Tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are regarded as significant prognostic markers in patients with breast cancer. However, the prognostic utility of TIL expression based on the intrinsic subtypes has just been identified. The present study investigated the relationship between TIL grades and prognosis in 294 Japanese paitents with breast cancer stratified based on the intrinsic subtypes and clinicopathological characteristics. Stromal TIL status was evaluated using haematoxylin and eosin staining, and TIL grades were categorised into low (<10%), intermediate (≥10 and ≤40%) and high (>40%) groups. The relationship between TIL expression and the intrinsic subtypes, clinicopathological characteristics and patient prognosis was analyzed. It was revealed that high TIL expression was correlated with negative oestrogen receptor (ER) expression and high histological grade (P<0.001). Among the ER-negative patients, the relapse-free survival (RFS) rate of the high-grade TIL group was significantly higher than that of the low-grade TIL group (P=0.04). Among the ER-negative patients without lymph node metastasis, RFS and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates of patients with high-grade TILs were significantly higher than the RFS and CSS rates of patients with low-grade TILs (P=0.01). However, among ER-positive patients, RFS was significantly higher in the low-grade TIL group than in the high-grade TIL group (P=0.02). In conclusion, TIL expression correlated with ER status and tumour proliferation. High TIL expression was a poor prognostic marker in ER-positive patients but was a good prognostic marker in ER-negative patients. Therefore, the biological association between TILs and primary breast tumours may differ between ER-positive and ER-negative breast cancer.
breast cancerprognosisoestrogen receptortumour-infiltrating lymphocyteslymph node metastasisIntroduction
In immune cell infiltration in breast cancer tissue, the expression of tumour-related immune cells differed greatly among different breast cancer subtypes and patients (1). Lymphocyte-predominant breast cancer (LPBC) is defined as a presentation wherein at least 50% of the tumour tissue is invaded by tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). LPBC was observed in 20% of triple-negative breast cancers, 16% of HER2-positive tumours and 6% of the hormonal receptor (HR)-positive tumours (1). Since the 1970s, studies have attempted to understand the basic function of TILs in cancer as immune response in cancer tissue has been driven by the specific functions of TILs (2). Moreover, the variety of immune cells is believed to contribute to drug sensitivity and prognosis in breast cancer patients. In 2006, Galon et al were the first to report that in situ TIL expression could serve as a strong prognostic marker for colorectal and breast cancer (3). Thereafter, many retrospective studies reported that TIL expression in breast cancer could predict the efficacy of drug therapy and prognosis (4–9). Although the methods to quantify TIL expression and cut-off TIL values in breast cancer tissues varied among studies and have not been clearly standardised, the International Working Group of TILs published the first guidelines for a TIL evaluation in 2014 (10). Accordingly, mononuclear immune cells located between tumour nests, i.e., within the tumour stroma, are defined as stromal TILs (str-TILs). The International TILs Working Group recommended that str-TIL expression should be graded as low (str-TILs: <10%), intermediate (str-TILs: ≥10 and ≤40%) and high (str-TILs: >40%) based on their relative abundance within the tumour stroma. However, there is no sufficient evidence to support the efficacy of this classification. In the present study, we evaluated the relationship of TIL grades with clinicopathological characteristics of breast cancer patients and prognosis based on the guidelines of the International TILs Working Group.
Patients and methodsPatient background
A total of 294 consecutive female patients, diagnosed as invasive breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery or modified radical mastectomy without neoadjuvant treatment at Saitama Cancer Centre between January 2000 and December 2001, were enrolled in this retrospective study. After the evaluation of intrinsic subtypes, patients with bilateral breast cancer were excluded from the study. Clinicopathological data on pathological tumour size, the status of pathological lymph node metastasis and clinical course were extracted from the patient medical records. This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and after the approval by the Institutional Review Board of the Saitama Cancer Centre (nos. 231, 483 and 534). All patients enrolled provided written comprehensive informed consent.
