Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology
Home About us Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Ahead Of Print Login 
Users Online: 278
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size


 
  Table of Contents    
ORIGINAL ARTICLE  
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 61  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 181-186
Interobserver reproducibility of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte evaluations in breast cancer


1 Department of Pathology, Istanbul Bilim University, Istanbul, Turkey
2 Department of Pathology, Gayrettepe Florence Nightingale Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
3 Department of Pathology, Acibadem Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
4 Department of General Surgery, Istanbul Florence Nightingale Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
5 Department of General Surgery, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Web Publication20-Apr-2018
 

   Abstract 


Aim: Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have a prognostic value in breast cancer (BC); however, because of the lack of standard evaluation methods, we aimed to assess the interobserver agreement of stromal TILs (sTILs) and intratumoral TILs (iTILs) as well as the effect of hot spot areas and molecular subtyping on the overall agreement. Methods: The study consisted of 121 haematoxylin and eosin (H and E)-stained slides of invasive BC samples obtained from the pathology archives. The TIL assessment was based on the International TIL Working Group recommendations for the percentage of sTILs and was conducted by four pathologists. The percentage of iTILs, the number of lymphocytes in hot spot areas (iTILs-HS), and the overall interobserver agreement for the molecular subtypes were evaluated. The interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess interobserver agreement among the four pathologists. Results: The ICC score among the observers for the sTIL percentages was 0.74, and the individual ICC values for each molecular subtype were 0.55, 0.88, and 0.79 for luminal, HER2-positive, and triple-negative tumors, respectively. The compliance value for the iTILs was 0.29 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.06–0.48], whereas the compliance value for the iTILs-HS was 0.63 (95% CI = 0.49–0.71). The compliance values for the iTILs-HS subtypes were 0.72, 0.43, and 0.55 for luminal, HER2-positive, and triple-negative tumors, respectively. Conclusion: The IWTILG recommendations are reproducible and reliable. The interobserver agreement of the sTIL percentages was considerably higher for the triple-negative and HER2-positive cases than the luminal cases, whereas the interobserver agreement for the assessment of iTILs-HS in tumors was higher for the luminal subtype.

Keywords: Breast cancer, breast pathology, tumor immunity, tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte

How to cite this article:
Cabuk FK, Aktepe F, Kapucuoglu FN, Coban I, Sarsenov D, Ozmen V. Interobserver reproducibility of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte evaluations in breast cancer. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2018;61:181-6

How to cite this URL:
Cabuk FK, Aktepe F, Kapucuoglu FN, Coban I, Sarsenov D, Ozmen V. Interobserver reproducibility of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte evaluations in breast cancer. Indian J Pathol Microbiol [serial online] 2018 [cited 2018 Sep 22];61:181-6. Available from: http://www.ijpmonline.org/text.asp?2018/61/2/181/230531





   Introduction Top


Breast cancer (BC) is the most common form of cancer among women [1] and is the leading cause of cancer-related death in women.[2] The interaction between stromal cells and cancer cells is critical during the development and growth of several types of cancer.[3] Recently, several studies have reported associations between tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and both disease outcome and treatment response.[4],[5],[6],[7],[8],[9],[10] The role of the immune response in BC is not fully understood, but some reports have demonstrated that elevated lymphocytic infiltration can predict a better prognosis and more robust response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.[11],[12],[13],[14],[15],[16],[17],[18],[19]

