We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
REVIEW
The value of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) for predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
PloS One 2014
BACKGROUND: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the predictive roles of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer.
METHOD: A PubMed and Web of Science literature search was designed. Random or fixed effect models were adopted to estimate the summary odds ratio (OR). Heterogeneity and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity among studies and to assess the effects of study quality. Publication bias was evaluated using a funnel plot, Egger's test and Begg's test. We included studies where the predictive significance of TILs, and/or TILs subset on the pathologic complete response (pCR) were determined in NAC of breast cancer.
RESULTS: A total of 13 published studies (including 3251 patients) were eligible. In pooled analysis, the detection of higher TILs numbers in pre-treatment biopsy was correlated with better pCR to NAC (OR = 3.93, 95% CI, 3.26-4.73). Moreover, TILs predicted higher pCR rates in triple negative (OR = 2.49, 95% CI: 1.61-3.83), HER2 positive (OR = 5.05, 95% CI: 2.86-8.92) breast cancer, but not in estrogen receptor (ER) positive (OR = 6.21, 95%CI: 0.86-45.15) patients. In multivariate analysis, TILs were still an independent marker for high pCR rate (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.19-1.66). For TILs subset, higher levels of CD8+ and FOXP3+ T-lymphocytes in pre-treatment biopsy respectively predicted better pathological response to NAC (OR = 6.44, 95% CI: 2.52-16.46; OR = 2.94, 95% CI: 1.05-8.26). Only FOXP3+ lymphocytes in post-NAC breast tissue were a predictive marker for low pCR rate in univariate (OR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.21-0.80) and multivariate (OR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.13-0.95) analysis.
CONCLUSION: Higher TILs levels in pre-treatment biopsy indicated higher pCR rates for NAC. TILs subset played different roles in predicting response to NAC.
METHOD: A PubMed and Web of Science literature search was designed. Random or fixed effect models were adopted to estimate the summary odds ratio (OR). Heterogeneity and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity among studies and to assess the effects of study quality. Publication bias was evaluated using a funnel plot, Egger's test and Begg's test. We included studies where the predictive significance of TILs, and/or TILs subset on the pathologic complete response (pCR) were determined in NAC of breast cancer.
RESULTS: A total of 13 published studies (including 3251 patients) were eligible. In pooled analysis, the detection of higher TILs numbers in pre-treatment biopsy was correlated with better pCR to NAC (OR = 3.93, 95% CI, 3.26-4.73). Moreover, TILs predicted higher pCR rates in triple negative (OR = 2.49, 95% CI: 1.61-3.83), HER2 positive (OR = 5.05, 95% CI: 2.86-8.92) breast cancer, but not in estrogen receptor (ER) positive (OR = 6.21, 95%CI: 0.86-45.15) patients. In multivariate analysis, TILs were still an independent marker for high pCR rate (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.19-1.66). For TILs subset, higher levels of CD8+ and FOXP3+ T-lymphocytes in pre-treatment biopsy respectively predicted better pathological response to NAC (OR = 6.44, 95% CI: 2.52-16.46; OR = 2.94, 95% CI: 1.05-8.26). Only FOXP3+ lymphocytes in post-NAC breast tissue were a predictive marker for low pCR rate in univariate (OR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.21-0.80) and multivariate (OR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.13-0.95) analysis.
CONCLUSION: Higher TILs levels in pre-treatment biopsy indicated higher pCR rates for NAC. TILs subset played different roles in predicting response to NAC.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app