Evaluation of str-TILs
Surgical specimens were fixed in buffered formalin solution, cut to 4-µm-thick slices and stained with haematoxylin and eosin. Using an optical microscope with ×200 and ×400 magnification, a surgical pathologist specialising in breast pathology (MK) quantified str-TILs. Str-TIL expression was classified into the following three grades per the International TILs Working Group (10) criteria: Low (str-TILs: <10%), intermediate (str-TILs: ≥10 and ≤40%) and high (str-TILs: >40%; Fig. 1A-C).
Procedures and evaluation of the expression of oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor and HER2
The following antibodies were used for immunostaining: 1D5 (Dako, Glostrup, Denmark) for ER, PgR636 (Dako) for progesterone receptor (PgR) and Hercep Test (Dako) for HER2. For evaluation of HER2 gene amplification, dual in situ hybridisation (DISH) was performed with INFORM HER2 Dual ISH DNA Probe Cocktail assay (Ventana Medical Systems, Inc., Tuscon, AZ, USA). ER, PgR and HER2 expression were evaluated in accordance with the American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists (11,12) criteria. In addition, the degree of ER and PgR staining ≥1% and the specimen was determined as positive. The proportional scores of cells membrane HER2 staining intensity were as follows: scores 0, 1+, 2+ and 3+. HER2 immunostaining with a score of 2+ was subjected to a DISH assay to assess the gene amplification of HER2. A HER2 score of 2+/DISH positive or 3+ was defined as HER2-positive cancer. Patients with ER-positive and/or PgR-positive breast cancer were defined as a hormonal receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer.
Statistical analysis
The relationship between TIL grades and various clinicopathological factors, including ER, PgR and HER2 expression was analysed by Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. The log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier method were used to estimate relapse-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). RFS was defined as the length of time from the day of surgery to any tumour recurrence (including locoregional recurrence). CSS was defined as the period from the day of surgery until the time of death caused by the progression of breast cancer. In the multivariate analysis, 95% confidence intervals for the relationship between TIL grades and clinicopathological factors were obtained using a logistic regression test. The relationship between TIL grades and prognosis were obtained using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS v22.0 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). P<0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.
ResultsPatient and tumour characteristics
The median age of the 294 patients enrolled in the study was 55 years (age range, 25–87 years). Of these patients, 171 (58.2%) were in postmenopausal state, 134 (45.6%) had positive pathological nodes (pN), 162 (55.1%) had a histological grade 3 tumour, 213 (72.4%) had HR-positive breast cancer, 176 (59.8%) underwent adjuvant endocrine therapy, 158 (53.7%) underwent adjuvant chemotherapy and 47 (16.0%) were diagnosed with HER2-positive breast cancer (Table I). There were no patients with HER2-positive who received adjuvant trastuzumab therapy since adjuvant trastuzumab administration had not been approved in Japan before 2008.
Relationship between TIL expression and clinicopathological characteristics
Of the patients assessed, 32 (10.9%), 44 (15.0%) and 218 (74.1%) patients have high, intermediate and low TIL expression, respectively. In both the HER2-negative and HER2-positive patients, only 3.3% had high TIL expression. In the HR-negative group, 30.9% had high TIL expression (Table II). The rate of high TIL expression was significantly higher in the HR-negative group than in the HR-positive group (P<0.001). A univariate analysis identified that the ER (P<0.001), PgR (P<0.001) and HER2 (P=0.004) status and histological grade (P<0.001) were significant (Table III). High TIL expression was significantly associated with ER-negative, PgR-negative, HER2-positive and histological grade 3 tumours. On the other hand, multivariate analysis confirmed that TIL expression was significantly higher in patients with ER-negative (P<0.001) and histological grade 3 (P=0.03) tumours (Table III).
