目的:评估口腔苔藓样病变中三级淋巴结构(TLS)的存在及其免疫细胞的组成特征。
方法:正常口腔黏膜组织样本,收集口腔扁平苔藓(OLP)和口腔苔藓组织反应(OLTR),每组30例。进行苏木精-伊红(H-E)染色以鉴定TLS样结构,免疫组织化学(IHC)染色用于评估浸润的CD3+T细胞的结构和数量,CD19+,CD20+B细胞,CD21+滤泡树突状细胞(FDC),Bcl-6+生发中心,OLLTLS中的CD34PNAd微静脉和CD34Gp36微淋巴管。组织病理学和分子标记用于评估TLS在OLL中的形态学表现。采用卡方检验(Fisher精确概率法)比较各组TLS的比例;采用积分光密度(IOD)法计算各分子标记的表达水平。采用非参数t检验(Mann-WhitneyU检验)分析其差异。用GraphPadPrism7.0软件进行统计分析。
结果:在OLP组和OLTR组中,46.7%(14/30)和23.4%(7/30)病例具有TLS样结构,分别。TLS样结构的出现频率与疾病类型无关(P>0.05)。与对照组相比,OLP组和OLTR组的分子标记高表达,OLP组CD19、CD20和CD21的表达具有TLS的形态学和结构特征。Bcl-6的表达(IOD的平均值和标准偏差为15498±15108vs.1841±2276,P<0.0001),CD20(13067±9049与7695±5159,P<0.05),CD21(13968±14560vs.2552±2584,P<0.0001),PNAd(10328±10383vs.1756±1570,P<0.0001)和Gp36(12778±12390与2313±2578,P<0.0001)显示OLP和OLTR组织之间存在显着差异,但是它不能作为没有形态特征的疾病类型的识别标准。
结论:TLS存在于OLL病变中,主要表现为非古典形式。古典形式偶尔可以找到。CD20和CD21可作为鉴定OLL中TLS的生物标志物。TLS不能用作识别OLP或OLTR的诊断标准。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the existence of tertiary lymphoid structures(TLS) in oral lichenoid lesions and its compositional characteristics of immune cells.
METHODS: Tissue samples of normal oral mucosa, oral lichen planus (OLP) and oral lichenoid tissue reaction(OLTR) were collected, thirty cases in each group. Hematoxylin-eosin(H-E) staining was performed to identify the TLS-like structures, and immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining was applied to assess the structure and amount of infiltrating CD3+ T cells, CD19+, CD20+ B cells, CD21+ follicular dendritic cells (FDC), Bcl-6+ germinal centers, CD34+ PNAd+ venules and CD34+ Gp36+ micro lymphatic vessels in TLS of OLL. Histopathology and molecular markers were used to evaluate the morphological performance of TLS in OLL. Chi-square test (Fisher exact probability method) was applied to compare the proportion of TLS in each group; integral optical density (IOD) method was used to calculate the expression level of each molecular marker, nonparametric t test (Mann-Whitney U test) was employed to analyze their difference. Statistical analysis was performed with GraphPad Prism 7.0 software.
RESULTS: In OLP group and OLTR group, 46.7% (14/30) and 23.4% (7/30) cases had TLS-like structures, respectively. The frequency of TLS-like structures was not correlated with the type of disease(P>0.05). Compared with the control group, the molecular markers in OLP group and OLTR group were highly expressed, and the expression of CD19, CD20, and CD21 in OLP group had morphological and structural characteristics of TLS. The expression of Bcl-6(mean and standard deviation of IOD were 15 498±15 108 vs. 1 841±2 276, P<0.0001), CD20 (13 067±9 049 vs. 7 695±5 159, P<0.05), CD21 (13 968±14 560 vs. 2 552±2 584, P<0.0001), PNAd (10 328±10 383 vs. 1 756±1 570, P<0.0001) and Gp36 (12 778±12 390 vs. 2 313±2 578, P<0.0001) showed significant differences between OLP and OLTR tissues, but it could not be used as the criteria for identifying the type of diseases without morphological characters.
CONCLUSIONS: TLS exists in OLL lesions, mainly presented as non-classical forms. The classical forms can be occasionally found. CD20 and CD21 can be used as the biomarkers to identify the TLS in OLL. TLS can not be used as the diagnosing criteria for identifying OLP or OLTR.