1 Clinical data and treatment statistics of gastric cancer patients

Feature	Quantity (n = 112)	Percentage (%)	Remarks
Age	59
Gender
Male	68	60.7
Female	44	39.3
TNM installment
I	25	22.3
II	48	42.9
III	39	34.8
Lauren classification
Intestinal type	63	56.2
Diffuse type	49	43.8
Histological grading
Highly differentiated	23	20.5
Moderate differentiation	53	47.3
Low differentiation	36	32.2
Treatment plan
Only surgery	34	30.4
Preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy	19	17	Including FOLFOX and XELOX solutions
Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy	59	52.7	Including FOLFOX and XELOX solutions
Marker expression
HER2 positive	21	18.8
HER2 negative	91	81.2
PD-L1 expression
PD-L1 positive (≥ 1%)	43	38.4
PD-L1 negative (< 1%)	69	61.6
MSI status
MSI-H	12	10.7
MSS	100	89.3
Immune cell infiltration
High density of CD8+ T cells	54	48.2	> 220/mm2
Low density of CD8+ T cells	58	51.8	≤ 220/mm2
High CD8+/FoxP3+ ratio	61	54.5	> 2.5
Low CD8+/FoxP3+ ratio	51	45.5	≤ 2.5
High proportion of PD-L1+ tumor cells	22	19.6	> 10%
Low proportion of PD-L1+ tumor cells	90	80.4	≤ 10%
Macrophages with high CD68+CD163+ M2	49	43.8
Low CD68+CD163+ M2 macrophages	63	56.2
Follow-up results
5-year OS rate	57	50.9
5-year DFS rate	65	58
Recurrence situation

TNM: Tumor-node-metastasis; HER2: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; PD-L1: Programmed death ligand 1; MSI: Microsatellite instability; MSI-H: Microsatellite instability-high; MSS: Microsatellite stability; FoxP3+: Forkhead box protein 3+; OS: Overall survival; DFS: Disease-free survival; FOLFOX: Folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin; XELOX: Capecitabine and oxaliplatin.