Prognostic significance of TIL expression
The analysis identified that the median of RFS was 127 (range, 1–147 months), and median of CSS was 130 (range, 4–149 months). TIL expression was not a significant prognostic factor when the analysis included the entire study cohort of breast cancer patients. Multivariate analysis confirmed that high TIL expression was not an independent prognostic marker (Table IV). TIL expression was not a significant prognostic marker in the HER2-positive breast cancer patient (RFS, P=0.67; CSS, P=0.87; Fig. 2A and B). Additionally, in the HR-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer patients, no significant difference in survival was recognised between the high- and low-grade TIL patients (RFS, P=0.50; CSS, P=0.94; Fig. 2C and D). Among the triple-negative breast cancer patients, the RFS and CSS were higher in the high-grade TIL group compared with the low-TIL group, although the difference was not significant (RFS, P=0.16; CSS, P=0.13; Fig. 2E and F). By contrast, among the ER-negative breast cancer patients, the RFS was significantly higher in the high-grade TIL group than in the low-grade TIL group (RFS, P=0.04; CSS, P=0.07; Fig. 3A and B). Conversely, among the ER-positive breast cancer patients, the RFS was significantly higher in the low-grade TIL group than in the high-grade TIL group with nonsignificant difference in the CSS (RFS, P=0.02; CSS, P=0.18; Fig. 3C and D).
Among the pN-negative patients, none of the cases with a high TIL score had recurrence. Moreover, the RFS and the CCS tended to be higher in the high-grade TIL group than in the low-grade TIL group (RFS, P=0.07; CSS, P=0.10; Fig. 4A and B). However, TIL expression was not a prognostic indicator in the pN-positive patients (RFS, P=0.17; CSS, P=0.14; Fig. 4C and D). Among the ER-negative and pN-negative patients, the RFS and CCS were significantly higher in the high-grade TIL group than in the low-grade TIL group (RFS, P=0.01; CSS, P=0.01; Fig. 5A and B). Conversely, TIL expression was not recognised as a prognostic factor in ER-negative and pN-positive patients (RFS, P=0.49; CSS, P=0.74; Fig. 5C and D).
Discussion
It has been revealed that patients with invasive breast cancer and high TIL expression, those with ER-negative and high histological grade tumours were significantly more common. Moreover, TIL expression level was a strong prognostic marker for ER-negative breast cancer. Among different breast cancer subtypes, ER-negative breast cancer and a subtype with high-grade malignancy exhibit extremely high growth potential. In the Breast International Group (BIG) 2–98 trial, Loi et al reported that TIL expression was a prognostic marker for ER-negative patients, especially those with triple-negative breast cancer (13). Adams et al (14) demonstrated that TIL expression was a strong prognostic marker for triple-negative breast cancer in the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 2197 and ECOG 1199 trials. Loi et al (15) conducted an meta-analysis of the efficacy of TIL expression as a prognostic marker in triple-negative breast cancer patients enrolled in large-scale trials, such as these trials and the Finland Herceptin Trial (FinHER) (16) and reported that TIL expression was a prognostic factor in triple-negative breast cancer. Therefore, most of the studies that showed the efficacy of TIL expression, as a predictor of prognosis and drug efficacy, were retrospective. We believe that a prospective clinical trial is necessary to clarify the real utility of TIL expression as a prognostic marker.
We found that survival was significantly higher in the low-grade TIL group than in the high-grade TIL group among ER-positive breast cancer patients. Recent studies on large cohorts reported that high TIL expression was a poor prognostic factor in ER-positive breast cancer (17). Consistent with these studies, morphological TIL heterogeneity is frequent in ER-positive patients compared with ER-negative patients (18). It is possible that this intra-tumour heterogeneity may affect the expression patterns of immune cells, thereby underlying the difference in the prognostic significance of TIL expression between ER-positive and ER-negative breast cancer patient. To ascertain different roles associated with various TIL types, immunohistochemical analysis of TILs is necessary to determine the distribution of immune cells (19). In addition, the tumour mutational burden is associated with tumour immunity (20) and a high level of the mutational load is associated with poor outcomes in patients with ER-positive tumours (21,22). ER is considered to play an important role in tumour immunosuppression (23) as treatment options for ER-positive and ER-negative breast cancer are distinct. Several clinical studies demonstrated an association between TIL expression and response to chemotherapy (19). Endocrine therapy may modulate immune microenvironment of primary tumours (24); however, relationship of TILs with the response to endocrine therapy in ER-positive breast cancer remains controversial. A grade of ER expression and therapeutic options may affect the extent and the pattern of infiltrating immune cells in the tumour tissue as TIL expression may contribute to different prognostic rates between ER-positive and ER-negative breast cancers. However, there is no clear evidence to support this biological mechanism and the prognostic power of TILs in ER-positive patients with the luminal A and B subtypes. Therefore, further investigation is needed to determine the prognostic utility of TIL expression in ER-positive breast cancer.
