Pruneri, Giancarlo

Abstract Recent advances in the field of immuno‐oncology have brought transformative changes in the management of cancer patients. The immune profile of tumours has been found to have key value in predicting disease prognosis and treatment response in various cancers. Multiplex immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence have emerged as potent tools for the simultaneous detection of multiple protein biomarkers in a single tissue section, thereby expanding opportunities for molecular and immune profiling while preserving tissue samples. By establishing the phenotype of individual tumour cells when distributed within a mixed cell population, the identification of clinically relevant biomarkers with high‐throughput multiplex immunophenotyping of tumour samples has great potential to guide appropriate treatment choices. Moreover, the emergence of novel multi‐marker imaging approaches can now provide unprecedented insights into the tumour microenvironment, including the potential interplay between various cell types. However, there are significant challenges to widespread integration of these technologies in daily research and clinical practice. This review addresses the challenges and potential solutions within a structured framework of action from a regulatory and clinical trial perspective. New developments within the field of immunophenotyping using multiplexed tissue imaging platforms and associated digital pathology are also described, with a specific focus on translational implications across different subtypes of cancer. © 2024 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Abstract Modern histologic imaging platforms coupled with machine learning methods have provided new opportunities to map the spatial distribution of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. However, there exists no standardized method for describing or analyzing spatial immune cell data, and most reported spatial analyses are rudimentary. In this review, we provide an overview of two approaches for reporting and analyzing spatial data (raster versus vector‐based). We then provide a compendium of spatial immune cell metrics that have been reported in the literature, summarizing prognostic associations in the context of a variety of cancers. We conclude by discussing two well‐described clinical biomarkers, the breast cancer stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes score and the colon cancer Immunoscore, and describe investigative opportunities to improve clinical utility of these spatial biomarkers. © 2023 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

AbstractThe clinical significance of the tumor‐immune interaction in breast cancer is now established, and tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have emerged as predictive and prognostic biomarkers for patients with triple‐negative (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2‐negative) breast cancer and HER2‐positive breast cancer. How computational assessments of TILs might complement manual TIL assessment in trial and daily practices is currently debated. Recent efforts to use machine learning (ML) to automatically evaluate TILs have shown promising results. We review state‐of‐the‐art approaches and identify pitfalls and challenges of automated TIL evaluation by studying the root cause of ML discordances in comparison to manual TIL quantification. We categorize our findings into four main topics: (1) technical slide issues, (2) ML and image analysis aspects, (3) data challenges, and (4) validation issues. The main reason for discordant assessments is the inclusion of false‐positive areas or cells identified by performance on certain tissue patterns or design choices in the computational implementation. To aid the adoption of ML for TIL assessment, we provide an in‐depth discussion of ML and image analysis, including validation issues that need to be considered before reliable computational reporting of TILs can be incorporated into the trial and routine clinical management of patients with triple‐negative breast cancer. © 2023 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

PURPOSE The investigation of multiple molecular targets with next-generation sequencing (NGS) has entered clinical practice in oncology, yielding to a paradigm shift from the histology-centric approach to the mutational model for personalized treatment. Accordingly, most of the drugs recently approved in oncology are coupled to specific biomarkers. One potential tool for implementing the mutational model of precision oncology in daily practice is represented by the Molecular Tumor Board (MTB), a multidisciplinary team whereby molecular pathologists, biologists, bioinformaticians, geneticists, medical oncologists, and pharmacists cooperate to generate, interpret, and match molecular data with personalized treatments. PATIENTS AND METHODS Since May 2020, the institutional MTB set at Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori of Milan met weekly via teleconference to discuss molecular data and potential therapeutic options for patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors. RESULTS Up to October 2021, among 1,996 patients evaluated, we identified >10,000 variants, 43.2% of which were functionally relevant (pathogenic or likely pathogenic). On the basis of functionally relevant variants, 711 patients (35.6%) were potentially eligible to targeted therapy according to European Society of Medical Oncology Scale for Clinical Actionability of Molecular Targets tiers, and 9.4% received a personalized treatment. Overall, larger NGS panels (containing >50 genes) significantly outperformed small panels (up to 50 genes) in detecting actionable gene targets across different tumor types. CONCLUSION Our real-world data provide evidence that MTB is a valuable tool for matching NGS data with targeted treatments, eventually implementing precision oncology in clinical practice.

AbstractThe JAK/STAT3 signaling pathway may be aberrantly activated and have various and conflicting roles in breast cancer. The current study explored prognostic implications of activated STAT3 in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)‐positive primary breast cancers in the context of a large prospective study (ALTTO). Activated STAT3 was determined by immunohistochemical analysis of STAT3 phosphorylation (Y705) performed on the primary tumors. This analysis evaluated whether patients with activated STAT3 had disease‐free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) different from patients without activated STAT3. A total of 5694 patients out of the 8381 patients enrolled in ALTTO were included in this analysis (67.9%), and 2634 of them (46%) had evidence of STAT3 activation (minimum tumor Allred score ≥2). The median follow‐up was 6.93 years (6.85‐6.97 years), at the end of which 1035 (18.18%) and 520 (9.13%) patients experienced DFS and OS events, respectively. Patients with STAT3 activation experienced improved DFS compared to those without it (multivariable hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74‐0.95; P = .006). There were no group differences in OS (multivariable HR, 0.92; 95% CI 0.78‐1.10; P = .37). This effect was limited to ER‐positive tumors. In conclusion, these findings support the role of STAT3 activation as a marker of favorable outcome in ER‐positive/HER2‐positive breast cancer patients.

