| Literature DB >> 27145494 |
Wenjing Tian1, Le Wang1, Lili Yuan2, Wenming Duan3, Wenhui Zhao1, Shuhuai Wang4, Qingyuan Zhang1,5.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to establish a prognostic risk model for patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). A total of 278 specimens of human TNBC tissues were investigated by immunohistochemistry for growth-arrest specific protein 6 expression, infiltrations of stromal natural killer cells and tumor-associated macrophages. According to their prognostic risk scores based on the model, patients were divided into three groups (score 0, 1-2, 3). Correlations of prognostic risk scores, clinicopathologic features and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. To study the clinical value of this stratification model in early disease recurrence or metastasis, 177 patients were screened out for further analysis. Based on disease free survival (DFS), 90 patients fell within the DFS ≤3 years group and 87 patients within the DFS ≥5 years group. We analyzed the differences in prognostic risk scores between the two groups. The prognostic risk scores were negatively related to tumor size, lymph node metastasis and P53 status (P < 0.001 for all). Patients with low prognostic risk scores had longer OS (P = 0.001). Using multivariate analysis, it was determined that TNM stage (HR = 0.432, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.281-0.665, P = 0.003), FOXP3 positive lymphocytes (HR = 1.712, 95% CI = 1.085-2.702, P = 0.021) and prognostic risk scores (HR = 1.340, 95% CI = 1.192-1.644, P = 0.005) were independent prognostic factors for OS. Compared with the DFS ≥5 years group, the DFS ≤3 years group patients had significantly higher prognostic risk scores (P < 0.001). In conclusion, the prognostic risk score of the model was a significant indicator of prognosis for patients with TNBC.Entities:
Keywords: Growth-arrest specific gene 6; natural killer cell; prognostic predictor; triple negative breast cancer; tumor-associated macrophages
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27145494 PMCID: PMC4946705 DOI: 10.1111/cas.12964
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Sci ISSN: 1347-9032 Impact factor: 6.716
Figure 1Immunohistochemical staining of stromal natural killer (NK) cells in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) tissues (200×). (a) High infiltration level of stromal NK cell. (b) Stromal NK cell negative staining.
Figure 2Immunohistochemical staining of growth‐arrest specific gene 6 (Gas6) protein in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) tissues (200×). (a) Gas6 positive staining. (b) Gas6 negative staining.
Figure 3Immunohistochemical staining of stromal tumor‐associated macrophages (TAM) in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) tissues (200×). (a) High infiltration level of stromal TAM. (b) Stromal TAM negative staining.
Figure 4Immunohistochemical staining of CD8 positive lymphocytes in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) tissues (200×). (a) High infiltration level of stromal CD8 positive lymphocytes. (b) Low infiltration level of stromal CD8 positive lymphocytes.
Figure 5Immunohistochemical staining of forkhead box protein 3 (FOXP3) positive lymphocytes in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) tissues (200×). (a) High infiltration level of stromal FOXP3 positive lymphocytes. (b) Low infiltration level of stromal FOXP3 positive lymphocytes.
Prognostic risk model
| Risk factors | Score |
|---|---|
| Low stromal NK cell infiltration | 1 |
| Stromal TAM positive | 1 |
| Gas6 expression positive | 1 |
Gas6, growth‐arrest specific gene 6; NK, natural killer; TAM, tumor‐associated macrophage.
Correlations of stromal NK cells, TAM, Gas6 expression, prognostic risk scores and clinicopathological features
| Stromal NK cell |
| Gas6 expression |
| Stromal TAM |
| Prognostic risk score |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | Negative | Positive | Low | High | 0 | 1–2 | 3 | |||||
| Age (years) | |||||||||||||
| <50 | 148 | 34 | 0.525 | 110 | 72 | 0.734 | 126 | 56 | 0.540 | 25 | 117 | 40 | 0.807 |
| ≥50 | 75 | 21 | 56 | 40 | 63 | 33 | 13 | 65 | 18 | ||||
| Tumor size (cm) | |||||||||||||
| ≤2 | 75 | 40 | <0.001 | 74 | 41 | 0.186 | 91 | 24 | 0.001 | 26 | 77 | 12 | <0.001 |
| >2 | 148 | 15 | 92 | 71 | 98 | 65 | 12 | 105 | 46 | ||||
| Lymph node metastasis | |||||||||||||
| Negative | 97 | 36 | 0.004 | 93 | 40 | 0.001 | 110 | 23 | <0.001 | 26 | 92 | 15 | <0.001 |
| Positive | 126 | 19 | 72 | 72 | 79 | 66 | 12 | 90 | 43 | ||||
| TNM stage | |||||||||||||
| I,II | 189 | 42 | 0.137 | 142 | 89 | 0.185 | 161 | 70 | 0.175 | 31 | 153 | 47 | 0.835 |
| III | 34 | 13 | 24 | 23 | 28 | 19 | 7 | 29 | 11 | ||||
| Histological grade | |||||||||||||
| I, II | 151 | 45 | 0.040 | 123 | 73 | 0.110 | 140 | 56 | 0.057 | 30 | 131 | 35 | 0.112 |
| III | 72 | 10 | 43 | 39 | 49 | 33 | 8 | 51 | 23 | ||||
| P53 status | |||||||||||||
| Negative | 71 | 32 | <0.001 | 68 | 35 | 0.100 | 89 | 14 | <0.001 | 22 | 75 | 6 | <0.001 |
| Positive | 152 | 23 | 98 | 77 | 100 | 75 | 16 | 107 | 52 | ||||
| Epidermal growth factor receptor | |||||||||||||
| Negative | 65 | 19 | 0.435 | 52 | 32 | 0.624 | 59 | 25 | 0.596 | 13 | 57 | 14 | 0.494 |
| Positive | 158 | 36 | 114 | 80 | 130 | 64 | 25 | 125 | 44 | ||||
| Stromal CD8+ TIL | |||||||||||||
| Low | 110 | 25 | 0.607 | 80 | 55 | 0.881 | 93 | 42 | 0.754 | 18 | 89 | 28 | 0.984 |
| High | 113 | 30 | 86 | 57 | 96 | 47 | 20 | 93 | 30 | ||||
| Stromal FOXP3+ TIL | |||||||||||||
| Low | 150 | 44 | 0.065 | 112 | 82 | 0.306 | 133 | 61 | 0.756 | 31 | 121 | 42 | 0.162 |
| High | 73 | 11 | 54 | 30 | 56 | 28 | 7 | 61 | 16 | ||||
FOXP3, forkhead box protein 3; Gas6, growth‐arrest specific gene 6; NK, natural killer; TAM, tumor‐associated macrophage; TIL, tumor infiltrating lymphocyte.