Recently, immune-related therapy has emerged as an effective therapeutic strategy for malignancies such as melanoma, nonsmall cell lung carcinoma, and prostate carcinoma.[20],[21],[22],[23] Thus, objective evaluation criteria to assess prognostic immune response indicators for such treatments are needed. Several studies have shown that there exists a relationship between the presence of TILs in BC (especially in triple-negative cancer) and a complete pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.[12],[15],[16],[18],[19] The presence of TILs could serve as an indicator of the individual antitumor immune response in BC; thus, an immunological grade or score should be included in pathology reports.[12] However, evaluating a TIL score in BC is an uncommon pathology practice and is often conducted semiquantitatively based on the subjective assessment of the pathologist because there is no clear consensus on how to conduct objective TIL scoring. Thus, easy, practical, and reproducible criteria to evaluate TILs for predicting the patient response to chemotherapy and immunotherapy are highly desirable. For this purpose, in 2014, the International TIL Working Group (ITILWG) proposed such guidelines that could be used by pathologists.[12] Many studies on TILs in BC have evaluated stromal and intratumoral lymphocytes and have concluded that either or both of these cell types have prognostic significance.[10],[11],[15],[17] Stromal TILs (sTILs) are defined as lymphocytes outside the tumoral nests, and intratumoral TILs (iTILs) are mononuclear cells within tumor nests that directly contact tumor cells.[12]

The expression status of the oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2 receptor is important in determining the chemotherapeutic protocol for treating BC. The presence of both sTILs and iTILs is important for predicting the efficacy of platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the prognosis of patients, especially those with triple-negative BC.[11],[16] Although the ITILWG suggests to only evaluate sTILs as the primary parameter and recommend criteria to standardize their evaluation,[12] iTILs are also important in determining the prognosis.[11],[16]

There are some concerns of the ITWILG recommendations. First, the method is too detailed to use routinely, and second, sTILs are difficult to estimate in diffuse tumors. For these reasons, evaluation of only hot spot areas, where TILs are most dense in the tumor, was recommended. This approach could predict the prognosis as well as ITILWG recommendations.[24]

There are many studies that have highlighted the importance of TILs in the prognosis of BC, but only a few have reported the interobserver agreement.[25],[26] In this study, we aimed to evaluate the interobserver agreement of sTILs and iTILs as well as the effectiveness of identifying hot spot areas and molecular subtyping on the overall agreement.


   Methods Top


This study consisted of 169 Haematoxylin and Eosin (H and E)-stained slides of invasive BC samples obtained from the archives of the Department of Pathology at Florence Nightingale Hospital. Tru-cut biopsies, specimens obtained from patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and consultation cases were excluded from our analysis. The final study cohort consisted of 121 tissue specimens. The TIL assessment was performed by four pathologists (F. K. C., I. C., F. A., N. K.; experience ranging between 3 and 24 years), two of whom had expertise in breast pathology. The recommendations of the ITILWG were studied in detail by all four pathologists before participation in the study.

For each case, a representative 5-mm-thick H and E-stained slide was selected from the pathology archives. For multifocal tumors, a representative slide from the largest tumor was selected. All 121 slides of invasive tumors in the final cohort were circulated among the four participating pathologists. The data regarding the clinicopathological features of the corresponding patients were collected from pathology reports and maintained in a separate file.

The percentage of sTILs was determined using a light microscope with a ×200 magnification field according to the proposed guidelines set by the ITILWG [Figure 1]a, [Figure 1]b and [Figure 2]. According to the ITILWG, TILs should be evaluated within the borders of the invasive tumor. A full assessment of average TILs in the tumor area by the pathologist should be used. They do not recommend to focus on hotspots areas. The percent of lenfoid cells to the stromal area was assessed in stromal area between tumor nests.
Figure 1: Distribution of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes according to percentage (a) small stromal area between tumoral nests. Pay attention to small number of lymphocytes in this stroma. When you accept the stromal area as 100% the percentage of area occupied by lymphocytes as accepted as stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. It is %5 in figure a (b) Large stromal area between tumoral nests. This stromal area is occupied by more lymphocytes than the figure a, it is accepted as 40%

Click here to view
Figure 2: Dense mononuclear lymphocyte infiltration in stromal areas outside the tumoral areas encircled in red (stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes 80%) (H and E, ×200)