It is noted that TIL expression was not a prognostic marker in pN-positive patients. However, among pN-negative patients, the prognosis was better in the high-grade TIL group than in the low-grade TIL group. Lymph node metastasis is an important factor in determining the prognosis of breast cancer patients and the mechanism underlying lymph node metastasis in breast cancer involves various factors. Nonetheless, we propose that a reduced ability of immune cells within the tumour microenvironment, which inhibits cancer cell metastasis is responsible for lymph node metastasis. Programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) contributes to the coexistence of cancer cells and immune cells. Moreover, programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibits killer T cell activity (25). PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors suppress these immune checkpoints, thereby promoting tumour immune response by killer T cells and exhibiting an anti-tumour effect (26–31). Recent studies were conducted to determine the mechanism by which these molecules interact with cancer invasion and metastasis (32). The expression levels of TILs and immune checkpoint markers in ductal carcinoma in situ provide important information on tumour microenvironment before breast cancer invasion and metastasis. Hendry et al (33) suggested that ductal carcinoma in situ progression into invasive breast cancer has a reduced ability of immune cells in the tumour microenvironment, which inhibits cancer cell invasion caused by PD-1 and PD-L1 activation. Furthermore, Tarhini et al (34) reported that PD-L1 expression in melanoma tumour cells contributed to the degree of micrometastasis and sentinel lymph nodes. However, there is still no clear evidence to support whether immune checkpoint factors, such as PD-1 and PD-L1, are involved in axillary lymph node metastasis of breast cancer. Thus, further investigation is required to determine the relationship between lymph node metastasis and tumour immunity in breast cancer.
In conclusions, high TIL expression correlated with negative ER and high histological grade. Among ER-negative patients, survival rate was higher in the high-grade TIL group than the low-grade TIL group. Moreover, TIL expression might be a potent prognostic marker in ER-negative and pN-negative patients. Conversely, among the ER-positive breast cancer patients, survival rate was significantly better in the low-grade TIL group than in the high-grade TIL group. Thus, the biological association of TILs with primary breast tumour might differ between ER-positive and ER-negative breast cancer. The current study revealed that the RFS and the CSS of triple-negative patients tended to be higher in the high-grade TIL group than in the low-grade TIL group without statistical significance. This cause might be due to several factors, which include differences in patient background (race, residence, and familial history) and differences in TIL evaluation method. The number of triple-negative patients was not large in this study. As such, a further study to validate the prognostic utility of TILs based on breast cancer subtypes in large Japanese cohorts is required.
Acknowledgements
The present study was selected for the Young Investigator Award, 2015 Annual meeting of Japan Surgical Society.
Funding
No funding was received.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Authors' contributions
All authors participated in the study design. SK mainly performed image acquisition and statistical analyses. MK assisted SK in histological examinations and evaluating results. KI, HM and MK assisted in the production of the study design and evaluating the results obtained. TF, JH, KS, TO and HK contributed toward the statistical evaluation of results and theoretical organization of the manuscript.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The present study was performed following approval from the Institutional Review Board in Saitama Cancer Centre (nos. 231, 483 and 534). Furthermore, the study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients prior to inclusion in the study.
Patient consent for publication
Written informed consent was obtained from all patients prior to inclusion in the study.
Competing interests
JH received research funding from CHUGAI Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. JH received an honoraria from Astra Zeneca K.K. in Japan. All remaining authors have declared that they have no competing interests.