Clinicopathological features, prognostic risk scores, infiltration levels of stromal NK cells and TAM between DFS ≤3 years group and DFS ≥5 years group
| Characteristics | DFS ≤3 years group ( | DFS ≥5 years group ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | |||
| <50 | 57 | 63 | 0.196 |
| ≥50 | 33 | 24 | |
| Tumor size (cm) | |||
| ≤2 | 37 | 43 | 0.267 |
| >2 | 53 | 44 | |
| Lymph node metastasis | |||
| Negative | 39 | 50 | 0.060 |
| Positive | 51 | 37 | |
| TNM stage | |||
| I, II | 66 | 78 | 0.005 |
| III | 24 | 9 | |
| Histological grade | |||
| I, II | 63 | 69 | 0.155 |
| III | 27 | 18 | |
| P53 status | |||
| Negative | 28 | 37 | 0.115 |
| Positive | 62 | 50 | |
| Epidermal growth factor receptor | |||
| Negative | 20 | 40 | 0.001 |
| Positive | 70 | 47 | |
| Stromal CD8+ TIL | |||
| Low | 52 | 36 | 0.029 |
| High | 38 | 51 | |
| Stromal FOXP3+ TIL | |||
| Low | 68 | 53 | 0.036 |
| High | 22 | 34 | |
| Stromal NK cell | |||
| Low | 79 | 61 | <0.001 |
| High | 11 | 26 | |
| Gas6 expression | |||
| Negative | 44 | 66 | <0.001 |
| Positive | 46 | 21 | |
| Stromal TAM | |||
| Low | 50 | 66 | 0.004 |
| High | 40 | 21 | |
| Prognostic risk score | |||
| 0 | 6 | 21 | <0.001 |
| 1–2 | 56 | 57 | |
| 3 | 28 | 9 | |
DFS, disease‐free survival; FOXP3 forkhead box protein 3; Gas6, growth‐arrest specific gene 6; NK, natural killer; TAM, tumor‐associated macrophage; TIL, tumor infiltrating lymphocyte.
Prognostic factors in the Cox proportional hazards model
| Variables | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard ratio | 95% CI |
| Hazard ratio | 95% CI |
| |
| Age (years) | ||||||
| <50⁄≥50 | 0.854 | 0.585–1.247 | 0.414 | |||
| Tumor size (cm) | ||||||
| ≤2.0⁄>2.0 | 0.915 | 0.628–1.331 | 0.641 | |||
| Lymph node metastasis | ||||||
| Negative⁄positive | 0.812 | 0.561–1.175 | 0.269 | |||
| TNM stage | ||||||
| I/II and III | 0.484 | 0.317–0.738 | 0.001 | 0.432 | (0.281–0.665) | 0.003 |
| Histological grade | ||||||
| I/II and III | 1.358 | 0.891–2.070 | 0.155 | |||
| P53 status | ||||||
| Negative/positive | 0.679 | 0.456–1.011 | 0.057 | 0.886 | (0.582–1.348) | 0.571 |
| Epidermal growth factor receptor | ||||||
| Negative/positive | 0.591 | 0.382–0.915 | 0.018 | 0.660 | (0.424–1.027) | 0.650 |
| Stromal CD8+ TIL | ||||||
| Low/high | 1.453 | 1.004–2.102 | 0.047 | 1.365 | (0.937–1.987) | 0.105 |
| Stromal FOXP3+ TIL | ||||||
| Low/high | 1.743 | 1.111–2.734 | 0.016 | 1.712 | (1.085–2.702) | 0.021 |
| Prognostic risk score | ||||||
| 0–3 | 1.857 | 1.347–2.560 | <0.001 | 1.340 | (1.192–1.644) | 0.005 |
CI, confidence interval; FOXP3, forkhead box protein 3; TIL, tumor infiltrating lymphocyte.
Figure 6Kaplan–Meier (K‐M) analysis for overall survival (OS). (a) K‐M analysis of OS based on stromal NK cells infiltration (P = 0.018) (b) K‐M analysis of OS based on Gas6 expressions (P = 0.002) (c) K‐M analysis of OS based on stromal TAM (P = 0.005) (d) K‐M analysis of OS based on prognostic risk scores (P = 0.001).