4.7 Article

Tumour infiltrating lymphocytes and survival after adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer: post-hoc analysis of the CLASSIC trial

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 128, Issue 12, Pages 2318-2325

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41416-023-02257-3

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study suggests that the quantification of TIL density in routine HE stained tissue sections can be a novel and clinically useful biomarker for identifying stage II-III gastric cancer patients who would benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Further validation through prospective studies is needed.
BackgroundOnly a subset of gastric cancer (GC) patients with stage II-III benefits from chemotherapy after surgery. Tumour infiltrating lymphocytes per area (TIL density) has been suggested as a potential predictive biomarker of chemotherapy benefit.MethodsWe quantified TIL density in digital images of haematoxylin-eosin (HE) stained tissue using deep learning in 307 GC patients of the Yonsei Cancer Center (YCC) (193 surgery+adjuvant chemotherapy [S + C], 114 surgery alone [S]) and 629 CLASSIC trial GC patients (325 S + C and 304 S). The relationship between TIL density, disease-free survival (DFS) and clinicopathological variables was analysed.ResultsYCC S patients and CLASSIC S patients with high TIL density had longer DFS than S patients with low TIL density (P = 0.007 and P = 0.013, respectively). Furthermore, CLASSIC patients with low TIL density had longer DFS if treated with S + C compared to S (P = 0.003). No significant relationship of TIL density with other clinicopathological variables was found.ConclusionThis is the first study to suggest TIL density automatically quantified in routine HE stained tissue sections as a novel, clinically useful biomarker to identify stage II-III GC patients deriving benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Validation of our results in a prospective study is warranted.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available