4.7 Article

Metaplastic breast cancers frequently express immune checkpoint markers FOXP3 and PD-L1

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 123, 期 11, 页码 1665-1672

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-01065-3

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Breast Cancer Foundation [PRAC-16-006, IIRS-19-084]
  2. Sydney Breast Cancer Foundation
  3. Pathology Queensland-Study Education and Research Committee
  4. NHMRC [APP1113867]
  5. Cancer Australia/National Breast Cancer Foundation PdCCRS grant [APP1082435]
  6. National Breast Cancer Foundation [IIRS-19-084, PRAC-16-006] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Metaplastic breast carcinoma encompasses a heterogeneous group of tumours with differentiation into squamous and/or spindle, chondroid, osseous or rhabdoid mesenchymal-looking elements. Emerging immunotherapies targeting Programmed Death Ligand 1 (PD-L1) and immune-suppressing T cells (Tregs) may benefit metaplastic breast cancer patients, which are typically chemo-resistant and do not express hormone therapy targets. Methods We evaluated the immunohistochemical expression of PD-L1 and FOXP3, and the extent of tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in a large cohort of metaplastic breast cancers, with survival data. Results Metaplastic breast cancers were significantly enriched for PD-L1 positive tumour cells, compared to triple-negative ductal breast cancers (P < 0.0001), while there was no significant difference in PD-L1 positive TILs. Metaplastic breast cancers were also significantly enriched for TILs expressing FOXP3, with FOXP3 positive intra-tumoural TILs (iTILs) associated with an adverse prognostic outcome (P = 0.0226). Multivariate analysis identified FOXP3 iTILs expression status as an important independent prognostic factor for patient survival. Conclusions Our findings indicate the clinical significance and prognostic value of FOXP3, PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint and TILs in metaplastic breast cancer and confirm that a subset of metaplastics may benefit from immune-based therapies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据