| Literature DB >> 35842661 |
Wei-Tong Zhang1, Gui-Lu Zhu2, Wu-Qin Xu2, Wei Zhang2, Hui-Zhen Wang1, Ya-Bing Wang3, Yong-Xiang Li4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Causative factors of breast cancer include infections, such as Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinicopathological features of EBV-positive (IBC) and determine if EBV affects programmed cell death receptor 1 (PD-1)/PD ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in IBC, similar to other EBV-infected tumors with PD-L1/PD-1 expression.Entities:
Keywords: Breast cancer; Epstein-Barr virus; Immunotherapy; PD-1; PD-L1
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35842661 PMCID: PMC9287995 DOI: 10.1186/s13000-022-01234-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagn Pathol ISSN: 1746-1596 Impact factor: 3.196
Clinicopathologic characteristics of patients by EBV status
| Clinicopathologic parameters | IBC tissue EBER-ISH | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | ||
| age | 0.705 | ||
| ≤ 50 | 15 (37.5%) | 25(62.5%) | |
| >50 | 42(42.0%) | 58(52.0%) | |
| tumor size | 0.043 | ||
| ≤ 2.0 cm | 28 (33.7%) | 55 (66.3%) | |
| > 2.0 cm | 29 (50.9%) | 28 (49.1%) | |
| Menopausal status | < 0.01 | ||
| postmenopausal | 22 (23.7%) | 71 (76.3%) | |
| menstruating | 35 (74.5%) | 12 (25.5%) | |
| Histological subtype | 0.302 | ||
| IDC | 48 (42.9%) | 64 (57.1%) | |
| ILC | 9 (32.1%) | 19 (67.9%) | |
| Histological classification of IDC | 0.22 | ||
| I | 7 (24.1%) | 22 (75.9%) | |
| II | 15 (42.9%) | 20 (57.1%) | |
| III | 26 (54.2%) | 22 (45.8%) | |
| Nodal metastasis | < 0.01 | ||
| Present | 37 (59.7%) | 25 (40.3%) | |
| Absent | 20 (25.6%) | 58 (74.4%) | |
| Lymphovascular Invasion | < 0.01 | ||
| Present | 31 (72.1%) | 12 (27.9%) | |
| Absent | 26 (26.8%) | 71 (73.2%) | |
| Ki-67 Index | 0.006 | ||
| <14% | 7 (21.2%) | 26(78.8%) | |
| >14% | 50(57.1%) | 57(53.3%) | |
| TNM Clinical Stage | < 0.01 | ||
| I ~ II | 19 (19.4%) | 79 (80.6%) | |
| III ~ IV | 38 (90.5%) | 4 (9.5%) | |
| ER | 0.05 | ||
| Positive | 25(30.5%) | 57(69.5%) | |
| Negative | 32(55.2%) | 26(44.8%) | |
| PR | 0.09 | ||
| Positive | 7 (15.2%) | 26 (84.8%) | |
| Negative | 50(46.7%) | 57(53.3%) | |
| HER-2 | 0.078 | ||
| Positive | 20(54.1%) | 17(45.9%) | |
| Negative | 37(35.6%) | 66(64.4) | |
Fig. 1EBER-CISH technique in IBC: A EBER positive in invasive ductal carcinoma of grade I 200× B EBER positive in pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of grade I 200× C EBER positive in invasive ductal carcinoma of grade III 400× D EBER positive in invasive ductal carcinoma of grade III Magnification: 200×
Fig. 2Immunohistochemistry in IBC: A PD-1 positive in in the stroma of IBC of grade III Magnification: 200× B PD-L1 positive in tumor stroma of basal cell-like breast cancer 200× C PD-L1 positive in basal cell-like tumor cell 400×
Clinicopathologic characteristics of patients by PD-L1 expression
| Clinicopathologic parameters | PD-L1 in TC |
| PD-L1 in IC |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | Positive | Negative | |||
| age | 0.01 | 0.06 | ||||
| ≤ 50 | 12(30.0%) | 28(70%) | 9(22.5%) | 31(77.5%) | ||
| >50 | 11(11.0%) | 89(89%) | 10(10.0%) | 90(90.0%) | ||
| tumor size | 0.221 | 0.101 | ||||
| ≤ 2.0 cm | 11 (13.3%) | 72 (86.7%) | 8(9.6%) | 75 (90.4%) | ||
| > 2.0 cm | 12 (21.1%) | 45 (78.9%) | 11 (19.3%) | 46 (80.7%) | ||
| Menopausal status | 0.011 | 0.001 | ||||
| postmenopausal | 10 (10.8%) | 83 (89.2%) | 9 (9.7%) | 84(90.3%) | ||
| menstruating | 13 (27.7%) | 34 (72.3%) | 10(21.3%) | 37(78.7%) | ||
| Histological subtype | 0.138 | 0.459 | ||||
| IDC | 21(18.8%) | 91(81.2%) | 14(13.0%) | 98(87.0%) | ||
| ILC | 2(7.1%) | 26(92.9%) | 5(17.9%) | 23(82.1%) | ||
| Histological classification of IDC | 0.117 | 0.001 | ||||
| I | 3 (10.3%) | 26 (89.7%) | 0(0.0%) | 29(100.0%) | ||
| II | 6 (17.1%) | 29 (82.9%) | 4(11.4%) | 31(88.6%) | ||
