Purpose Recent studies suggest that tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are associated with disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in operable triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). We seek to validate the prognostic impact of TILs in primary TNBCs in two adjuvant phase III trials conducted by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG). Patients and methods Full-face hematoxylin and eosin–stained sections of 506 tumors from ECOG trials E2197 and E1199 were evaluated for density of TILs in intraepithelial (iTILs) and stromal compartments (sTILs). Patient cases of TNBC from E2197 and E1199 were randomly selected based on availability of sections. For the primary end point of DFS, association with TIL scores was determined by fitting proportional hazards models stratified on study. Secondary end points were OS and distant recurrence–free interval (DRFI). Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies criteria were followed, and all analyses were prespecified. Results The majority of 481 evaluable cancers had TILs (sTILs, 80%; iTILs, 15%). With a median follow-up of 10.6 years, higher sTIL scores were associated with better prognosis; for every 10% increase in sTILs, a 14% reduction of risk of recurrence or death (P = .02), 18% reduction of risk of distant recurrence (P = .04), and 19% reduction of risk of death (P = .01) were observed. Multivariable analysis confirmed sTILs to be an independent prognostic marker of DFS, DRFI, and OS. Conclusion In two national randomized clinical trials using contemporary adjuvant chemotherapy, we confirm that stromal lymphocytic infiltration constitutes a robust prognostic factor in TNBCs. Studies assessing outcomes and therapeutic efficacies should consider stratification for this parameter.

Prognostic Value of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Triple-Negative Breast Cancers From Two Phase III Randomized Adjuvant Breast Cancer Trials: ECOG 2197 and ECOG 1199

A review of prognostic and predictive biomarkers in breast cancer

Comparison of three FDA-approved diagnostic immunohistochemistry assays of PD-L1 in triple-negative breast carcinoma.

How low can you go? PD-L1 expression as a biomarker in trials of cancer immunotherapy.

The approval of anti-PD-L1 drugs, including atezolizumab/pembrolizumab in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), potentially improveme treatment regimens available for TNBC.We conducted a meta-analysis to review the efficacy of atezolizumab/pembrolizumab for the treatment of TNBC in both the adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings. We calculated standardized mean difference (SMD) for the associations of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and odds ratios (ORs) to estimate objective response rate (ORR) and pathological complete response (pCR), using 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Six clinical trials comprising 3612 patients were included. For adjuvant therapies, the ORR (OR = 1.26, P = 0.04) of atezolizumab/pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was higher in the intention to treat (ITT) arms than the placebo groups in TNBC. A positive effect size was found for PFS in the ITT arms (d = 1.55, P < 0.001). The atezolizumab plus chemotherapy group had a positive effect size for OS compared to control groups (d = 0.52, P < 0.001). In the neoadjuvant setting, patients in ITT arms had higher pCR rates than the control groups (OR = 1.61, P = 0.001).We collate evidence of atezolizumab/pembrolizumab as viable therapeutics among patients with TNBC with PD-L1 subgroups deriving higher benefits.PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), atezolizumab and pembrolizumab, have received approval for patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) expressing PD-L1. Thus far, it has only been approved for patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC. With the IMpassion 130 and KEYNOTE-355 trials introducing the immunotherapy era for TNBC, ongoing trials have started exploring the outcomes of the ICIs in early-stage TNBC in combination. Recently, the ICIs have demonstrated positive efficacy outcomes in neoadjuvant settings. Both the ICIs have shown a safe profile in terms of adverse events. The recent advances made by clinical trials indicate promising results for early-stage and advanced/metastatic TNBC. However, there is a need to harmonize and explore biomarkers and endpoints in the ongoing clinical trials to enhance patient treatment protocols. As TNBC is an aggressive subtype, exploring beyond the PD-L1 positive subgroup is necessary to expand the target population receiving ICIs for TNBC. 

Atezolizumab and pembrolizumab in triple-negative breast cancer: a meta-analysis

In the evaluation of PD-L1 expression to select patients for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment, uniform guidelines that account for different immunohistochemistry assays, different cell types and different cutoff values across tumor types are lacking Data on how different scoring methods compare in breast cancer are scant Using FDA-approved 22C3 diagnostic immunohistochemistry assay, we retrospectively evaluated PD-L1 expression in 496 primary invasive breast tumors that were not exposed to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment and compared three scoring methods (TC: invasive tumor cells; IC: tumor-infiltrating immune cells; TCIC: a combination of tumor cells and immune cells) in expression frequency and association with clinicopathologic factors In the entire cohort, positive PD-L1 expression was observed in 20% of patients by TCIC, 16% by IC, and 10% by TC, with a concordance of 87% between the three methods In the triple-negative breast cancer patients, positive PD-L1 expression was observed in 35% by TCIC, 31% by IC, and 16% by TC, with a concordance of 76% Associations between PD-L1 and clinicopathologic factors were investigated according to receptor groups and whether the patients had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy The three scoring methods showed differences in their associations with clinicopathologic factors in all subgroups studied Positive PD-L1 expression by IC was significantly associated with worse overall survival in patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and showed a trend for worse overall survival and distant metastasis-free survival in triple-negative patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy Positive PD-L1 expression by TCIC and TC also showed trends for worse survival in different subgroups Our findings indicate that the three scoring methods with a 1% cutoff are different in their sensitivity for PD-L1 expression and their associations with clinicopathologic factors Scoring by TCIC is the most sensitive way to identify PD-L1-positive breast cancer by immunohistochemistry As a prognostic marker, our study suggests that PD-L1 is associated with worse clinical outcome, most often shown by the IC score; however, the other scores may also have clinical implications in some subgroups Large clinical trials are needed to test the similarities and differences of these scoring methods for their predictive values in anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy

/pdf/comparison-of-three-scoring-methods-using-the-fda-approved-wejdw1o95h.pdf

Comparison of three scoring methods using the FDA-approved 22C3 immunohistochemistry assay to evaluate PD-L1 expression in breast cancer and their association with clinicopathologic factors

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Hui Liu

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Comparison of three scoring methods using the FDA-approved 22C3 immunohistochemistry assay to evaluate PD-L1 expression in breast cancer and their association with clinicopathologic factors