Click here to view


Because TILs should be assessed as a continuous parameter, the percentage of sTILs is a semiquantitative parameter; for example, 80% sTILs corresponds to 80% of the stromal area presenting a dense mononuclear infiltrate. To assess the percentage values, the dissociated growth pattern of lymphocytes should be accounted. Lymphocytes do not typically form solid cellular aggregates; therefore, a designation of “100% sTILs” would still allow for some empty tissue space between the individual lymphocytes.[12]

Although the ITILWG does not recommend evaluating iTILs, the percentage of iTILs was determined using a light microscope at ×200 magnification in fields inside tumor nest [26] [Figure 3]. In addition to the iTIL evaluation, the entire slide was first viewed under low-power microscopy and then focused on hot spot areas inside the tumor nest, and lymphocytes counted in a single high-power (×400) field within the hot spot were defined as iTILs-HS.
Figure 3: Intratumoral tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are defined as mononuclear cells either within tumor nests or in direct contact with tumor cells (H and E, ×400)

Click here to view


To identify the luminal subtypes, the levels of established immunohistochemical markers (i.e., ER, PR, HER2, and Ki-67) were used. The tumor samples were classified as follows: luminal, HER2-negative (ER-and/or PR-positive); HER2-positive, HER2-positive and either ER-and PR-negative or ER-and/or PR-positive; and triple-negative (ER-, PR-and HER2-negative).[27]

The interobserver agreements regarding the sTILs, iTILs, and iTILs-HS were separately and blindly evaluated by each pathologist. The effect of molecular subtypes on the interobserver agreement was also assessed. Analysis of the interobserver agreement for the evaluation of sTILs was performed using an interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis within the SPSS software package version 20 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL). To evaluate the agreement among the four pathologists, the formulas reported by Fleiss [28] were used. The interobserver agreement for the sTILs, iTILs, and iTILs-HS was assessed using the ICC with a 95% confidence interval (CI) based on two-way random models. There are no standard criteria available for ICC analysis, but similar criteria are generally used with kappa statistics. In general, kappa values <0.4 are associated with the relatively poor agreement, values of 0.4–0.6 indicate moderate agreement, values of 0.6–0.8 indicate substantial (good) agreement and values >0.8 are associated with excellent (almost perfect) agreement.[29]

The study was approved by the Regional Ethics Committee at Bilim University in İstanbul, Turkey (IRB No.: 47-05).


   Results Top


The patients' ages ranged from 23 to 91 years (mean 54.50 ± 13.52 years). The distribution of the molecular subtypes of the patients was as follows: 76 luminal (71.1%), 23 HER2-positive (19%), and 12 triple-negative (9.9%) cases. The pathological features of the patients are summarized in [Table 1].
Table 1: Histopathological characteristics of the patients included in the study

Click here to view


According to the ITILWG recommendations, the overall ICC of the sTILs among the four pathologists was 0.78 (95% CI = 0.71–0.84), with ICC values for the individual molecular subtypes of 0.55, 0.88, and 0.79 for luminal, HER2-positive, and triple-negative tumors, respectively. The distribution of the cases based on the TIL category and molecular subtype is shown in [Table 2].
Table 2: The interclass correlation coefficient and 95% confidence interval of the percentage of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in tumors based on molecular subtype

Click here to view


The ICC of sTILs according to tumoral subtypes was 0.73 (95% CI = 0.63–0.81) in invasive ductal carcinomas, 0.78 (95% CI = 0.54–0.91) in lobular cacinomas, and 0.67 (95% CI = 0.30–0.87) among other subtypes. The subgroup analysis of ICC of sTILs according to tumor grade was 0.61 (95% CI = 0.09–0.86) in grade 1, 0.64 (95% CI = 0.48–0.76) in grade 2, and 0.79 (95% CI = 0.66–0.87) in grade 3.

