| Literature DB >> 34858800 |
Jesse Lopes da Silva1, Lucas Zanetti de Albuquerque1, Fabiana Resende Rodrigues2, Guilherme Gomes de Mesquita1,2, Priscila Valverde Fernandes2, Luiz Claudio Santos Thuler1, Andreia Cristina de Melo1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the prevalence and prognostic role of tumor microenvironment (TME) in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) through immunohistochemical characterization.Entities:
Keywords: biomarkers; neoadjuvant chemotherapy; triple-negative breast cancer; tumor microenvironment; tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte
Year: 2021 PMID: 34858800 PMCID: PMC8630741 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.636716
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Correlation of clinical–pathological characteristics and expression profile of biomarkers with residual burden cancer by logistic regression through univariate analysis (n = 171).
| Variables/biomarker | RCB 0/1 | RCB 2/3 | Crude | Adjusted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50 (29.2%) | 121 (70.8%) | |||
| Age mean (SD) | 51.0 (11.5) | 50.3 (10.4) | 0.849 | |
| BMI kg/m² mean (SD) | 29.2 (7.2) | 28.3 (5.2) | ||
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
| ||
| Grade | 0.547 | |||
| 1 | 1 (2.0%) | 2 (1.7%) | ||
| 2 | 17 (34%) | 36 (29.8%) | ||
| 3 | 32 (64%) | 83 (68.6%) | ||
| Histological type | 0.433 | |||
| Invasive ductal carcinoma NOS | 48 (96%) | 112 (92.6%) | ||
| Metaplastic | 2 (4%) | 9 (7.4%) | ||
| NACT regimen | 0.863 | |||
| AC-T | 34 (68%) | 83 (68.6%) | ||
| FAC-T | 16 (32%) | 38 (31.4%) | ||
|
| 51.6 (28.8) | 42.5 (30.7) | 0.127 |
|
| CD3 | 0.907 | |||
| High | 8 (16.7%) | 18 (15.9%) | ||
| Low | 40 (83.3%) | 95 (84.1%) | ||
|
|
| 0.147 | ||
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
| ||
| CD8 | 0.581 | |||
| High | 23 (47.9%) | 59 (52.7%) | ||
| Low | 25 (52.1%) | 53 (47.3%) | ||
| CD14 | 0.825 | |||
| High | 7 (14.6%) | 15 (13.3%) | ||
| Low | 41 (85.4%) | 98 (86.7%) | ||
| CD68 | 0.571 | |||
| High | 24 (50%) | 62 (54.9%) | ||
| Low | 24 (50%) | 51 (45.1%) | ||
| CD117 | 0.437 | |||
| High | 5 (10.4%) | 17 (15%) | ||
| Low | 43 (89.6%) | 96 (85%) | ||
| FOXP3 | 0.340 | |||
| High | 19 (39.6%) | 54 (47.8%) | ||
| Low | 29 (60.4%) | 59 (52.2%) | ||
| PD-1 | 0.188 | 0.256 | ||
| High | 1 (2.2%) | 9 (8.3%) | ||
| Low | 45 (97.8%) | 99 (91.7%) | ||
| PD-L1 TPS | 0.238 | |||
| High | 18 (36%) | 32 (26.9%) | ||
| Low | 32 (64%) | 87 (73.1%) | ||
| PD-L1 IC | 0.944 | |||
| High | 7 (14.6%) | 16 (14.2%) | ||
| Low | 41 (85.4%) | 97 (85.8%) | ||
| PD-L1 CPS | 0.888 | |||
| Positive | 29 (58%) | 71 (59.2%) | ||
| Negative | 21 (42%) | 49 (40.8%) | ||
| PD-L2 | 0.121 | |||
| High | 21 (43.8%) | 35 (31%) | ||
| Low | 27 (56.2%) | 78 (69%) | ||
| CD4/FOXP3 ratio | 0.210 | |||
| High | 22 (45.8%) | 64 (56.6%) | ||
| Low | 26 (54.2%) | 49 (43.4%) | ||
| CD8/FOXP3 ratio | 0.841 | |||
| High | 41 (85.4%) | 97 (86.6%) | ||
| Low | 7 (14.6%) | 15 (13.4%) | ||
| CD4/CD8 ratio | 0.540 | |||
| High | 4 (8.3%) | 13 (11.6%) | ||
| Low | 44 (91.7%) | 99 (88.4%) |
RCB, residual cancer burden; SD, standard deviation; BMI, body mass index; NOS, not otherwise specified; NACT, neoadjuvant chemotherapy; AC-T, doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by taxane; FAC-T, doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/fluorouracil; CD3, Cluster of Differentiation 3; CD4, Cluster of Differentiation 4; CD8, Cluster of Differentiation 8; CD14, Cluster of Differentiation 14; CD56, Cluster of Differentiation 56; CD68, Cluster of Differentiation 68; CD117, Cluster of Differentiation 117; FOXP3, Forkhead Box P3; PD-1, Programmed Cell Death Protein 1; PD-L1 TPS, Programmed Death-Ligand 1 tumor proportion scores; PD-L1 IC, Programmed Death-Ligand 1 tumor-infiltrating immune cells; PD-L1 CPS, Programmed Death-Ligand 1 combined positive score; PD-L2, Programmed Death-Ligand 2.
