The prognostic impact of PD-L1 and CD8 expression in anal cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression has been shown to be prognostic in many cancer types and used in consideration of checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy. However, there are very limited and conflicting data on the prognostic impact of PD-L1 in patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC). The objectives of this study were to measure the expression of PD-L1 and CD8 in patients with ASCC treated with radical chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and to correlate tumor expression with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Methods: Ninety-nine patients with ASCC treated with primary CRT at two tertiary care cancer centers between 2000 and 2013, with available pre-treatment tumors, were included. Tissue microarrays (TMAs) from pre-treatment tumor specimens were stained for PD-L1 and CD8. PD-L1 expression in the tumor and stroma was quantified using HALO image analysis software, and results were interpreted using quantitative methods. The density of CD8 cells within the tumor was interpreted by a trained pathologist semi-quantitatively, using a 0-4 scoring system. Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank was used to determine the significance in the association of tumor markers with PFS and OS. Cox multivariate analysis was used to explore independent predictors of PFS and OS. Results: Of the 99 patients, 63 (64%) had sufficient tumor samples available for full analysis. CD8 high status was documented in 32 of 63 (50.8%) % of cases. PD-L1 expression was positive in 88.9% of cases. Approximately half the patients had tumor PD-L1 ≥ 5%. Patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 5% had better OS vs those with lower expression, HR=0.32 (95% CI 0.11-0.87), p=0.027; 10 years OS: 84% for tumor PD-L1 ≥ 5% vs 49% for PD-L1 < 5%. PD-L1 expression was not associated with PFS. On multivariate analysis, tumor PD-L1 ≥ 5% showed a trend to statistical significance for better OS, HR=0.55 (95% CI 0.12- 1.00), p=0.052. Conclusions: Tumor PD-L1≥5% is associated with OS in patients with ASCC treated with CRT. PD-L1 expression status using this unique cut-point warrants further validation for prognostication in patients with this disease. Future studies are required to determine the benefit of alternative treatment strategies based on PD-L1 status.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".