Literature DB >> 35017545

Tumor infiltrating lymphocyte stratification of prognostic staging of early-stage triple negative breast cancer.

Sherene Loi1,2, Roberto Salgado3,4, Sylvia Adams5, Giancarlo Pruneri6, Prudence A Francis3,7, Magali Lacroix-Triki8, Heikki Joensuu9, Maria Vittoria Dieci10,11, Sunil Badve12, Sandra Demaria13, Robert Gray14, Elisabetta Munzone15, Damien Drubay16, Jerome Lemonnier17, Christos Sotiriou18, Pirkko Liisa Kellokumpu-Lehtinen19, Andrea Vingiani6, Kathryn Gray20, Fabrice André8, Carsten Denkert21, Martine Piccart18, Elvire Roblin16, Stefan Michiels16.   

Abstract

The importance of integrating biomarkers into the TNM staging has been emphasized in the 8th Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging system. In a pooled analysis of 2148 TNBC-patients in the adjuvant setting, TILs are found to strongly up and downstage traditional pathological-staging in the Pathological and Clinical Prognostic Stage Groups from the AJJC 8th edition Cancer Staging System. This suggest that clinical and research studies on TNBC should take TILs into account in addition to stage, as for example patients with stage II TNBC and high TILs have a better outcome than patients with stage I and low TILs.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 35017545      PMCID: PMC8752727          DOI: 10.1038/s41523-021-00362-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  NPJ Breast Cancer        ISSN: 2374-4677


Introduction

The importance of integrating biomarkers into the TNM staging has been emphasized in the 8th Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging System (www.cancerstaging.org). Prognostic biomarkers are becoming increasingly important given that many low early-stage breast cancer patients have excellent outcomes with standard of care treatments. The clinical guidelines for systemic treatment in early-stage TNBC are not consistent. The evidence for the integration of biomarkers into the TNM staging system is mostly retrospective and with limited prospective data available[1]. In the case of multigene panels, their clinical validity for defining prognosis of particular subgroups of patients had been shown in several retrospective analyses and these were routinely used and incorporated into national (NCCN and ASCO) and international (ESMO, St Gallen) treatment guidelines far before prospective data became available. In the 8th edition of the AJCC, histologic grading, molecular subtype (luminal, HER2-positive, and triple negative [TN]) and multigene panels/genomic signatures were included into staging assessments. Whilst pathological and clinical stage remain a valuable aspect of the staging process and are strongly prognostic, we highlight here the evidence that supports Tumor Infiltrating Lymphocytes (TILs) as a biologic biomarker which improves discrimination over prognostic pathological and clinical staging for early stage TNBC. A recent pooled analysis provides the relevant work for integrating TIL quantity into clinical staging for early-stage TNBC (JCO 2019)[2]. These data were from 2148 patients enrolled onto eight prospective clinical trials as well as one large institutional cohort. All patients had received anthracyclines with or without taxanes based regimens in the adjuvant setting. The median follow-up was 6.6 years. In the current study, using the Pathological and Clinical Prognostic Stage Groups from the AJJC 8th edition Cancer Staging Manual (for definitions hereof, see footnote*), three endpoints were calculated for each Stage group: invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant disease-free survival (D-DFS) as well as overall survival (OS). At a cut-point of 30% or more, TIL scores are found to strongly up and downstage traditional pathological-staging in this large data set (Fig. 1, Supp Table 1). This suggest that clinical and research studies on TNBC should take TILs into account in addition to stage, as patients with stage II TNBC and high TILs have a better outcome than patients with stage I and low TILs. Importantly, histological grade is not prognostic in this pooled analysis. At the established prognostic cut-off of 30%, trained pathologists have a high pairwise concordance rate up to 0.93 using both core-biopsies as well as full sections, indicating that TILs are a reliable biomarker that can be used in daily practice and in research and clinical trial settings[3]. This compares favorably to the reproducibility of other commonly used morphological features in breast cancer practice[4]. Similarly, adding TILs to clinical staging is shown to up- and downstage prognostic groups which also take subtype into consideration (Fig. 2; Supp Table 2) though we note the small numbers in some of the subgroups (ie Stage IIA).
Fig. 1

Kaplan–Meier curves of overall survival of triple-negative breast cancer patients treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy with or without taxanes, according to pathological prognostic stage and TILs.

Pathological Prognostic Stage is assigned stage for patients who have surgical resection as the initial treatment of their cancer before receipt of any systemic or radiation therapy. It is based on clinical information, biomarker data, and findings from surgery and resected tissue. The 5-year estimated overall survival values (5-Yr OS) are provided together with bootstrap confidence intervals.

