MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P3-07-32: Tumour infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) and chemokine gene signature predicts for benefit of anthracycline-containing chemotherapy in breast cancer patients

2016· article· en· W2340583087 on OpenAlexaff
Marsela Braunstein, Caihong Yao, Nicola Lyttle, PC Boutros, C.J. Twelves, JMS Bartlett, Melanie Spears

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerAnthracyclineGene signatureTumor-infiltrating lymphocytesOncologyCancer researchCancerInternal medicineMedicineCTL*ChemokineImmunologyBiologyImmune systemImmunotherapyGene expressionGeneCD8

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: The contribution of immune cells has long been appreciated in tumour development and disease progression; however, their translational potential as cancer-associated prognostic and predictive markers was only recently recognized. High densities of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) correlate with improved clinical outcome in breast cancer; whether TILs also predict anthracycline benefit in all, or only a particular subgroup, of breast cancer patients remains largely unknown. Furthermore, since identification of TILs is generally based on H&E staining, it has not previously been possible to evaluate relative contribution of distinct T-cell types, and B cells, to patient outcome. Methods: We assessed 290 patient samples from the BR9601 adjuvant breast cancer trial for the capacity of TIL contexture to predict for anthracycline (E-CMF) benefit over CMF. We immunoprofiled patient samples on the Nanostring platform to gain insight into the impact of lymphocyte populations predicting for anthracycline benefit. Our immunoprofiling panel included 38 genes representing TIL-gene signatures and chemokines that may be responsible for recruiting TILs to the tumour site. Results: The analyses revealed two important findings. First, refinement of the 38-gene panel resulted in the generation of a novel 9-gene signature that includes cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL) and chemokine genes. Low CTL gene expression correlated with ER+ expression while high expression correlated with ER- expression (p<0.0001), consistent with the notion that high TIL densities are predominantly observed in non-luminal breast cancers. Second, in an univariate Cox regression analysis, this 9-gene signature was a predictive biomarker of anthracycline benefit with respect to breast-cancer specific OS (HR: 0.371, 95%CI 0.158-0.868, p=0.022) and DRFS (HR: 0.395, 95%CI 0.172-0.907, p=0.028); this effect was no longer significant after adjustment for other prognostic factors (OS HR: 0.437, 95%CI 0.166-1.150, p=0.094; DRFS HR: 0.488, 95%CI 0.185-1.287, p=0.147). Conclusion: This study highlights the significance of assessing the entire tumour since TILs, tumour and stromal cells collectively engage in a complex interplay that contributes to disease development and progression. Importantly, it reveals that not only CTLs but also chemokines may be clinically relevant and should be validated as potential biomarkers of anthracycline benefit and as therapeutic targets. Citation Format: Braunstein M, Yao C, Lyttle N, Liao L, Boutros PC, Twelves CJ, Bartlett JMS, Spears M. Tumour infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) and chemokine gene signature predicts for benefit of anthracycline-containing chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-07-32.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→