Trial reportJournal of the National Cancer Institute2026
Prognostic value of visually and computationally assessed tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TBCRC-030).
Trial report in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01982448 (A Randomized Phase II Study of Preoperative Cisplatin Versus Paclitaxel in Patients With Triple Negative Breast Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
A Randomized Phase II Study of Preoperative Cisplatin Versus Paclitaxel in Patients With Triple Negative Breast Cancer: Evaluating the Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) Biomarker
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), assessed by visual examination, are prognostic and predictive in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer. Computational assessment may provide a complementary approach. We evaluated the prognostic value of TILs by visual examination and computational assessment.
methodsCisplatin vs Paclitaxel for Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TBCRC030; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01982448) was a randomized phase 2 trial enrolling patients with BRCA1/2-proficient stage I to III triple-negative breast cancer to receive preoperative cisplatin or paclitaxel. The primary endpoint was pathological response at surgery. The TILs were visually scored on digitized pretreatment biopsies per International TILS Working Group recommendations. Computational assessment used the 4D Path QPOR platform to generate TILs, an immune heterogeneity index, and a combined immune/cell cycle biomarker (CmbI). Predictive performance for residual cancer burden 0/1 was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs; all statistical tests were 2-sided.
resultsOf 139 response-evaluable patients, 121 had matched visual examination and computational assessment data (59 on cisplatin, 62 on paclitaxel). Median visual examination TILs were higher in responders (40.0% vs. 10.0%; P = .002) and predicted response (OR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.24 to 2.87; area under the curve = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.57 to 0.80). Computational assessment CmbI differed by response group and predicted residual cancer burden 0/1 (OR = 3.20, 95% CI = 1.05 to 11.07; area under the curve = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.51 to 0.73). Computational assessment TILs and immune heterogeneity index were not predictive. Visual examination TILs and computational assessment CmbI predicted response to paclitaxel (OR = 2.91, 95% CI = 1.56 to 6.14; OR = 9.17, 95% CI = 2.01 to 66.39, respectively) but not to cisplatin.
conclusionVisual examination TILs and computational assessment CmbI were each associated with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer in the overall cohort and the paclitaxel arm. Computational assessment CmbI did not outperform visual assessment. Further validation is needed before clinical implementation of computational approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.