Skip to main content
. 2016 Sep 26;5(10):2920–2933. doi: 10.1002/cam4.886

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Chemokine (C‐C motif) ligand‐2 (CCL2) expression in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) clinical specimens. (A) Examples of ccRCC samples showing “not stained”, “slightly stained”, “partially stained”, and “diffusely stained” CCL2 staining (bar: 100 μm). (B) Statistical analysis for clinical stage of patients in the CCL2‐negative group (“not stained” and “slightly stained”, n = 79) compared with patients in the CCL2‐positive group (“partially stained” and “diffusely stained”, n = 35). Statistical analysis was performed using Mann–Whitney nonparametric U‐test (**P < 0.01). (C) Statistical analysis for Fuhrman grade of patients in the CCL2‐negative group (n = 79) compared with patients in the CCL2‐positive group (n = 35). Statistical analysis was performed using Mann–Whitney nonparametric U‐test (*P < 0.05). (D) Overall survival rates of 114 ccRCC patients were determined according to CCL2 expression by Kaplan–Meier curves, with the event being defined as death related to cancer (79 patients in the CCL2‐negative group and 35 patients in the CCL2‐positive group). The log‐rank test was used to identify differences between the survival curves of different patient groups (P  = 0.000329). (E) Examples of CD68 staining in ccRCC samples (top panels, bar: 100 μm). Statistical analysis of the number of recruited macrophages in tumors in the CCL2‐negative group (n = 79) and CCL2‐positive group (n = 35) (bottom table). Statistical analysis was performed using the Students' t‐test (**P < 0.01).