Promotion of Sema4D expression by tumor-associated macrophages: Significance in gastric carcinoma

Table 1 Relationship between CD68 and Sema4D expression and clinicopathological features of patients n (%)

Clinicopathological feature	CD68-positive			Sema4D-positive
	Positive rate	χ2	P value	Positive rate	χ2	P value
Age (yr)		0.761	0.383		3.538	0.060
≤ 50	103/149 (69.0)			104/149 (70.0)
> 50	104/141 (73.8)			112/141 (79.4)
Gender		0.524	0.469		2.194	0.139
Male	105/151 (69.5)			113/151 (77.2)
Female	102/139 (73.4)			114/139 (71.2)
Histological differentiation type		18.511	0.000		30.6961	0.0001
Well differentiated adenocarcinoma	41/78 (52.5)			40/78 (51.3)
Moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma	88/113 (87.9)			96/113 (85.0)
Poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma	78/99 (78.8)			80/99 (80.8)
Tumor diameter (cm)		3.120	0.077		1.189	0.276
< 5	116/153 (75.8)			118/153 (77.1)
≥ 5	91/137 (66.4)			98/137 (71.5)
TNM stage		6.142	0.013		20.639	0.000
I/II	58/105 (55.2)			60/105 (57.1)
III/IV	149/185 (80.5)	1.000		156/185 (84.3)
Lymph node metastasis		7.375	0.007		6.319	0.012
Yes	149/195 (76.4)			154/195 (80.0)
No	58/95 (61.1)			62/95 (65.3)

¹Well differentiated group compared with the moderately and poorly differentiated groups. TNM: Tumor, node, metastasis.

Table 2 CD68 and Sema4D expression in gastric carcinoma and adjacent tissues

		Sema4D
Group	n	Negative	Positive
CD68
Negative	83	50	33
Positive	207	24	183