ReferencesStantonSEAdamsSDisisMLVariation in incidence and magnitude of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer subtypes: A systematic reviewJAMA Oncol213541360201610.1001/jamaoncol.2016.106127355489KleinEBeckerSSvedmyrEJondalMVánkyFTumor infiltrating lymphocytesAnn N Y Acad Sci276207216197610.1111/j.1749-6632.1976.tb41647.x1071962GalonJAngellHKBedognettiDMarincolaFMThe continuum of cancer immunosurveillance: Prognostic, predictive, and mechanistic signaturesImmunity391126201310.1016/j.immuni.2013.07.00823890060SavasPSalgadoRDenkertCSotiriouCDarcyPKSmythMJLoiSClinical relevance of host immunity in breast cancer: From TILs to the clinicNat Rev Clin Oncol13228241201610.1038/nrclinonc.2015.21526667975SalgadoRDenkertCCampbellCSavasPNuciforoPAuraCde AzambujaEEidtmannHEllisCEBaselgaJTumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and associations with pathological complete response and event-free survival in HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer treated with lapatinib and trastuzumab: A secondary analysis of the NeoALTTO TrialJAMA Oncol1448454201510.1001/jamaoncol.2015.083026181252DenkertCLoiblSNoskeARollerMMüllerBMKomorMBudcziesJDarb-EsfahaniSKronenwettRHanuschCTumor-associated lymphocytes as an independent predictor of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancerJ Clin Oncol28105113201010.1200/JCO.2009.23.737019917869Issa-NummerYDarb-EsfahaniSLoiblSKunzGNekljudovaVSchraderISinnBVUlmerHUKronenwettRJustMProspective validation of immunological infiltrate for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-negative breast cancer-a substudy of the neoadjuvant GeparQuinto trialPLoS One8e79775201310.1371/journal.pone.007977524312450DenkertCvon MinckwitzGBraseJCSinnBVGadeSKronenwettRPfitznerBMSalatCLoiSSchmittWDTumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without carboplatin in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive and triple-negative primary breast cancersJ Clin Oncol33983991201510.1200/JCO.2014.58.196725534375WestNRMilneKTruongPTMacphersonNNelsonBHWatsonPHTumor-infiltrating lymphocytes predict response to anthracycline-based chemotherapy in estrogen receptor-negative breast cancerBreast Cancer Res13R126201110.1186/bcr307222151962SalgadoRDenkertCDemariaSSirtaineNKlauschenFPruneriGWienertSVan den EyndenGBaehnerFLPenault-LlorcaFThe evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer: Recommendations by an International TILs Working Group 2014Ann Oncol26259271201410.1093/annonc/mdu45025214542HammondMEHayesDFDowsettMAllredDCHagertyKLBadveSFitzgibbonsPLFrancisGGoldsteinNSHayesMAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology/College Of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancerJ Clin Oncol2827842795201010.1200/JCO.2009.25.652920404251WolffACHammondMEHicksDGDowsettMMcShaneLMAllisonKHAllredDCBartlettJMBilousMFitzgibbonsPRecommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline updateArch Pathol Lab Med138241256201410.5858/arpa.2013-0953-SA24099077LoiSSirtaineNPietteFSalgadoRVialeGVan EenooFRouasGFrancisPCrownJPHitreEPrognostic and predictive value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in a phase III randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial in node-positive breast cancer comparing the addition of docetaxel to doxorubicin with doxorubicin-based chemotherapy: BIG 02–98J Clin Oncol31860867201310.1200/JCO.2011.41.090223341518AdamsSGrayRJDemariaSGoldsteinLPerezEAShulmanLNMartinoSWangMJonesVESaphnerTJPrognostic value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in triplenegative breast cancers from two phase III randomized adjuvant breast cancer trials: ECOG 2197 and ECOG 1199J Clin Oncol3229592966201410.1200/JCO.2013.55.049125071121LoiSDrubayDAdamsSFrancisPAJoensuuHDieciMVBadveSDemariaSGrayRPiccartMJPooled individual