Abstract BRCA-associated homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) is present in ~ 50% of high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSC) and predicts sensitivity to platinum-based therapy. However, there is little understanding of why some patients with BRCA-deficient tumors experience unexpectedly poor outcomes. We profiled 154 tumors, enriched for patients with BRCA-deficient tumors that experienced short overall survival (≤ 3 years, n = 42), using whole-genome, transcriptome, and methylation analyses. All but one BRCA-deficient tumor exceeded an accepted HRD genomic scarring threshold. However, patients with BRCA1-deficient HGSC with a more elevated HRD score survived significantly longer. Patients with BRCA2-deficient HGSC and loss of NF1 survived twice as long as those without NF1 loss, whereas PIK3CA or RAD21 amplification defined BRCA2-deficient HGSC with exceptionally short survival. BRCA1-deficient tumors in short survivors had evidence of immunosuppressive c-kit signaling and EMT. In a large HGSC cohort (n = 1,389) including 282 individuals with pathogenic germline BRCA variants (gBRCApv), the location of the mutation within functional domains stratified clinical outcomes. Notably, residual disease after primary surgery had limited prognostic effect in gBRCApv-carriers compared to non-carriers. Our findings indicate that tumor HR proficiency in the context of therapy response and survival is not a binary property, and highlight genomic and immune modifiers of outcomes in BRCA-deficient HGSC.
Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Patients With Stage I Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Untreated With Chemotherapy
ImportanceThe absolute benefit of chemotherapy for all patients with stage I triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is unclear, and biomarkers are not currently available for selecting patients with an excellent outcome for whom neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy may have negligible benefit. High levels of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) are associated with favorable survival in TNBC, but data solely in stage I TNBC are lacking.ObjectiveTo examine the outcomes of patients of all ages with stage I TNBC solely and who received neither neoadjuvant nor adjuvant chemotherapy, according to centrally reviewed sTIL levels at prespecified cutoffs.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study used the Netherlands Cancer Registry to identify patients diagnosed with stage I TNBC between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2015, who were not treated with chemotherapy. Only patients who did not receive neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy were selected. The clinical data were matched with their corresponding pathology data provided by the Dutch Pathology Registry. Data analysis was performed between February and October 2023.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end point was breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS) at 5, 10, and 15 years for the prespecified sTIL level cutoffs of 30%, 50%, and 75%. Hematoxylin and eosin–stained slides were used for central review of histologic subtype, grade, and lymphovascular invasion. The International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group guidelines were used to score the sTIL levels; these levels were determined for 1041 patients.ResultsOf a total of 4511 females with stage I TNBC, patients who were not treated with chemotherapy were selected and tissue blocks requested; sTILs were scored in 1041 patients (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 64.4 [11.1] years, median follow-up 11.4 [95% CI, 10.9-11.9] years) who were included in the analyses.. Most tumors (952 [91.5%]) were invasive carcinomas of nonspecial histologic subtype. Most patients (548 [52.6%]) had pT1cN0 tumors. Median (range) sTIL level was 5% (1%-99%). A total of 775 patients (74.4%) had sTIL levels below 30%, 266 (25.6%) had 30% or greater, 203 (19.5%) had 50% or greater, and 141 (13.5%) had 75% or greater. Patients with pT1abN0 tumors had a more favorable outcome vs patients with pT1cN0 tumors, with a 10-year BCSS of 92% (95% CI, 89%-94%) vs 86% (95% CI, 82%-89%). In the overall cohort, sTIL levels of at least 30% were associated with better BCSS compared with sTIL levels less than 30% (96% and 87%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26-0.77). High sTIL levels of 50% or greater were associated with a better outcome than low sTIL levels of less than 50% (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10-0.74) in patients with pT1C tumors, with a 10-year BCSS of 95% increasing to 98% with sTIL levels of 75% or greater.Conclusions and RelevanceResults of this study showed that patients with stage I TNBC and high level of sTILs who did not receive neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy had excellent 10-year BCSS. The findings further support the role of sTILs as integral biomarkers in prospective clinical trials of therapy optimization for this patient population.
