| Literature DB >> 25501357 |
Yan Mao1, Qing Qu2, Yuzi Zhang1, Junjun Liu1, Xiaosong Chen1, Kunwei Shen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the predictive roles of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25501357 PMCID: PMC4264870 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115103
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Baseline Characteristics of Included Studies.
| Authors and published years | Data collection | Pts No | Country of origin | Ethnicity | pCR definition | Cut-off value | Assay | Marker | Time | Location | Neoadjuvant regimen |
| Ladoire et al. 2008 | Retrospective | 56 | France | Europe | ypT0 | Scores>0 | IHC | CD3, CD8, FOXP3 | Pre-,post-NAC | IS | CEF,CEX, H,,DC |
| Aruga et al. 2009 | Retrospective | 87 | Japan | Asia | Japanese criteria | Median | IHC | FOXP3 | Pre-,post-NAC | IS | CEF,EC,EC-T,CEF-T |
| Denkert et al. 2010a | Prospective | 218 | Germany | Europe | ypT0/TisypN0 | 10%,LPBC,10% INC | H&E | TILs | Pre-NAC | IS,SS | EC-T |
| Denkert et al. 2010b | Prospective | 840 | Germany | Europe | ypT0/TisypN0 | 10%,LPBC,10% INC | H&E, IHC | TILs, CD3 | Pre-NAC | IS,SS | TAC, NX |
| West et al. 2011 | Prospective | 113 | Europe | Europe | Not clear | upper quartile | Gene-signature | TILs | Pre-NAC | BS | CEF,TET |
| Oda et al. 2012 | Retrospective | 180 | Japan | Asia | ypT0 ypN0 | median | IHC | CD8, FOXP3 | Pre-,post-NAC | IS | CEF-T |
| Ono et al. 2012 | Retrospective | 180 | Japan | Asia | ypT0 | score>2 | H&E | TILs | Pre-NAC | BS | AC,ACT,CEF,AT, CEF-T |
| Yamaguchi et al. 2012 | Retrospective | 68 | Japan | Asia | ypT0 | Score>1 | H&E | TILs | Pre-NAC | BS | CEF-T |
| Liu et al. 2012 | Retrospective | 132 | China | Asia | ypT0 | median | IHC | FOXP3 | Pre-,post-NAC | SS | CEF,CEX |
| Seo et al. 2013 | Retrospective | 153 | Korea | Asia | ypT0 ypN0 | median | IHC | CD4,CD8, FOXP3 | Pre-NAC | IS | AC,AC-T,AD |
| Lee et al. 2013 | Retrospective | 175 | Korea | Asia | ypT0 ypN0 | 10%,10% INC | IHC | CD3,CD8,FOXP3 | Pre-NAC | SS | AT,AC-T,H |
| Loi et al. 2013 | Retrospective | 156 | Germany | Europe | ypT0, ypTis | 10% INC | H&E | TILs | Pre- NAC | SS | EC-TX, H,EC-T |
| Denkert et al. 2013 | Prospective | 580 | Germany | Europe | ypT0ypN0 | LPBC,10% INC, | H&E | TILs | Pre-NAC | IS,SS | PM+/−Cb,Bev,H,L |
| Issa-Nummer et al. 2013 | Prospective | 313 | Germany,Switzerland | Europe | ypT0ypN0 | 10% INC | H&E | TILs | Pre- NAC | IS,SS | EC-T,Bev,EVE, L |
Abbreviations: pts, patients; IHC, immunohistochemistry; HE, staining Hematoxylin-eosin staining; FOXP3, regulatory T-lymphocytes expressing forkhead box P 3 protein; NAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy; CEF, cyclophosphamide/epirubicin/fluorouracil; CEX, epirubicin/cyclophosphamide/capecitabine; DC, docetaxel/carboplatin; EC, epirubicin/cyclophosphamide; EC-T, epirubicin/cyclophosphamide-taxane; CEF-T, cyclophosphamide/epirubicin/fluorouracil-taxane;T AC, docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide; NX, vinorelbine/capecitabine; TET, docetaxel-docetaxel/epirubicin; AC, doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide; AC-T, doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide-taxane; AD, doxorubicin/docetaxel; AT, doxorubicin/taxane; EC-TX, epirubicin/cyclophosphamide-docetaxel/capecitabine; EC-T-X, epirubicin/cyclophosphamide-docetaxel-capecitabine; PM, paclitaxle/non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin; PMCb, paclitaxle/non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin/carboplatin; H, trastuzumab; Bev, bevacizumab; L, lapatinib; EVE, everolimus; IS = Intratumoral sites; SS = stromal sites;BS, both sites;10% INC, 10 increment
a, GeparDuo.
b, GeparTrio.
Figure 1Flow chart for the selection process of eligible publications.
Figure 2Forest plots from the fixed-effect meta-analysis of the efficacy of TILs on the NAC response stratified by infiltration locations (A) and different cutoff values (B).
The width of horizontal line represents 95% CI of the individual studies, and the grey boxes represent the weight of each study. The diamond represents the overall summary estimate. The unbroken vertical line was set at the null value (HR = 1.0). Abbreviations: LPBC, lymphocyte-predominant breast cancer; TILs, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes.
Figure 3Forest plots from the fixed-effect meta-analysis of the efficacy of TILs on the NAC response stratified by different subtypes.
The width of horizontal line represents 95% CI of the individual studies, and the grey boxes represent the weight of each study. The diamond represents the overall summary estimate. The unbroken vertical line was set at the null value (HR = 1.0). Abbreviations: TNBC, triple negative breast cancer; HER2, human epithelial growth factor receptor 2; ER, estrogen receptor.
