17 research outputs found

    CXCL1: A new diagnostic biomarker for human tuberculosis discovered using Diversity Outbred mice.

    Get PDF
    More humans have died of tuberculosis (TB) than any other infectious disease and millions still die each year. Experts advocate for blood-based, serum protein biomarkers to help diagnose TB, which afflicts millions of people in high-burden countries. However, the protein biomarker pipeline is small. Here, we used the Diversity Outbred (DO) mouse population to address this gap, identifying five protein biomarker candidates. One protein biomarker, serum CXCL1, met the World Health Organization\u27s Targeted Product Profile for a triage test to diagnose active TB from latent M.tb infection (LTBI), non-TB lung disease, and normal sera in HIV-negative, adults from South Africa and Vietnam. To find the biomarker candidates, we quantified seven immune cytokines and four inflammatory proteins corresponding to highly expressed genes unique to progressor DO mice. Next, we applied statistical and machine learning methods to the data, i.e., 11 proteins in lungs from 453 infected and 29 non-infected mice. After searching all combinations of five algorithms and 239 protein subsets, validating, and testing the findings on independent data, two combinations accurately diagnosed progressor DO mice: Logistic Regression using MMP8; and Gradient Tree Boosting using a panel of 4: CXCL1, CXCL2, TNF, IL-10. Of those five protein biomarker candidates, two (MMP8 and CXCL1) were crucial for classifying DO mice; were above the limit of detection in most human serum samples; and had not been widely assessed for diagnostic performance in humans before. In patient sera, CXCL1 exceeded the triage diagnostic test criteria (\u3e90% sensitivity; \u3e70% specificity), while MMP8 did not. Using Area Under the Curve analyses, CXCL1 averaged 94.5% sensitivity and 88.8% specificity for active pulmonary TB (ATB) vs LTBI; 90.9% sensitivity and 71.4% specificity for ATB vs non-TB; and 100.0% sensitivity and 98.4% specificity for ATB vs normal sera. Our findings overall show that the DO mouse population can discover diagnostic-quality, serum protein biomarkers of human TB

    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

    Spatial analyses of immune cell infiltration in cancer : current methods and future directions. A report of the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group on Breast Cancer

    Get PDF
    Modern histologic imaging platforms coupled with machine learning methods have provided new opportunities to map the spatial distribution of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. However, there exists no standardized method for describing or analyzing spatial immune cell data, and most reported spatial analyses are rudimentary. In this review, we provide an overview of two approaches for reporting and analyzing spatial data (raster versus vector-based). We then provide a compendium of spatial immune cell metrics that have been reported in the literature, summarizing prognostic associations in the context of a variety of cancers. We conclude by discussing two well-described clinical biomarkers, the breast cancer stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes score and the colon cancer Immunoscore, and describe investigative opportunities to improve clinical utility of these spatial biomarkers. © 2023 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.http://www.thejournalofpathology.com/hj2024ImmunologySDG-03:Good heatlh and well-bein

    Spatial analyses of immune cell infiltration in cancer : current methods and future directions. A report of the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group on Breast Cancer

    No full text

    Spatial analyses of immune cell infiltration in cancer: current methods and future directions. A report of the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group on Breast Cancer

    No full text
    Abstract Modern histologic imaging platforms coupled with machine learning methods have provided new opportunities to map the spatial distribution of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. However, there exists no standardized method for describing or analyzing spatial immune cell data, and most reported spatial analyses are rudimentary. In this review, we provide an overview of two approaches for reporting and analyzing spatial data (raster versus vector‐based). We then provide a compendium of spatial immune cell metrics that have been reported in the literature, summarizing prognostic associations in the context of a variety of cancers. We conclude by discussing two well‐described clinical biomarkers, the breast cancer stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes score and the colon cancer Immunoscore, and describe investigative opportunities to improve clinical utility of these spatial biomarkers. © 2023 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland
    corecore