patient data analysis of stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in primary triple negative breast cancer treated with anthracyclinebased chemotherapyCancer Res76(suppl)abstr S1-03201610.1158/1538-7445.SABCS15-S1-03LoiSMichielsSSalgadoRSirtaineNJoseVFumagalliDKellokumpu-LehtinenPLBonoPKatajaVDesmedtCTumor infiltrating lymphocytes are prognostic in triple negative breast cancer and predictive for trastuzumab benefit in early breast cancer: Results from the FinHER trialAnn Oncol2515441550201410.1093/annonc/mdu11224608200DenkertCvon MinckwitzGDarb-EsfahaniSLedererBHeppnerBIWeberKEBudcziesJHuoberJKlauschenFFurlanettoJTumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and prognosis in different subtypes of breast cancer: A pooled analysis of 3771 patients treated with neoadjuvant therapyLancet Oncol194050201810.1016/S1470-2045(17)30904-X29233559HeindlASestakINaidooKCuzickJDowsettMYuanYRelevance of Spatial Heterogeneity of Immune Infiltration for Predicting Risk of Recurrence After Endocrine Therapy of ER+ Breast CancerJ Natl Cancer Inst110201810.1093/jnci/djx13728859291KurozumiSFujiiTMatsumotoHInoueKKurosumiMHoriguchiJKuwanoHSignificance of evaluating tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in breast cancerMed Mol Morphol50185194201710.1007/s00795-017-0170-y28936553GoodmanAMKatoSBazhenovaLPatelSPFramptonGMMillerVStephensPJDanielsGAKurzrockRTumor mutational burden as an independent predictor of response to immunotherapy in diverse cancersMol Cancer Ther1625982608201710.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-038628835386PereiraBChinSFRuedaOMVollanHKProvenzanoEBardwellHAPughMJonesLRussellRSammutSJThe somatic mutation profiles of 2,433 breast cancers refines their genomic and transcriptomic landscapesNat Commun711479201610.1038/ncomms1190827161491HaricharanSBainbridgeMNScheetPBrownPHSomatic mutation load of estrogen receptor-positive breast tumors predicts overall survival: An analysis of genome sequence dataBreast Cancer Res Treat146211220201410.1007/s10549-014-2991-x24839032SvoronosNPerales-PuchaltAAllegrezzaMJRutkowskiMRPayneKKTesoneAJNguyenJMCurielTJCadungogMGSinghalSTumor cell-independent estrogen signaling drives disease progression through mobilization of myeloid-derived suppressor cellsCancer Discov77285201710.1158/2159-8290.CD-16-050227694385MontagnaEVingianiAMaisonneuvePCancelloGContaldoFPruneriGColleoniMUnfavorable prognostic role of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in hormone-receptor positive, HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer treated with metronomic chemotherapyBreast348388201710.1016/j.breast.2017.05.00928544923TopalianSLTaubeJMAndersRAPardollDMMechanism-driven biomarkers to guide immune checkpoint blockade in cancer therapyNat Rev Cancer16275287201610.1038/nrc.2016.3627079802LarkinJChiarion-SileniVGonzalezRGrobJJCoweyCLLaoCDSchadendorfDDummerRSmylieMRutkowskiPCombined nivolumab and ipilimumab or monotherapy in untreated melanomaN Engl J Med3732334201510.1056/NEJMoa150403026027431BrahmerJReckampKLBaasPCrinòLEberhardtWEPoddubskayaEAntoniaSPluzanskiAVokesEEHolgadoENivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced squamous-cell nonsmall-cell lung cancerN Engl J Med373123135201510.1056/NEJMoa150462726028407MotzerRJRiniBIMcDermottDFRedmanBGKuzelTMHarrisonMRVaishampayanUNDrabkinHAGeorgeSLoganTFNivolumab for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results of a randomized phase II trialJ Clin Oncol3314301437201510.1200/JCO.2014.59.070325452452NandaRChowLQDeesECBergerRGuptaSGevaRPusztaiLPathirajaKAktanGChengJDPembrolizumab in patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer: Phase Ib KEYNOTE-012 studyJ Clin Oncol3424602467201610.1200/JCO.2015.64.893127138582GibneyGTWeinerLMAtkinsMBPredictive biomarkers for checkpoint inhibitor-based