Figure 4Forest plots from the random-effect meta-analysis of the efficacy of TILs on the NAC response stratified by infiltration locations in multivariate way.
The width of horizontal line represents 95% CI of the individual studies, and the grey boxes represent the weight of each study. The diamond represents the overall summary estimate. The unbroken vertical line was set at the null value (HR = 1.0).
Figure 5Forest plots from the fixed- or random-effect meta-analysis of the efficacy of TILs subset on NAC response in pre-treatment biopsy (A, B).
The width of horizontal line represents 95% CI of the individual studies, and the grey boxes represent the weight of each study. The diamond represents the overall summary estimate. The unbroken vertical line was set at the null value (HR = 1.0).
Figure 6Forest plots from the fixed-effect meta-analysis of the efficacy of TILs subset on NAC response in post-treatment breast tissue.
The width of horizontal line represents 95% CI of the individual studies, and the grey boxes represent the weight of each study. The diamond represents the overall summary estimate. The unbroken vertical line was set at the null value (HR = 1.0).
Figure 7Forest plots from the random-effect meta-analysis of the efficacy of TIL subset on NAC response in pre-treatment biopsy in multivariate way.
The width of horizontal line represents 95% CI of the individual studies, and the grey boxes represent the weight of each study. The diamond represents the overall summary estimate. The unbroken vertical line was set at the null value (HR = 1.0).
Sensitivity analysis of TILs and TILs subset.
| Degree of heterogeneity (I2 statistics; %) | P value of heterogeneity | OR (95% CI) | P value of OR | |
|
| ||||
| Total | 41.1 | 0.083 | 3.93(3.26–4.73) | 0.000 |
|
| ||||
| Prospective | 23.4 | 0.250 | 3.87(3.19–4.69) | 0.000 |
| Retrospective | 72.3 | 0.027 | 4.85(2.42–9.74) | 0.000 |
|
| ||||
| Europe | 23.4 | 0.250 | 3.87(3.19–4.69) | 0.000 |
| Asia | 72.3 | 0.027 | 4.85(2.42–9.74) | 0.000 |
|
| ||||
| ≤100 | 55.91(6.63–471.06) | 0.000 | ||
| >100 | 15.1 | 0.308 | 3.85(3.20–4.64) | 0.000 |
|
| ||||
| Score≤4 | 86.1 | 0.007 | 5.20(1.51–17.94) | 0.009 |
| Score>4 | 12.5 | 0.330 | 3.97(3.22–4.88) | 0.000 |
|
| ||||
| others | 62.4 | 0.021 | 4.08(3.12–5.33) | 0.000 |
| 10% | 0 | 0.577 | 3.80(2.94–4.92) | 0.000 |
|
| ||||
| Intratumoral sites | 0 | 0.586 | 4.15(2.95–5.84) | 0.000 |
| Stromal sites | 0 | 0.457 | 3.58(2.50–5.13) | 0.000 |
| Both sites | 69.7 | 0.010 | 4.01(3.03–5.32) | 0.000 |
|
| ||||
| Total | 0 | 0.533 | 6.44(2.52–16.46) | 0.000 |
|
| ||||
| Japan | 5.87(1.35–25.64) | 0.019 | ||
| Korea | 18.8 | 0.267 | 6.87(2.04–23.15) | 0.002 |
|
| ||||
| median | 0 | 0.542 | 8.10(2.83–23.17) | 0.000 |
| 10% | 2.65(0.33–21.10) | 0.357 | ||
|
| ||||
| Intratumoral sites | 0 | 0.542 | 8.10(2.83–23.17) | 0.000 |
| Stromal sites | 2.65(0.33–21.10) | 0.357 | ||
|
| ||||
| Total | 69.8 | 0.019 | 2.94(1.05–8.26) | 0.041 |
|
| ||||
| Japan | 88.7 | 0.003 | 2.30(0.24–21.75) | 0.468 |
| Korea | 0 | 0.742 | 3.90(1.66,9.16) | 0.041 |
|
| ||||
| ≤100 | 0.73(0.26–2.09 | 0.562 | ||
| >100 | 0 | 0.642 | 4.95(2.53–9.68) | 0.000 |
|
| ||||
| median | 79.7 | 0.007 | 2.84(0.70–11.54) | 0.144 |
| 10% | 3.33(0.93–11.92) | 0.065 | ||
|
| ||||
| Intratumoral sites | 79.7 | 0.007 | 2.84(0.70–11.54) | 0.144 |
| Stromal sites | 3.33(0.93–11.92) | 0.065 | ||
|
| ||||
| Total | 39.3 | 0.192 | 0.41(0.21–0.80) | 0.009 |
|
| ||||
| Europe | 0.07(0.01–0.53) | 0.010 | ||
| Asia | 0 | 0.838 | 0.51(0.25–1.03) | 0.059 |
|
| ||||
| ≤100 | 67.8 | 0.078 | 0.35(0.14–0.91) | 0.030 |
| >100 | 0.47(0.18–1.22) | 0.122 | ||
|
| ||||
| median | 0 | 0.838 | 0.51(0.25–1.03) | 0.059 |
| Score>0 | 0.07(0.01–0.53) | 0.010 | ||
|
| ||||
| Score≤4 | 67.8 | 0.078 | 0.35(0.14–0.91) | 0.030 |
| Score>4 | 0.47(0.18–1.22) | 0.122 | ||
Figure 8Funnel plot for publication bias in the pooled pCR analysis based on TIL status (A) and TILs subset before (B) treatment.