Fig. 2

Kaplan–Meier curves of overall survival of triple-negative breast cancer patients treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy with or without taxanes, according to clinical prognostic stage and TILs.

Clinical prognostic stage assigned stage for all patients based on history, physical examination, imaging studies performed (but not required) and relevant biopsies. Clinical prognostic stage is determined by T, N, M, tumor grade, as well as subtype information using human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2), estrogen receptor (ER), and progesterone receptor (PR)- status. Supplementary Tables 1 and 2.

Kaplan–Meier curves of overall survival of triple-negative breast cancer patients treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy with or without taxanes, according to pathological prognostic stage and TILs.

Pathological Prognostic Stage is assigned stage for patients who have surgical resection as the initial treatment of their cancer before receipt of any systemic or radiation therapy. It is based on clinical information, biomarker data, and findings from surgery and resected tissue. The 5-year estimated overall survival values (5-Yr OS) are provided together with bootstrap confidence intervals.

Kaplan–Meier curves of overall survival of triple-negative breast cancer patients treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy with or without taxanes, according to clinical prognostic stage and TILs.

Clinical prognostic stage assigned stage for all patients based on history, physical examination, imaging studies performed (but not required) and relevant biopsies. Clinical prognostic stage is determined by T, N, M, tumor grade, as well as subtype information using human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2), estrogen receptor (ER), and progesterone receptor (PR)- status. Supplementary Tables 1 and 2. Risk assessment models meeting the AJCC criteria and included in the 8th Edition were Adjuvant Online and PREDICT-Plus. We have developed a prognostic model for early-stage disease that includes age, number of positive lymph nodes, tumor size, grade, and stromal TIL percentage. This prognostic model is available on the website of the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group (www.tilsinbreastcancer.org). This prognostic model could be used in routine patient care as well as future trial designs. The inclusion of immune biomarkers is timely given reporting of phase III registration trials of PD-1/PD-L1 targeting agents in early-stage TNBC. In the recently reported KEYNOTE-522 study (NCT03036488)[5], pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, was found to significantly but moderately increase the rates of pathological complete response (pCR) and significantly improve event-free survival (EFS) when added to a neoadjuvant regimen of anthracycline, taxanes and carboplatin in patients with stage II and III TNBC. Similar magnitude of EFS improvements have been reported in smaller studies[6,7]. PD-L1 protein is known to be highly expressed on the breast cancer TIL and correlations between both markers have been observed[8]. In the KEYNOTE-522 study, patients designated as PD-L1 positive by the PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmdDx assay (Agilent Technologies, Carpinteria, CA, USA) were reported to have higher rates of pCR in both pembrolizumab and control arms across all TNM stages. An important treatment by PD-L1 interaction was not observed, in contrast to late-stage disease[9,10]. In any case, the increasing incorporation of PD-1 inhibition into the treatment of both early- and late stage TNBC further reinforces the need for routine evaluation of TIL in all TNBC patients, particularly given discordances in PD-L1 IHC assays. One could also speculate that patients with high expression of both immune biomarkers, i.e. those “immune enriched” could be strong candidates for future treatment optimization (for example, reduced cytotoxic chemotherapy)[11].

Methods

This is a follow-up analysis of the Loi et al 2019 study[2]. The study protocol of this project was approved by the local institutional review committee at Gustave Roussy in November 2014 and authorized by the French National Committee on Computing and Liberty. Identified studies were prospective randomized clinical trials or large retrospective hospital series that evaluated the prognostic associations of TILs in patients who were diagnosed with early-stage TNBC treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy with or without taxane in the adjuvant setting using the same prespecified method for reading TILS (according to International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group guidelines). TNBC was defined by estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2 negativity as outlined in Loi et al. (ref). The prespecified primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), defined as the date of first invasive recurrence, or second primary or death from any cause. Patients still alive without an event of interest were censored at the date of the last visit. Distant disease-free survival (D-DFS) is defined as the date of first distant recurrence or death from any cause. Patients still alive without an event of interest were censored at the date of the last visit. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the date of death from any cause. Patients still alive were censored at the date of the last visit. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to establish survival curves according to AJCC staging categories. The Kaplan–Meier estimates are provided together with bootstrap confidence intervals (1000 samples).
  8 in total

1.  Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes and Prognosis: A Pooled Individual Patient Analysis of Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancers.