Differences in absolute value correspond to missing data.
Statistically significant results are in bold.
Figure 1Representative pictures of lymphocyte infiltration in triple-negative breast cancer core biopsy showing immunohistochemical staining of high CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, CD14+, CD68+, CD117+, FOXP3+, PD-1+, PD-L1+, and PD-L2+. The specimens are imaged at ×20 magnification with a 100-µm scale on each one.
Post-NACT clinicopathological features and crude and adjusted hazards ratios for event-free survival (EFS) estimated by univariate analysis and multivariate analysis.
| Post-NACT clinicopathological features | Univariate analysis |
| Multivariate analysis |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI | |||
| Clinical stage (III versus II) | 1.91 | (0.88–4.16) | 0.103 | 1.76 | (0.75–4.14) | 0.194 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CD4 (high versus low) | 0.69 | (0.42–1.13) | 0.138 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FOXP3 (high versus low) | 1.53 | (0.83–2.81) | 0.170 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
| |||
| CD4/CD8 ratio (high versus low) | 2.31 | (0.83–6.41) | 0.107 | |||
CD3, Cluster of Differentiation 3; CD4, Cluster of Differentiation 4; CD8, Cluster of Differentiation 8; CD14, Cluster of Differentiation 14; CD68, Cluster of Differentiation 68; CD117, Cluster of Differentiation 117; FOXP3, Forkhead Box P3. Significant p-values are in bold.
Post-NACT clinicopathological features and crude and adjusted hazards ratios for overall survival (OS) estimated by univariate analysis and multivariate analysis.
| Post-NACT clinicopathological features | Univariate analysis |
| Multivariate analysis |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI | |||
| Clinical stage (III versus II) | 1.75 | (0.80–3.83) | 0.159 | 1.53 | (0.65–3.60) | 0.330 |
|
|
|
|
| 0.77 | (0.38–1.52) | 0.449 |
| CD4 (high versus low) | 0.68 | (0.41–1.14) | 0.145 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.40 | (0.15–1.02) | 0.055 |
| CD14 (high versus low) | 2.73 | (0.99–7.57) | 0.053 | 2.75 | (0.95–7.98) | 0.062 |
| FOXP3 (high versus low) | 1.63 | (0.87–3.07) | 0.130 | 2.05 | (0.99–4.23) | 0.051 |
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
| |||
| CD4/CD8 ratio (high versus low) | 1.96 | (0.70–5.46) | 0.199 | |||
CD3, Cluster of Differentiation 3; CD4, Cluster of Differentiation 4; CD8, Cluster of Differentiation 8; CD14, Cluster of Differentiation 14; CD68, Cluster of Differentiation 68; CD117, Cluster of Differentiation 117; FOXP3, Forkhead Box P3. Significant p-values are in bold.
Figure 2Event-free survival (EFS) by (A) CD3; (B) CD8; (C) CD14; (D) CD4/FOXP3 ratio; and (E) CD8/FOXP3 ratio. Regarding the immunohistochemistry markers and the ratios, Kaplan–Meier curves for EFS were stratified according to the cutoff for prognostic evaluation and divided into low versus high subgroup for each variable subsets. The red solid line indicates patients with low values and the blue solid line indicates patients with high values. Tick marks indicate censored data.
Figure 3Overall survival (OS) by (A) CD3; (B) CD8; (C) CD14; (D) CD4/FOXP3 ratio; and (E) CD8/FOXP3 ratio. Regarding the immunohistochemistry markers and the ratios, Kaplan–Meier curves for EFS were stratified according to the cutoff for prognostic evaluation and divided into low versus high subgroup for each variable subsets. The red solid line indicates patients with low values and the blue solid line indicates patients with high values. Tick marks indicate censored data.