Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34280779›Full record

ArticleEBioMedicine2021

A Computational Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocyte Assessment Method Comparable with Visual Reporting Guidelines for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Peng Sun, Jiehua He, Xue Chao, Keming Chen, Yuanyuan Xu, Qitao Huang, Jingping Yun, Mei Li, Rongzhen Luo, Jinbo Kuang and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EBioMedicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Peng SunState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, P. R. China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, P. R. China. Electronic address: sunpeng1@sysucc.org.cn.
Jiehua HeState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, P. R. China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, P. R. China.
Xue ChaoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, P. R. China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, P. R. China.
Keming ChenState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, P. R. China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, P. R. China.
Yuanyuan XuDepartment of Physiology, Zhongshan school of Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, P. R. China.
Qitao HuangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, P. R. China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, P. R. China.
Jingping YunState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, P. R. China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, P. R. China.
Mei LiState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, P. R. China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, P. R. China.
Rongzhen LuoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, P. R. China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, P. R. China.
Jinbo KuangBio-totem Pte Ltd, Foshan, P. R. China.
Huajia WangBio-totem Pte Ltd, Foshan, P. R. China.
Haosen LiBio-totem Pte Ltd, Foshan, P. R. China.
Hui HuiBio-totem Pte Ltd, Foshan, P. R. China.
Shuoyu XuBio-totem Pte Ltd, Foshan, P. R. China; Department of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, P. R. China. Electronic address: shuoyu.xu@bio-totem.com.
Sun Yat-sen University · CNNanfang Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are clinically significant in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Although a standardized methodology for visual TILs assessment (VTA) exists, it has several inherent limitations. We established a deep learning-based computational TIL assessment (CTA) method broadly following VTA guideline and compared it with VTA for TNBC to determine the prognostic value of the CTA and a reasonable CTA workflow for clinical practice.

methodsWe trained three deep neural networks for nuclei segmentation, nuclei classification and necrosis classification to establish a CTA workflow. The automatic TIL (aTIL) score generated was compared with manual TIL (mTIL) scores provided by three pathologists in an Asian (n = 184) and a Caucasian (n = 117) TNBC cohort to evaluate scoring concordance and prognostic value.

findingsThe intraclass correlations (ICCs) between aTILs and mTILs varied from 0.40 to 0.70 in two cohorts. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed that the aTIL score was associated with disease free survival (DFS) in both cohorts, as either a continuous [hazard ratio (HR)=0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.99] or dichotomous variable (HR=0.29, 95% CI 0.12-0.72). A higher C-index was observed in a composite mTIL/aTIL three-tier stratification model than in the dichotomous model, using either mTILs or aTILs alone.

interpretationThe current study provides a useful tool for stromal TIL assessment and prognosis evaluation for patients with TNBC. A workflow integrating both VTA and CTA may aid pathologists in performing risk management and decision-making tasks.

fundingNational Natural Science Foundation of China, Guangdong Medical Research Foundation, Guangdong Natural Science Foundation.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicDeep LearningDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedFemaleHumansLymphocytes, Tumor-InfiltratingObserver VariationPathologistsTriple Negative Breast NeoplasmsDeep learningPrognosisTriple-negative breast cancerTumor-infiltrating lymphocyte

Identifiers

PMID34280779
PMCPMC8318866
OpenAlexW3187048440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.