Authors:  Sherene Loi; Damien Drubay; Sylvia Adams; Giancarlo Pruneri; Prudence A Francis; Magali Lacroix-Triki; Heikki Joensuu; Maria Vittoria Dieci; Sunil Badve; Sandra Demaria; Robert Gray; Elisabetta Munzone; Jerome Lemonnier; Christos Sotiriou; Martine J Piccart; Pirkko-Liisa Kellokumpu-Lehtinen; Andrea Vingiani; Kathryn Gray; Fabrice Andre; Carsten Denkert; Roberto Salgado; Stefan Michiels
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Interobserver reproducibility of histopathological features in stage II breast cancer. An ECOG study.

Authors:  K W Gilchrist; L Kalish; V E Gould; S Hirschl; J E Imbriglia; W M Levy; A S Patchefsky; D W Penner; J Pickren; J A Roth
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Neoadjuvant atezolizumab in combination with sequential nab-paclitaxel and anthracycline-based chemotherapy versus placebo and chemotherapy in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (IMpassion031): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Hong Zhang; Carlos H Barrios; Shigehira Saji; Kyung Hae Jung; Roberto Hegg; Andreas Koehler; Joohyuk Sohn; Hiroji Iwata; Melinda L Telli; Cristiano Ferrario; Kevin Punie; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Shilpen Patel; Anh Nguyen Duc; Mario Liste-Hermoso; Vidya Maiya; Luciana Molinero; Stephen Y Chui; Nadia Harbeck
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-09-20       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Atezolizumab and Nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Peter Schmid; Sylvia Adams; Hope S Rugo; Andreas Schneeweiss; Carlos H Barrios; Hiroji Iwata; Véronique Diéras; Roberto Hegg; Seock-Ah Im; Gail Shaw Wright; Volkmar Henschel; Luciana Molinero; Stephen Y Chui; Roel Funke; Amreen Husain; Eric P Winer; Sherene Loi; Leisha A Emens
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2018-10-20       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Pembrolizumab for Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Peter Schmid; Javier Cortes; Lajos Pusztai; Heather McArthur; Sherko Kümmel; Jonas Bergh; Carsten Denkert; Yeon Hee Park; Rina Hui; Nadia Harbeck; Masato Takahashi; Theodoros Foukakis; Peter A Fasching; Fatima Cardoso; Michael Untch; Liyi Jia; Vassiliki Karantza; Jing Zhao; Gursel Aktan; Rebecca Dent; Joyce O'Shaughnessy
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-02-27       Impact factor: 176.079

Review 6.  The path to a better biomarker: application of a risk management framework for the implementation of PD-L1 and TILs as immuno-oncology biomarkers in breast cancer clinical trials and daily practice.

Authors:  Paula I Gonzalez-Ericsson; Elisabeth S Stovgaard; Luz F Sua; Emily Reisenbichler; Zuzana Kos; Jodi M Carter; Stefan Michiels; John Le Quesne; Torsten O Nielsen; Anne-Vibeke Laenkholm; Stephen B Fox; Julien Adam; John Ms Bartlett; David L Rimm; Cecily Quinn; Dieter Peeters; Maria V Dieci; Anne Vincent-Salomon; Ian Cree; Akira I Hida; Justin M Balko; Harry R Haynes; Isabel Frahm; Gabriela Acosta-Haab; Marcelo Balancin; Enrique Bellolio; Wentao Yang; Pawan Kirtani; Tomoharu Sugie; Anna Ehinger; Carlos A Castaneda; Marleen Kok; Heather McArthur; Kalliopi Siziopikou; Sunil Badve; Susan Fineberg; Allen Gown; Giuseppe Viale; Stuart J Schnitt; Giancarlo Pruneri; Frederique Penault-Llorca; Stephen Hewitt; E Aubrey Thompson; Kimberly H Allison; William F Symmans; Andrew M Bellizzi; Edi Brogi; David A Moore; Denis Larsimont; Deborah A Dillon; Alexander Lazar; Huangchun Lien; Matthew P Goetz; Glenn Broeckx; Khalid El Bairi; Nadia Harbeck; Ashley Cimino-Mathews; Christos Sotiriou; Sylvia Adams; Shi-Wei Liu; Sibylle Loibl; I-Chun Chen; Sunil R Lakhani; Jonathan W Juco; Carsten Denkert; Elizabeth F Blackley; Sandra Demaria; Roberto Leon-Ferre; Oleg Gluz; Dimitrios Zardavas; Kenneth Emancipator; Scott Ely; Sherene Loi; Roberto Salgado; Melinda Sanders
Journal:  J Pathol       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 7.996

