Data from Immune Phenotype and Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractPurpose: Increasing tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) is associated with higher rates of pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, the presence of TILs does not consistently predict pCR, therefore, the current study was undertaken to more fully characterize the immune cell response and its association with pCR. Experimental Design: We obtained pretreatment core-needle biopsies from 105 patients with stage I–III TNBC enrolled in ARTEMIS (NCT02276443) who received NAT from Oct 22, 2015 through July 24, 2018. The tumor-immune microenvironment was comprehensively profiled by performing T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) IHC, multiplex immunofluorescence, and RNA sequencing on pretreatment tumor samples. The primary endpoint was pathologic response to NAT. Results: The pCR rate was 40% (42/105). Higher TCR clonality (median = 0.2 vs. 0.1, P = 0.03), PD-L1 positivity (OR: 2.91, P = 0.020), higher CD3+:CD68+ ratio (median = 14.70 vs. 8.20, P = 0.0128), and closer spatial proximity of T cells to tumor cells (median = 19.26 vs. 21.94 μm, P = 0.0169) were associated with pCR. In a multivariable model, closer spatial proximity of T cells to tumor cells and PD-L1 expression enhanced prediction of pCR when considered in conjunction with clinical stage. Conclusions: In patients receiving NAT for TNBC, deep immune profiling through detailed phenotypic characterization and spatial analysis can improve prediction of pCR in patients receiving NAT for TNBC when considered with traditional clinical parameters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".