AbstractImmune checkpoint inhibitor therapies targeting PD‐1/PD‐L1 are now the standard of care in oncology across several hematologic and solid tumor types, including triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Patients with metastatic or locally advanced TNBC with PD‐L1 expression on immune cells occupying ≥1% of tumor area demonstrated survival benefit with the addition of atezolizumab to nab‐paclitaxel. However, concerns regarding variability between immunohistochemical PD‐L1 assay performance and inter‐reader reproducibility have been raised. High tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have also been associated with response to PD‐1/PD‐L1 inhibitors in patients with breast cancer (BC). TILs can be easily assessed on hematoxylin and eosin–stained slides and have shown reliable inter‐reader reproducibility. As an established prognostic factor in early stage TNBC, TILs are soon anticipated to be reported in daily practice in many pathology laboratories worldwide. Because TILs and PD‐L1 are parts of an immunological spectrum in BC, we propose the systematic implementation of combined PD‐L1 and TIL analyses as a more comprehensive immuno‐oncological biomarker for patient selection for PD‐1/PD‐L1 inhibition‐based therapy in patients with BC. Although practical and regulatory considerations differ by jurisdiction, the pathology community has the responsibility to patients to implement assays that lead to optimal patient selection. We propose herewith a risk‐management framework that may help mitigate the risks of suboptimal patient selection for immuno‐therapeutic approaches in clinical trials and daily practice based on combined TILs/PD‐L1 assessment in BC. © 2020 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Abstract Abstract 880 Pulmonary marginal zone lymphoma is a distinct subgroup of B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphomas originating from the bronchial-associated lymphoid tissue (BALT) and characterized by an indolent clinical course. Here we present the data of the IELSG-28 study of the International Extranodal Lymphoma Study Group (IELSG) on primary pulmonary lymphoma patients. Clinical records and histological material of 186 patients diagnosed with pulmonary marginal zone lymphoma from December 1986 to June 2009 were collected. The pathology was reviewed centrally and the diagnosis was confirmed in 180 (96%) patients. The median age at diagnosis was 62 (30 – 88). The majority of the patients (149/180) had localized disease at diagnosis with a good performance status (0–1) and low prognostic index (IPI 0–2). Eighty-one patients (45%) received local treatment, including surgery (74%) or radiotherapy (4%). Ninety-nine patients with advanced stage disease or incomplete surgical resection received an additional systemic treatment. Most of these patients (66; 66%) received an alkylating containing regimen, 22 (22%) patients were treated with an anthracycline containing regimen and 29 (29%) received the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody in combination with chemotherapy. With a median follow up of 67 (range 1–256) months, 47/180 patients (26%) experienced disease progression. (median time to progression 30 months, range 0–109). Progression free survival analysis showed a trend in favour of patients treated with immuno-chemotherapy versus those receiving chemotherapy alone (HR 0.53–95%CI: 0.21, 1.33), while no difference in terms of OS and PFS was observed between patients receiving systemic anthracycline or alkylating containing regimens. In twenty five cases a specific PCR-assay was carried out for detecting the presence of Achromobacter (Alcaligenes) xylosoxidans. The presence of Achromobacter was detected in 50% of patients. Our results confirm that local therapy (surgery or radiotherapy) is the treatment of choice for patients with localized disease. Chemotherapy has to be considered in case of relapse, incomplete surgical excision or advanced disease. In this setting, alkylating containing regimens plus rituximab is the most effective option. Further studies are ongoing to confirm the relevance of infection/colonization with Achromobacter (Alcaligenes) xylosoxidans for pathogenesis of BALT lymphoma. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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.

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.

Abstract Primary lymphoma of the lung is a rare entity. Clinical features, optimal treatment, role of surgery and outcomes are not well defined, and the follow‐up is variable in published data. Clinical data of 205 patients who were confirmed to have bronchus mucosa‐associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma from December 1986 to December 2011 in 17 different centres worldwide were evaluated. Fifty‐five per cent of the patients were female. The median age at diagnosis was 62 (range 28–88) years. Only 9% had a history of exposure to toxic substances, while about 45% of the patients had a history of smoking. Ten per cent of the patients had autoimmune disease at presentation, and 19% patients had a reported preexisting lung disease. Treatment modalities included surgery alone in 63 patients (30%), radiotherapy in 3 (2%), antibiotics in 1 (1%) and systemic treatment in 128 (62%). Patients receiving a local approach, mainly surgical resection, experienced significantly improved progression‐free survival ( p = 0.003) versus those receiving a systemic treatment. There were no other significant differences among treatment modalities. The survival data confirm the indolent nature of the disease. Local therapy (surgery or radiotherapy) results in long‐term disease‐free survival for patients with localized disease. Systemic treatment, including alkylating‐containing regimens, can be reserved to patients in relapse after incomplete surgical excision or for patients with advanced disease. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.