MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract PD5-08: Expression of LAG-3 in breast cancer, and its association with subtype and outcome

2017· article· en· W2592573955 on OpenAlexaff
S Burugu, Dongxia Gao, TO Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health Outcomes
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineImmune checkpointTumor-infiltrating lymphocytesContext (archaeology)CancerOncologyBreast carcinomaBiomarkerInternal medicinePathologyCancer researchBiologyImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim: To investigate the expression and clinical value of the immune checkpoint marker LAG-3 in breast cancer patients Background: Lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) is a recently discovered immune checkpoint biomarker that is targeted by agents currently being evaluated in early phase clinical trials. LAG-3 functions as a cell surface receptor expressed following T cell activation and negatively impacts T cell functions. This biomarker has not yet been evaluated in large series of breast cancers with long term treatment and outcome data, in the context of subtype and other immune biomarkers. Methods: Two tissue microarray series (a training set with N=330 and a validation set with N = 2203 patients) were constructed from breast carcinoma primary excision specimens from University of British Columbia hospitals, linked to detailed clinical and pathological data. None of these patients had received neoadjuvant treatment. 4µm sections were stained with an antibody to LAG-3 (clone 17B4) by immunohistochemistry using a Ventana Discovery Ultra automated slide stainer. LAG-3+ stromal and intra-epithelial tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were reported as absolute counts per tissue microarray core. Stromal TILs (sTIL) were defined as lymphocytes present in the stroma not in direct contact with tumor nest whereas intra-epithelial TIL (iTIL) were lymphocytes in direct contact with carcinoma cells. All descriptive and survival analyses were conducted using SPSS software. Results: LAG-3+ sTILs were found in 16% of breast cancer cases in both the training set and the validation set; LAG-3+iTILs were present in 14 and 11%, respectively. In both the training set and the validation set, the presence of LAG-3 (iTILs or sTILs) was significantly (p<0.001) associated with high grade tumors, estrogen and progesterone receptor negativity, high Ki67 index and with the HER2+ and basal-like subtypes. In survival analyses of ER negative patients, in both sets patients with LAG-3 T cells (iTILs or sTILs) had a significantly improved disease-specific survival (p<0.05). As with other lymphocyte biomarkers, this association was not observed among ER+ patients. Conclusions: LAG-3+TILs are present in breast cancer and are associated with major risk factors and hormone receptor negative subtypes. ER negative breast cancer patients have a better outcome if they contain LAG-3+ TILs, consistent with published data showing better survival among ER- breast cancer patients with immune infiltrates. More than a quarter of ER negative breast cancers contain TILs expressing LAG3, and may represent the most relevant subset to target with emerging checkpoint inhibitors targeting this T cell surface receptor. Citation Format: Burugu S, Gao D, Nielsen TO. Expression of LAG-3 in breast cancer, and its association with subtype and outcome [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD5-08.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.343 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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