Image‐based multiplex immune profiling of cancer tissues: translational implications. A report of the International Immuno‐oncology Biomarker Working Group on Breast Cancer
Spatial analyses of immune cell infiltration in cancer: current methods and future directions: A report of the International Immuno‐Oncology Biomarker Working Group on Breast Cancer
Pitfalls in machine learning‐based assessment of tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer: A report of the International Immuno‐Oncology Biomarker Working Group on Breast Cancer
AbstractBackgroundCyclin E1 (CCNE1) is a potential predictive marker and therapeutic target in tubo‐ovarian high‐grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). Smaller studies have revealed unfavorable associations for CCNE1 amplification and CCNE1 overexpression with survival, but to date no large‐scale, histotype‐specific validation has been performed. The hypothesis was that high‐level amplification of CCNE1 and CCNE1 overexpression, as well as a combination of the two, are linked to shorter overall survival in HGSC.MethodsWithin the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium, amplification status and protein level in 3029 HGSC cases and mRNA expression in 2419 samples were investigated.ResultsHigh‐level amplification (>8 copies by chromogenic in situ hybridization) was found in 8.6% of HGSC and overexpression (>60% with at least 5% demonstrating strong intensity by immunohistochemistry) was found in 22.4%. CCNE1 high‐level amplification and overexpression both were linked to shorter overall survival in multivariate survival analysis adjusted for age and stage, with hazard stratification by study (hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.08‐1.47, p = .034, and HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05‐1.32, p = .015, respectively). This was also true for cases with combined high‐level amplification/overexpression (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.09‐1.47, p = .033). CCNE1 mRNA expression was not associated with overall survival (HR, 1.00 per 1‐SD increase; 95% CI, 0.94‐1.06; p = .58). CCNE1 high‐level amplification is mutually exclusive with the presence of germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants and shows an inverse association to RB1 loss.ConclusionThis study provides large‐scale validation that CCNE1 high‐level amplification is associated with shorter survival, supporting its utility as a prognostic biomarker in HGSC.
Assessing Tumor-infiltrating Lymphocytes in Solid Tumors: A Practical Review for Pathologists and Proposal for a Standardized Method From the International Immunooncology Biomarkers Working Group: Part 1: Assessing the Host Immune Response, TILs in Invasiv
Assessment of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in histopathologic specimens can provide important prognostic information in diverse solid tumor types, and may also be of value in predicting response to treatments. However, implementation as a routine clinical biomarker has not yet been achieved. As successful use of immune checkpoint inhibitors and other forms of immunotherapy become a clinical reality, the need for widely applicable, accessible, and reliable immunooncology biomarkers is clear. In part 1 of this review we briefly discuss the host immune response to tumors and different approaches to TIL assessment. We propose a standardized methodology to assess TILs in solid tumors on hematoxylin and eosin sections, in both primary and metastatic settings, based on the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group guidelines for TIL assessment in invasive breast carcinoma. A review of the literature regarding the value of TIL assessment in different solid tumor types follows in part 2. The method we propose is reproducible, affordable, easily applied, and has demonstrated prognostic and predictive significance in invasive breast carcinoma. This standardized methodology may be used as a reference against which other methods are compared, and should be evaluated for clinical validity and utility. Standardization of TIL assessment will help to improve consistency and reproducibility in this field, enrich both the quality and quantity of comparable evidence, and help to thoroughly evaluate the utility of TILs assessment in this era of immunotherapy.
Assessing Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Solid Tumors: A Practical Review for Pathologists and Proposal for a Standardized Method from the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers Working Group: Part 2: TILs in Melanoma, Gastrointestinal Tract Carcinoma
Assessment of the immune response to tumors is growing in importance as the prognostic implications of this response are increasingly recognized, and as immunotherapies are evaluated and implemented in different tumor types. However, many different approaches can be used to assess and describe the immune response, which limits efforts at implementation as a routine clinical biomarker. In part 1 of this review, we have proposed a standardized methodology to assess tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in solid tumors, based on the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers Working Group guidelines for invasive breast carcinoma. In part 2 of this review, we discuss the available evidence for the prognostic and predictive value of TILs in common solid tumors, including carcinomas of the lung, gastrointestinal tract, genitourinary system, gynecologic system, and head and neck, as well as primary brain tumors, mesothelioma and melanoma. The particularities and different emphases in TIL assessment in different tumor types are discussed. The standardized methodology we propose can be adapted to different tumor types and may be used as a standard against which other approaches can be compared. Standardization of TIL assessment will help clinicians, researchers and pathologists to conclusively evaluate the utility of this simple biomarker in the current era of immunotherapy.