4.5 Review

Biomarkers for breast cancer immunotherapy: PD-L1, TILs, and beyond

期刊

EXPERT OPINION ON INVESTIGATIONAL DRUGS
卷 31, 期 6, 页码 549-555

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13543784.2022.2008354

关键词

Breast cancer; triple negative breast cancer; PD-L1; predictive biomarkers; immune checkpoint inhibitors; TILs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article discusses potential predictors of response to ICIs in breast cancer, including PD-L1 expression, TILs, TMB, and other biomarkers. Valuable data on predictive biomarkers have emerged, supporting the use of immunotherapy in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, although further investigations are needed.
Introduction Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have recently entered into the therapeutic scenario of metastatic breast cancer. However, only a proportion of patients benefit from ICIs and immune-based combinations, so the identification of reliable predictors of response remains an unmet need. Areas covered We discuss potential predictors of response to ICIs in breast cancer, including PD-L1 expression, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), tumor mutational burden (TMB), and several other biomarkers and suggest future directions of research in this setting. A literature search was conducted in October 2021 of Pubmed/Medline, Cochrane library and Scopus databases; in addition, abstract of international cancer meetings were reviewed. Expert opinion In terms of predictors of response to immunotherapy in TNBC patients, several biomarkers are being evaluated. Valuable data on predictive biomarkers have recently emerged, including host-related factors, immune-related cells, and protein and genetic markers. Data supporting immunotherapy in the metastatic triple-negative breast cancer setting are not concordant, but there have been some positive phase III trials including IMpassion130 and KEYNOTE-355. Phase II and III (neo)adjuvant trials are supportive of this therapeutic strategy. Further investigations are warranted in this challenging area.

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

4.5
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