| III | 12 (25.0%) | 36(75.0%) | 10(20.8%) | 38(79.2%) | ||
| Nodal metastasis | < 0.01 | 0.066 | ||||
| Present | 19(30.6%) | 43(69.4%) | 12(19.4%) | 50(80.6%) | ||
| Absent | 4(5.1%) | 74(94.9%) | 7(9.0%) | 71(91.0%) | ||
| Lymphovascular Invasion | < 0.01 | < 0.01 | ||||
| Present | 18(41.9%) | 25(58.1%) | 14 (32.6%) | 29 (67.4%) | ||
| Absent | 5(5.1%) | 92(94.9%) | 5 (5.1%) | 92 (94.9%) | ||
| Ki-67 Index | 0.064 | 0.076 | ||||
| <14% | 9(27.2%) | 24(72.3%) | 8(24.2%) | 25(75.8) | ||
| >14% | 14(13.1%) | 93 (86.9%) | 11(10.3%) | 96(89.7%) | ||
| TNM Clinical Stage | < 0.01 | < 0.01 | ||||
| I ~ II | 7 (7.1%) | 91 (92.9%) | 6(6.1%) | 92(93.9%) | ||
| III ~ IV | 16 (38.1%) | 26 (61.9%) | 13(31.0%) | 29(69.0%) | ||
| ER | 0.001 | < 0.01 | ||||
| Positive | 6(7.3%) | 76(92.7%) | 2(2.4%) | 80(97.6) | ||
| Negative | 17(29.3%) | 41(70.7%) | 17(29.3%) | 41(70.7%) | ||
| PR | 0.104 | 0.007 | ||||
| Positive | 2(6.1%) | 31(93.9%) | 0(0%) | 33(100%) | ||
| Negative | 21(19.6%) | 86(80.4%) | 19(17.8%) | 88(82.2%) | ||
| HER-2 | 0.596 | 0.004 | ||||
| Positive | 6(16.2%) | 31(83.8%) | 5(13.5%) | 32(86.5%) | ||
| Negative | 17(16.5%) | 86(83.5%) | 14(13.6%) | 89(86.4%) | ||
Clinicopathologic characteristics of patients by PD-1 expression
| Clinicopathologic parameters | PD-1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | ||
| age | 0.01 | ||
| ≤ 50 | 7 (17.5%) | 33(82.5%) | |
| >50 | 12(12.0%) | 88(88.0%) | |
| tumor size | 0.416 | ||
| ≤ 2.0 cm | 11 (13.3%) | 72 (86.7%) | |
| > 2.0 cm | 8(14.0%) | 49(86.0%) | |
| Menopausal status | 0.171 | ||
| postmenopausal | 10(10.8%) | 83(89.2%) | |
| menstruating | 9(19.1%) | 38(80.9%) | |
| Histological subtype | 0.902 | ||
| IDC | 15(13.4%) | 97(86.6%) | |
| ILC | 4(14.3%) | 24(85.7%) | |
| Histological classification of IDC | 0.243 | ||
| I | 2(6.9%) | 27 (93.1%) | |
| II | 7 (20.0%) | 28 (80%) | |
| III | 6 (12.5%) | 42 (87.5%) | |
| Nodal metastasis | < 0.01 | ||
| Present | 16 (25.8%) | 46 (74.2%) | |
| Absent | 3 (3.8%) | 75 (96.2%) | |
| Lymphovascular Invasion | < 0.01 | ||
| Present | 16 (37.2%) | 27 (62.8%) | |
| Absent | 3 (3.1%) | 94 (96.9%) | |
| Ki-67 Index | 0.019 | ||
| <14% | 9 (27.2%) | 24(72.8%) | |
| >14% | 10(9.3%) | 97(90.7%) | |
| TNM Clinical Stage | < 0.01 | ||
| I ~ II | 6 (6.1%) | 92 (93.9%) | |
| III ~ IV | 13 (31.0%) | 29 (69.0%) | |
| ER | 0.047 | ||
| Positive | 7(8.5%) | 75(91.5%) | |
| Negative | 12(25.0%) | 46(75.0%) | |
| PR | 0.161 | ||
| Positive | 2(6.1%) | 31(93.9%) | |
| Negative | 17(15.9%) | 90(84.1%) | |
| HER-2 | 0.596 | ||
| Positive | 6(16.2%) | 31(83.8%) | |
| Negative | 17(16.5%) | 86(83.5%) | |
Correlation between the status of EBV infection and PD1/PDL1
| IBC tissue EBER-ISH (+) | IBC tissue EBER-ISH (−) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| PD-L1(+) in TC | 18 (78.3%) | 5 (21.7%) | < 0.01 |
| PD-L1(−) in TC | 39 (33.3%) | 78 (66.7%) | |
| PD-L1(+) in IC | 16 (84.2%) | 3 (15.8%) | < 0.01 |
| PD-L1(−) in IC | 41 (33.9%) | 80 (66.1%) | |
| PD-1 (+) | 17 (89.5%) | 2 (10.5%) | < 0.01 |
| PD-1 (−) | 40 (33.1%) | 81(66.9%) |
Fig. 3A&B Kaplan–Meier estimates of DSF and OS of IBC patients according to IBC tissue EBER-ISH; C&D Kaplan–Meier estimates of DSF and OS of IBC patients according to TC-PD-L1; E&F Kaplan–Meier estimates of DSF and OS of IBC patients according to IC-PD-L1; G&H Kaplan–Meier estimates of DSF and OS of IBC patients according to PD-L1
Fig. 4A&B Kaplan–Meier estimates of DSF and OS of double positive for EBV and TC-PD-L1 IBC patients compared to cases that were double negative or single positive IBC patients. C&D Kaplan–Meier estimates of DSF and OS of double positive for EBV and IC-PD-L1 IBC patients compared to cases that were double negative or single positive IBC patients. E&F Kaplan–Meier estimates of DSF and OS of double positive for EBV and PD-1 IBC patients compared to cases that were double negative or single positive IBC patients