Optimized tumour infiltrating lymphocyte assessment for triple negative breast cancer prognostics.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ adverse effects
Artificial Intelligence
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ analysis
Breast Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Cohort Studies
Female
Humans
Immunohistochemistry
Lymphocytes, Tumor-Infiltrating
/ drug effects
Mastectomy
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
Netherlands
Prognosis
Retrospective Studies
Survival Rate
Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Tumor Microenvironment
Artificial intelligence
Multispectral imaging
Prognosis
Triple negative breast cancer
Tumour infiltrating lymphocytes
Journal
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland)
ISSN: 1532-3080
Titre abrégé: Breast
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9213011
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2021
Apr 2021
Historique:
received:
25
09
2020
revised:
05
02
2021
accepted:
08
02
2021
pubmed:
1
3
2021
medline:
18
9
2021
entrez:
28
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The tumour microenvironment has been shown to be a valuable source of prognostic information for different cancer types. This holds in particular for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), a breast cancer subtype for which currently no prognostic biomarkers are established. Although different methods to assess tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have been published, it remains unclear which method (marker, region) yields the most optimal prognostic information. In addition, to date, no objective TILs assessment methods are available. For this proof of concept study, a subset of our previously described TNBC cohort (n = 94) was stained for CD3, CD8 and FOXP3 using multiplex immunohistochemistry and subsequently imaged by a multispectral imaging system. Advanced whole-slide image analysis algorithms, including convolutional neural networks (CNN) were used to register unmixed multispectral images and corresponding H&E sections, to segment the different tissue compartments (tumour, stroma) and to detect all individual positive lymphocytes. Densities of positive lymphocytes were analysed in different regions within the tumour and its neighbouring environment and correlated to relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). We found that for all TILs markers the presence of a high density of positive cells correlated with an improved survival. None of the TILs markers was superior to the others. The results of TILs assessment in the various regions did not show marked differences between each other. The negative correlation between TILs and survival in our cohort are in line with previous studies. Our results provide directions for optimizing TILs assessment methodology.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33640523
pii: S0960-9776(21)00021-7
doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2021.02.007
pmc: PMC7933536
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
78-87Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest Jeroen van der Laak is member of the scientific advisory boards of Philips, the Netherlands and ContextVision, Sweden and receives research funding from Philips, the Netherlands and Sectra, Sweden. Geert Litjens received research funding from Philips Digital Pathology Solutions (Best, the Netherlands) and has a consultancy role for Novartis (Basel, Switzerland). The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Références
Ann Oncol. 2015 Feb;26(2):259-71
pubmed: 25214542
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Sep 20;34(27):3308-14
pubmed: 27480155
Clin Breast Cancer. 2009 Feb;9(1):29-33
pubmed: 19299237
NPJ Breast Cancer. 2020 May 12;6:17
pubmed: 32411819
Breast. 2018 Feb;37:207-214
pubmed: 28363679
J Clin Oncol. 2011 May 20;29(15):1949-55
pubmed: 21483002
Histopathology. 1991 Nov;19(5):403-10
pubmed: 1757079
Cancer Res. 2016 Jun 15;76(12):3496-506
pubmed: 27197179
BMJ. 2015 Oct 28;351:h5527
pubmed: 26511519
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 Aug 17;97(16):1180-4
pubmed: 16106022
Sci Rep. 2019 Jan 29;9(1):864
pubmed: 30696866
Lancet. 2018 May 26;391(10135):2128-2139
pubmed: 29754777
Ann Oncol. 2014 Aug;25(8):1544-50
pubmed: 24608200
Cell Oncol (Dordr). 2019 Aug;42(4):555-569
pubmed: 30989469
J Cancer. 2017 Feb 25;8(5):761-773
pubmed: 28382138
Methods. 2014 Nov;70(1):46-58
pubmed: 25242720
Ann Oncol. 2014 Aug;25(8):1536-43
pubmed: 24915873
Adv Anat Pathol. 2017 Sep;24(5):235-251
pubmed: 28777142
Ann Oncol. 2015 Aug;26(8):1698-704
pubmed: 25995301
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Jul;158(2):323-31
pubmed: 27372069
Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Aug 1;13(15 Pt 1):4429-34
pubmed: 17671126
J Clin Oncol. 2019 Mar 1;37(7):559-569
pubmed: 30650045
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Apr 1;28(10):1684-91
pubmed: 20194857
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 May;163(1):21-35
pubmed: 28233108
Ann Diagn Pathol. 2020 Jun;46:151490
pubmed: 32179443
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2016 Sep;63(9):1812-1819
pubmed: 26625400
Br J Cancer. 2013 Jan 15;108(1):155-62
pubmed: 23169287