7.  Pitfalls in assessing stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) in breast cancer.

Authors:  Zuzana Kos; Elvire Roblin; Rim S Kim; Stefan Michiels; Brandon D Gallas; Weijie Chen; Koen K van de Vijver; Shom Goel; Sylvia Adams; Sandra Demaria; Giuseppe Viale; Torsten O Nielsen; Sunil S Badve; W Fraser Symmans; Christos Sotiriou; David L Rimm; Stephen Hewitt; Carsten Denkert; Sibylle Loibl; Stephen J Luen; John M S Bartlett; Peter Savas; Giancarlo Pruneri; Deborah A Dillon; Maggie Chon U Cheang; Andrew Tutt; Jacqueline A Hall; Marleen Kok; Hugo M Horlings; Anant Madabhushi; Jeroen van der Laak; Francesco Ciompi; Anne-Vibeke Laenkholm; Enrique Bellolio; Tina Gruosso; Stephen B Fox; Juan Carlos Araya; Giuseppe Floris; Jan Hudeček; Leonie Voorwerk; Andrew H Beck; Jen Kerner; Denis Larsimont; Sabine Declercq; Gert Van den Eynden; Lajos Pusztai; Anna Ehinger; Wentao Yang; Khalid AbdulJabbar; Yinyin Yuan; Rajendra Singh; Crispin Hiley; Maise Al Bakir; Alexander J Lazar; Stephen Naber; Stephan Wienert; Miluska Castillo; Giuseppe Curigliano; Maria-Vittoria Dieci; Fabrice André; Charles Swanton; Jorge Reis-Filho; Joseph Sparano; Eva Balslev; I-Chun Chen; Elisabeth Ida Specht Stovgaard; Katherine Pogue-Geile; Kim R M Blenman; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Stuart Schnitt; Sunil R Lakhani; Anne Vincent-Salomon; Federico Rojo; Jeremy P Braybrooke; Matthew G Hanna; M Teresa Soler-Monsó; Daniel Bethmann; Carlos A Castaneda; Karen Willard-Gallo; Ashish Sharma; Huang-Chun Lien; Susan Fineberg; Jeppe Thagaard; Laura Comerma; Paula Gonzalez-Ericsson; Edi Brogi; Sherene Loi; Joel Saltz; Frederick Klaushen; Lee Cooper; Mohamed Amgad; David A Moore; Roberto Salgado
Journal:  NPJ Breast Cancer       Date:  2020-05-12

Review 8.  Incorporation of clinical and biological factors improves prognostication and reflects contemporary clinical practice.

Authors:  Rashmi K Murthy; Juhee Song; Akshara S Raghavendra; Yisheng Li; Limin Hsu; Kenneth R Hess; Carlos H Barcenas; Vicente Valero; Robert W Carlson; Debu Tripathy; Gabriel N Hortobagyi
Journal:  NPJ Breast Cancer       Date:  2020-03-25
  8 in total
  4 in total

1.  Single-cell profile of tumor and immune cells in primary breast cancer, sentinel lymph node, and metastatic lymph node.

Authors:  Ning Liao; Cheukfai Li; Li Cao; Yanhua Chen; Chongyang Ren; Xiaoqing Chen; Hsiaopei Mok; Lingzhu Wen; Kai Li; Yulei Wang; Yuchen Zhang; Yingzi Li; Jiaoyi Lv; Fangrong Cao; Yuting Luo; Hongrui Li; Wendy Wu; Charles M Balch; Armando E Giuliano
Journal:  Breast Cancer       Date:  2022-09-21       Impact factor: 3.307

Review 2.  Systemic Therapy De-Escalation in Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Dawn of a New Era?

Authors:  Ravi Kumar Gupta; Arya Mariam Roy; Ashish Gupta; Kazuaki Takabe; Ajay Dhakal; Mateusz Opyrchal; Pawel Kalinski; Shipra Gandhi
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 6.575

3.  Prognostic value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in DCIS: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shuang-Ling Wu; Xinmiao Yu; Xiaoyun Mao; Feng Jin
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 4.638

Review 4.  Multiplexed In Situ Spatial Protein Profiling in the Pursuit of Precision Immuno-Oncology for Patients with Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Davide Massa; Anna Tosi; Antonio Rosato; Valentina Guarneri; Maria Vittoria Dieci
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-10-06       Impact factor: 6.575

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.