The tumor ratio of the iTIL evaluation and the ICC calculated to determine the agreement correlation was relatively poor (0.29 [95% CI = 0.06–0.48]). The ICC of the iTILs-HS was higher (0.63 [95% CI = 0.49–0.71]) than the ratio of the iTILs. Regarding the iTIL evaluation, the results of our ICC analysis stratified by molecular subtype are presented in [Table 3] and [Table 4].
Table 3: The interclass correlation coefficient and 95% confidence interval of the percentage of intratumoral tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in tumors based on molecular subtype

Click here to view
Table 4: The interclass correlation coefficient and 95% confidence interval of the presence of intratumoral tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes by average hot spot score based on molecular subtype

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


In this study, the overall interobserver agreement for sTILs was good based on the ITILWG guidelines. Swisher et al.[26] published data on the interobserver agreement of this methodology. Despite evaluating sTILs as a continuous variable as suggested by the ITILWG, this group categorized the percentage of sTILs as <10%, 10%–50%, or >50% and observed moderate interobserver agreement (kappa = 0.57). However, another study that strictly adhered to the ITILWG recommendations using a software program reported the near-perfect interobserver agreement.[25]

Studies on interobserver agreement among pathologists assessing TILs in BC have only been investigated for triple-negative tumors;[24],[26] however, in our study, all the BC molecular subtypes were included. On evaluation of the sTILs, the kappa statistics for interobserver agreement according to molecular subtype were 0.55, 0.88, and 0.79 for luminal, HER2-positive, and triple-negative tumors, respectively, with a lower kappa value for the luminal subtype than the other subtypes. This could be due to the more heterogeneous nature of the luminal subtype, as it consists of a mixture of ductal, lobular, and special types of breast carcinoma. Because the number of triple-negative samples was low, a higher interobserver agreement among the triple-negative tumors was observed but likely skewed.

In the literature, iTILs are as important as sTILs, especially regarding disease-free survival.[16] Pathological sections also provide a temporal view of the tumor. Lymphocytes are mobile elements of tissue, and a lymphocyte in the stromal area might migrate into the tumor a short time later.[12] Thus, although not recommended by the ITILWG, evaluation of the iTILs was also conducted by our group. In our study, the interobserver agreement for the evaluation of iTILs was extremely low (ICC, 0.29 [95% CI = 0.06–0.48]) when reported as a percentage. Swisher et al.[26] did not distinguish iTILs and sTILs and found a moderate agreement (ICC = 0.62). However, Hida and Ohi.[24] reported that the method described by the working group was too detailed; rather, they proposed the evaluation of TILs at hot spots and classified the results as low (<10%), intermediate (10–50%), and high (>50%). They argued that this method is easier and more applicable. In our study, the interobserver agreement increased when including the iTILs-HS count (ICC, 0.61 [95% CI = 0.49–0.71]). However, the interobserver agreement of the iTIL percentage in tumors based on molecular subtype was the lowest in triple-negative tumors. The difficulty in the distinguishing iTILs from individual cell necrosis or apoptosis while using H and E-stained slides could explain the low interobserver agreement in iTILs. In contrast, the higher interobserver agreement of the hot spot areas could be due to the evaluation of a smaller area.

Most of the studies in the literature that determined the prognosis and assessed the interobserver agreement of TILs only evaluated triple-negative tumors.[17],[19],[24],[26],[30] In the BIG 2–98 trial study, each 10% increase in intratumoral and sTILs was associated with a 17% and 15% reduced risk of relapse, respectively, and 27% and 17% reduced risk of death, respectively.[15] In another study, for every 10% increase in TILs, the BC-free interval risk reduction was 13% in triple-negative BC.[31] TILs have been associated with higher rates of pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant therapy especially in triple negative and HER2 positive BC.[32],[33] In primary node negative triple-negative BC patients with TILs 20% or more had excellent 5-year distant metastases-free survival.[31],[34] This could result in studies suggesting that the prognostic significance of TILs is the highest in triple-negative and HER2 positive tumors. However, all the molecular types of BC could be important in standardizing the TIL evaluation criteria; therefore, all the molecular subtypes of BC were included in our study. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that evaluated the interobserver variation in assessing TILs in all the molecular subtypes of BC.