immunotherapyLancet Oncol17e542e551201610.1016/S1470-2045(16)30406-527924752ZhangMSunHZhaoSWangYPuHWangYZhangQExpression of PD-L1 and prognosis in breast cancer: A meta-analysisOncotarget83134731354201728430626SolimanHKhalilFAntoniaSPD-L1 expression is increased in a subset of basal type breast cancer cellsPLoS One9e88557201410.1371/journal.pone.008855724551119HendrySPangJBByrneDJLakhaniSRCummingsMCCampbellIGMannGBGorringeKLFoxSBRelationship of the breast ductal carcinoma in situ immune microenvironment with clinicopathological and genetic featuresClin Cancer Res2352105217201710.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-074328611201TarhiniAAZahoorHYearleyJHGibsonCRahmanZDubnerRRaoUNSanderCKirkwoodJMTumor associated PD-L1 expression pattern in microscopically tumor positive sentinel lymph nodes in patients with melanomaJ Transl Med13319201510.1186/s12967-015-0678-726419843
Classification of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) using the criteria of the International TILs Working Group. (A) Low-grade TILs: A few lymphocytes are present in tissue surrounding the cancer nests. (B) Intermediate-grade TILs. (C) High-grade TILs: Numerous lymphocytes are distributed adjacent to the cancer nests.
Survival curves of breast cancer subtypes stratified by TIL expression. (A) RFS and (B) CSS curves stratified by TIL expression in HER2-positive patients. (C) RFS and (D) CSS curves stratified by TIL expression in HR-positive and HER2-negative patients. (E) RFS and (F) CSS curves stratified by TIL expression in triple-negative patients. TIL, tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte; RFS, relapse-free survival; CSS, cancer-specific survival; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2; HR, hormonal receptor.
Survival curves stratified by TIL expression and ER status. Comparisons of (A) RFS and (B) CSS between high-grade and low-grade TILs groups in ER-negative patients. The relationship between TIL expression and (C) RFS and (D) CSS in ER-positive breast cancer patients. TIL, tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte; ER, oestrogen receptor; RFS, relapse-free survival; CSS, cancer-specific survival.
Survival curves stratified by TIL expression and pathological nodal status. Comparisons of (A) RFS and (B) CSS between high-grade and low-grade TIL groups in pathological node-negative patients. The relationship between TIL expression and (C) RFS and (D) CSS in pathological node-positive patients. TIL, tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte; RFS, relapse-free survival; CSS, cancer-specific survival.
Survival curves stratified by TIL expression and pathological nodal status in ER-negative patients. Comparisons of (A) RFS and (B) CSS between high-grade and low-grade TIL groups in ER-negative and pathological node-negative patients. The relationship between TIL expression and (C) RFS and (D) CSS in ER-negative and pathological node-positive patients. TIL, tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte; ER, oestrogen receptor; RFS, relapse-free survival; CSS, cancer-specific survival.
Patient characteristics.
Characteristics
Total
Age, years
<40
26
≥40 and <60
158
≥60
110
Menopause status
Pre-
123
Post-
171
Type of breast surgery
Breast-conserving surgery
227
Mastectomy
67
Axillary surgery
Sentinel lymph node (biopsy alone)
149
Axillary lymph node (dissection)
142
No surgery
4
Pathological tumour size
pT1
152
pT2
116
pT3
17
pT4
9
Pathological nodal status
pN0
156
pN1
78
pN2
34
pN3
22
No surgery
4
Pathological TNM stage
I
98
IIA
96
IIB
35
IIIA
30
IIIB
9
IIIC
22
Not evaluated
4
Histological grade
Grade 1
45
Grade 2
87
Grade 3
162
Oestrogen receptor
Positive
207
Negative
87
Progesterone receptor
Positive
179
Negative
115
HER2 status
Positive
47
Negative
247
TNM, tumor-node-metastasis.
