57 research outputs found

    Ki67 Index, HER2 Status, and Prognosis of Patients With Luminal B Breast Cancer

    Get PDF
    "Background Gene expression profiling of breast cancer has identified two biologically distinct estrogen receptor (ER)-positive subtypes of breast cancer: luminal A and luminal B. Luminal B tumors have higher proliferation and poorer prognosis than luminal A tumors. In this study, we developed a clinically practical immunohistochemistry assay to distinguish luminal B from luminal A tumors and investigated its ability to separate tumors according to breast cancer recurrence-free and disease-specific survival. Methods Tumors from a cohort of 357 patients with invasive breast carcinomas were subtyped by gene expression profile. Hormone receptor status, HER2 status, and the Ki67 index (percentage of Ki67-positive cancer nuclei) were determined immunohistochemically. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine the Ki67 cut point to distinguish luminal B from luminal A tumors. The prognostic value of the immunohistochemical assignment for breast cancer recurrence-free and disease-specific survival was investigated with an independent tissue microarray series of 4046 breast cancers by use of Kaplan–Meier curves and multivariable Cox regression. Results Gene expression profiling classified 101 (28%) of the 357 tumors as luminal A and 69 (19%) as luminal B. The best Ki67 index cut point to distinguish luminal B from luminal A tumors was 13.25%. In an independent cohort of 4046 patients with breast cancer, 2847 had hormone receptor–positive tumors. When HER2 immunohistochemistry and the Ki67 index were used to subtype these 2847 tumors, we classified 1530 (59%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 57% to 61%) as luminal A, 846 (33%, 95% CI = 31% to 34%) as luminal B, and 222 (9%, 95% CI = 7% to 10%) as luminal–HER2 positive. Luminal B and luminal–HER2-positive breast cancers were statistically significantly associated with poor breast cancer recurrence-free and disease-specific survival in all adjuvant systemic treatment categories. Of particular relevance are women who received tamoxifen as their sole adjuvant systemic therapy, among whom the 10-year breast cancer–specific survival was 79% (95% CI = 76% to 83%) for luminal A, 64% (95% CI = 59% to 70%) for luminal B, and 57% (95% CI = 47% to 69%) for luminal–HER2 subtypes. Conclusion Expression of ER, progesterone receptor, and HER2 proteins and the Ki67 index appear to distinguish luminal A from luminal B breast cancer subtypes.

    Breast cancer in neurofibromatosis type 1 : overrepresentation of unfavourable prognostic factors

    Get PDF
    Background: An increased breast cancer incidence and poor survival have been reported for women with neurofibromatosis 1 (NF1). To explain the poor survival, we aimed to link the histopathology and clinical characteristics of NF1-associated breast cancers. Methods: The Finnish Cancer Registry and the Finnish NF Registry were cross-referenced to identify the NF1 patients with breast cancer. Archival NF1 breast cancer specimens were retrieved for histopathological typing and compared with matched controls. Results: A total of 32 breast cancers were diagnosed in 1404 NF1 patients during the follow-up. Women with NF1 had an estimated lifetime risk of 18.0% for breast cancer, and this is nearly two-fold compared with that of the general Finnish female population (9.74%). The 26 successfully retrieved archival NF1 breast tumours were more often associated with unfavourable prognostic factors, such as oestrogen and progesterone receptor negativity and HER2 amplification. However, survival was worse in the NF1 group (P = 0.053) even when compared with the control group matched for age, diagnosis year, gender and oestrogen receptor status. Scrutiny of The Cancer Genome Atlas data set showed that NF1 mutations and deletions were associated with similar characteristics in the breast cancers of the general population. Conclusions: These results emphasise the role of the NF1 gene in the pathogenesis of breast cancer and a need for active follow-up for breast cancer in women with NF1.Peer reviewe

    Application of a risk-management framework for integration of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in clinical trials

    Get PDF

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

    Get PDF

    Application of a risk-management framework for integration of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in clinical trials

    Get PDF
    Stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) are a potential predictive biomarker for immunotherapy response in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). To incorporate sTILs into clinical trials and diagnostics, reliable assessment is essential. In this review, we propose a new concept, namely the implementation of a risk-management framework that enables the use of sTILs as a stratification factor in clinical trials. We present the design of a biomarker risk-mitigation workflow that can be applied to any biomarker incorporation in clinical trials. We demonstrate the implementation of this concept using sTILs as an integral biomarker in a single-center phase II immunotherapy trial for metastatic TNBC (TONIC trial, NCT02499367), using this workflow to mitigate risks of suboptimal inclusion of sTILs in this specific trial. In this review, we demonstrate that a web-based scoring platform can mitigate potential risk factors when including sTILs in clinical trials, and we argue that this framework can be applied for any future biomarker-driven clinical trial setting

    Pitfalls in machine learning‐based assessment of tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer: a report of the international immuno‐oncology biomarker working group

    Get PDF
    The clinical significance of the tumor-immune interaction in breast cancer (BC) has been well established, and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have emerged as a predictive and prognostic biomarker for patients with triple-negative (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 negative) breast cancer (TNBC) and HER2-positive breast cancer. How computational assessment of TILs can complement manual TIL-assessment in trial- and daily practices is currently debated and still unclear. Recent efforts to use machine learning (ML) for the automated evaluation of TILs show promising results. We review state-of-the-art approaches and identify pitfalls and challenges by studying the root cause of ML discordances in comparison to manual TILs quantification. We categorize our findings into four main topics; (i) technical slide issues, (ii) ML and image analysis aspects, (iii) data challenges, and (iv) validation issues. The main reason for discordant assessments is the inclusion of false-positive areas or cells identified by performance on certain tissue patterns, or design choices in the computational implementation. To aid the adoption of ML in TILs assessment, we provide an in-depth discussion of ML and image analysis including validation issues that need to be considered before reliable computational reporting of TILs can be incorporated into the trial- and routine clinical management of patients with TNBC
    • 

    corecore