The grade of tumor in BC is associated with outcomes of patients. In our study, we find a good ICC between observers in grade and subtypes. In the literature, we found no study that check the ICC in grade and subtypes, but Sawe et al. concluded that there is no correlation between tumoral grade and subtypes with TILs. They accept the immune response to tumoral cells as an independent prognostic factor than grade or subtypes of BC.[35]

The primary limitation of our study was the small number of pathologists who participated. Also, the number of triple-negative and HER2-positive cases included was low. A software program could increase the interobserver agreement, but many programs are only used in scientific studies and are not available in daily clinical practice.


   Conclusion Top


In conclusion, for the evaluation of sTILs, the IWTILG recommendations are reproducible and reliable without stratifying the percentages of sTILs into groups. The interobserver agreement of the sTILs percentage was considerably higher for triple-negative and HER2-positive cases than luminal cases, whereas the interobserver agreement for the assessing iTILs-HS in tumors was higher for the luminal subtype. We suggest that if TILs were evaluated for each molecular subtype of BC, sTILs should be the standard for HER2 and triple-negative tumors, whereas the iTILs-HS is a better metric for evaluating luminal subtypes.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 2013;63:11-30.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D, et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011;61:69-90.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Galon J, Costes A, Sanchez-Cabo F, Kirilovsky A, Mlecnik B, Lagorce-Pagès C, et al. Type, density, and location of immune cells within human colorectal tumors predict clinical outcome. Science 2006;313:1960-4.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Tomsová M, Melichar B, Sedláková I, Steiner I. Prognostic significance of CD3+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2008;108:415-20.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
de Jong RA, Leffers N, Boezen HM, ten Hoor KA, van der Zee AG, Hollema H, et al. Presence of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes is an independent prognostic factor in type I and II endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2009;114:105-10.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Giatromanolaki A, Bates GJ, Koukourakis MI, Sivridis E, Gatter KC, Harris AL, et al. The presence of tumor-infiltrating FOXP3+ lymphocytes correlates with intratumoral angiogenesis in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2008;110:216-21.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Yamagami W, Susumu N, Tanaka H, Hirasawa A, Banno K, Suzuki N, et al. Immunofluorescence-detected infiltration of CD4+ FOXP3+regulatory T cells is relevant to the prognosis of patients with endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2011;21:1628-34.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Flammiger A, Weisbach L, Huland H, Tennstedt P, Simon R, Minner S, et al. High tissue density of FOXP3+ T cells is associated with clinical outcome in prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer 2013;49:1273-9.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Li JF, Chu YW, Wang GM, Zhu TY, Rong RM, Hou J, et al. The prognostic value of peritumoral regulatory T cells and its correlation with intratumoral cyclooxygenase-2 expression in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int 2009;103:399-405.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Lee HJ, Seo JY, Ahn JH, Ahn SH, Gong G. Tumor-associated lymphocytes predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. J Breast Cancer 2013;16:32-9.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Denkert C, Loibl S, Noske A, Roller M, Müller BM, Komor M, et al. Tumor-associated lymphocytes as an independent predictor of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:105-13.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Salgado R, Denkert C, Demaria S, Sirtaine N, Klauschen F, Pruneri G, et al. The evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer: Recommendations by an international TILs working group 2014. Ann Oncol 2015;26:259-71.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Lee HJ, Park IA, Song IH, Shin SJ, Kim JY, Yu JH, et al. Tertiary lymphoid structures: Prognostic significance and relationship with tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes in triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 2016;69:422-30.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Lee HJ, Kim JY, Park IA, Song IH, Yu JH, Ahn JH, et al. Prognostic significance of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and the tertiary lymphoid structures in HER2-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant trastuzumab. Am J Clin Pathol 2015;144:278-88.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Loi S, Sirtaine N, Piette F, Salgado R, Viale G, Van Eenoo F, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in a phase III randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial in node-positive breast cancer comparing the addition of docetaxel to doxorubicin with doxorubicin-based chemotherapy: BIG 02-98. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:860-7.