Minireviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Hepatol. Jun 27, 2023; 15(6): 775-785
Published online Jun 27, 2023. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v15.i6.775
Table 1 Relationship of tumor budding with clinicopathologic parameters and survival in hepatocellular and cholangiocarcinomas
Ref.
Tumor
No.
Correlations
Prognosis
Kairaluoma et al[75]HCC47-R; 212-NRNot observed; Not observedOS: TB negative vs TB positive; DSS: TB negative vs TB positive
Wei et al[76]HCC423Tumor subtypes, EMT related marker expression, FOXP3, PD-L1 and CD68 expressions; Frequent mast cell infiltration, p53 mutation (IS-TB type I); CTNNB1 mutation (IS-TB type IV)DFS: Type II vs Type I + Type IV; Type III vs Type I + Type IV; OS: Type II vs Type I + Type IV; Type III vs Type I + Type IV
Okubo et al[77]CCC299Dif G1/G2vs Dif G3OS: TB negative vs TB positive
Ogino et al[78]EHCC-PH; EHCC-DC195; 115Grade, T, LI, VI, PN, LNM, RSM; Grade, Higher T, LI, VI, PN, LNMOS: TB low vs TB ıntermediate vs TB high; OS: TB low vs TB high
Tanaka et al[80]ICC107Stage, Hilar invasion, Grade, VI, LNM, SMRFS: TB negative vs TB positive; OS: TB negative vs TB positive
Type 149NPRFS: Not prognostic; OS: Not prognostic
Type 258NPRFS: Not prognostic; OS: TB negative vs TB positive
EHCC-PH54LIRFS TB negative vs TB positive; OS TB negative vs TB positive
EHCC-DC40VIRFS: Not prognostic; OS: Not prognostic
Ito et al[81]EHCC-PH78Grade, T, LNM, M
36 NTCombined HA/PV Resection, Grade, T, LNM, MDSS: TB low vs TB high; RFS: TB low vs TB high
42 WTNot observedDSS: TB low vs TB high; RFS: Not prognostic
Agostini-Vulaj et al[83]EHCC; ICC 58; 54Gender, Location, Grade, LNI, PNI, RSM; Gender, Location, Grade, LNI, PNIDSS: TB ıntermediate vs TB high; RFS: TB ıntermediate vs TB high
Budau et al[84]ICC89NPOS: TB Low vs TB Intermediate vs TB High; RFS TB Low vs TB Intermediate vs TB High ITTB, PTTB, TB
Kosaka et al[85]ICC235Size, Tumor type, Grade, VI, MBI, LNM DSS: TB Low/Intermediate vs TB High; RFS: TB Low/Intermediate vs TB High
Nakayama et al[82]EHCC-DC65T, LNM, LI, VI, ZEB-1 expression, stageOS: TB Low vs TB High
Table 2 Criteria applied for tumor budding in previous studies
Ref.
Tumor
Tumor budding criteria
Kairaluoma et al[75]HCCEvaluation was performed according to median values; Negative: No buds were found; Positive: At least one bud was present
Wei et al[76]HCCAssociation between TB and clinicopathological parameters; Grade 1 (0-4), Grade 2 (5-9), Grade 3 (≥ 10); For survival analysis; Low grade (0-9), High grade (≥ 10)
Okubo et al[77]CCCNegative: < 5 budding focus; Positive: ≥ 5 budding focus
Ogino et al[78]EHCC-PH, EHCC-DCCut-off values of TB obtained by recursive partioning technique; For EHCC-PH; Low grade (0-4), Intermediate grade (5-11), High grade (≥ 12); For EHCC-DC; Low grade (0-4), High grade (≥ 5)
Tanaka et al[80]ICC, EHCC-PH, EHCC-DCLow grade (0-4), Intermediate grade (5-9), High grade (≥10)
Ito et al[81]EHCC-PHLow TB: < 5 budding focus; High TB: ≥ 5 budding focus
Agostini-Vulaj et al[83]ICC, EHCCGrade 1 (0-4), Grade 2 (5-9), Grade 3 (≥ 10)
Budau et al[84]ICCGrade 1 (0-4), Grade 2 (5-9), Grade 3 (≥ 10)
Kosaka et al[85]ICCLow grade (0-4), Intermediate grade (5-9), High grade (≥ 10)
Nakayama et al[82]EHCC-DCLow TB (0-4), High [TB Grade 2 (5-9) and 3 (≥ 10)]