Patient distribution by TIL grades in each breast cancer subtype.
Patients, no. (%)
Subtype
High TIL group
Intermediate TIL group
Low TIL group
Total
HR+/HER2-
6 (3.1)
24 (12.2)
166 (84.7)
196
HR+/HER2+
1 (5.9)
5 (29.4)
11 (64.7)
17
HR-/HER2+
9 (30.0)
6 (20.0)
15 (50.0)
30
HR-/HER2-
16 (31.4)
9 (17.6)
26 (50.9)
51
Total
32 (10.9)
44 (15.0)
218 (74.1)
294
TIL, tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte; HR, hormonal receptor; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2.
The association between TIL grades and clinicopathological characteristics.
Patients, no.
Univariate analysis
Multivariate analysis
Clinicopathological factor
Low TIL group
Intermediate TIL group
High TIL group
P-value
P-value
ER status
<0.001
<0.001
Positive
175
27
5
Negative
43
17
27
PgR status
<0.001
0.31
Positive
148
26
5
Negative
70
18
27
HER2 status
0.004
0.61
Positive
26
11
10
Negative
192
33
22
Tumour size
0.16
T1-2
191
38
24
T3-4
27
6
8
Nodal status
0.14
Negative
117
19
12
Positive
101
25
20
Menopausal status
0.31
Pre-
87
23
13
Post-
131
21
19
Histological grade
<0.001
0.03
1-2
116
11
5
3
102
33
27
TIL, tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte; ER, oestrogen receptor; PgR, progesterone receptor; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2.
Results of univariate and multivariate survival analyses on the influence of clinicopathological variables, including the expression of TILs.
A, RFS
Univariate analysis
Multivariate analysis
Clinicopathological factor
Hazard ratio
P-value
Hazard ratio
95% CI
P-value
TIL expression
Low
Reference
Reference
Intermediate
0.050
0.82
0.88
0.49–1.61
0.69
High
0.017
0.90
0.61
0.28–1.30
0.20
ER status
Positive
Reference
Reference
Negative
4.68
0.03
1.05
0.55–2.02
0.88
PgR status
Positive
Reference
Reference
Negative
8.01
0.005
1.68
0.92–3.07
0.09
HER2 status
Negative
Reference
Reference
Positive
9.49
0.002
1.52
0.88–2.61
0.13
Tumour size
T 1–2
Reference
Reference
T 3–4
15.13
<0.001
1.79
0.99–3.23
0.05
Nodal status
Negative
Reference
Reference
Positive
29.80
<0.001
3.04
1.88–4.92
<0.001
Histological grade
Grade 1–2
Reference
Reference
Grade 3
5.80
0.02
1.19
0.71–2.00
0.51
B, CSS
Univariate analysis
Multivariate analysis
Clinicopathological factor
Hazard ratio
P-value
Hazard ratio
95% CI
P-value
TIL expression
High
Reference
Reference
Intermediate
0.60
0.44
0.56
0.26–1.21
0.14
Low
0.11
0.74
0.54
0.24–1.22
0.14
ER status
Positive
Reference
Reference
Negative
9.93
0.002
1.51
0.72–3.16
0.28
PgR status
Positive
Reference
Reference
Negative
11.28
<0.001
1.60
0.78–3.29
0.20
HER2 status
Negative
Reference
Reference
Positive
4.84
0.03
1.09
0.59–2.02
0.79
Tumour size
T1-2
Reference
Reference
T3-4
11.51
0.001
1.95
1.00–3.81
0.05
Nodal status
Negative
Reference
Reference
Positive
17.93
<0.001
2.60
1.49–4.52
<0.001
Histological grade
Grade 1–2
Reference
Reference
Grade 3
9.06
0.003
1.56
0.85–2.87
0.15
TILs, tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes; ER, oestrogen receptor; PgR, progesterone receptor; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2; RFS, relapse-free survival; CSS, cancer-specific survival; CI, confidence interval.