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Yu X, Zhang Z, Wang Z, Wu P, Qiu F, Huang J, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Transl Oncol 2016;18:497-506.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Liu S, Lachapelle J, Leung S, Gao D, Foulkes WD, Nielsen TO, et al. CD8+ lymphocyte infiltration is an independent favorable prognostic indicator in basal-like breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2012;14:R48.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Mahmoud SM, Paish EC, Powe DG, Macmillan RD, Grainge MJ, Lee AH, et al. Tumor-infiltrating CD8+ lymphocytes predict clinical outcome in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:1949-55.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Yuan Y. Modelling the spatial heterogeneity and molecular correlates of lymphocytic infiltration in triple-negative breast cancer. J R Soc Interface 2015;12. pii: 20141153.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Robert C, Schachter J, Long GV, Arance A, Grob JJ, Mortier L, et al. Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2521-32.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Hodi FS, Hwu WJ, Kefford R, Weber JS, Daud A, Hamid O, et al. Evaluation of immune-related response criteria and RECIST v1.1 in patients with advanced melanoma treated with pembrolizumab. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:1510-7.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Marrone KA, Brahmer JR. Immune checkpoint therapy in non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer J 2016;22:81-91.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Tse BW, Jovanovic L, Nelson CC, de Souza P, Power CA, Russell PJ, et al. From bench to bedside: Immunotherapy for prostate cancer. Biomed Res Int 2014;2014:981434.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Hida AI, Ohi Y. Evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer; proposal of a simpler method. Ann Oncol 2015;26:2351.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Denkert C, Wienert S, Poterie A, Loibl S, Budczies J, Badve S, et al. Standardized evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer: Results of the ring studies of the international immuno-oncology biomarker working group. Mod Pathol 2016;29:1155-64.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Swisher SK, Wu Y, Castaneda CA, Lyons GR, Yang F, Tapia C, et al. Interobserver agreement between pathologists assessing tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer using methodology proposed by the international TILs working group. Ann Surg Oncol 2016;23:2242-8.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Thürlimann B, Senn HJ, et al. Strategies for subtypes – Dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: Highlights of the st. Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 2011;22:1736-47.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 1971;76:378-82.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Ono M, Tsuda H, Shimizu C, Yamamoto S, Shibata T, Yamamoto H, et al. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are correlated with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012;132:793-805.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Loi S, Drubay D, Adams S, Francis PA, Joensuu H, Dieci MV, et al. Pooled individual patient data analysis of stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in primary triple negative breast cancer treated with anthracycline-based chemo-therapy. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symp San Antonio 2015;S1-3.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Denkert C, von Minckwitz G, Brase JC, Sinn BV, Gade S, Kronenwett R, et al. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without carboplatin in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive and triple-negative primary breast cancers. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:983-91.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Loi S, Michiels S, Salgado R, Sirtaine N, Jose V, Fumagalli D, et al. Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) indicate trastuzumab benefit in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (HER2+ BC). Cancer Res 2013;73:aS1-05(24 Suppl): Abstract nr S1-05.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Wein L, Savas P, Luen SJ, Virassamy B, Salgado R, Loi S, et al. Clinical validity and utility of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in routine clinical practice for breast cancer patients: Current and future directions. Front Oncol 2017;7:156.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Sawe RT, Mining SK, Ofulla AV, Patel K, Guyah B, Chumba D, et al. Tumor infiltrating leukocyte density is independent of tumor grade and molecular subtype in aggressive breast cancer of western Kenya. Trop Med Health 2017;45:19.  Back to cited text no. 35
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Fatmagul Kusku Cabuk
Cumhuriyet Avenue, No: 4A -13 Gokturk, Eyup Istanbul
Turkey
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/IJPM.IJPM_131_17

Rights and Permissions


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    Abstract
   Introduction
   Methods
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed668    
    Printed55    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded113    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal