Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Mar 9;16(1):54.
doi: 10.1186/s12967-018-1443-5.

Study on the progression types of cancer in patients with breast cancer undergoing eribulin chemotherapy and tumor microenvironment

Affiliations

Study on the progression types of cancer in patients with breast cancer undergoing eribulin chemotherapy and tumor microenvironment

Shinichiro Kashiwagi et al. J Transl Med. .

Abstract

Background: Recently, the concepts of progression due to pre-existing lesions (PPL) and progression due to new metastasis (PNM) have been proposed to differentiate the progression types of treatment-resistant cancers. Previously, the differences between these two progression types did not affect the determination of treatment strategies since both PPL and PNM are classified as progressive disease based on the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) diagnostic criteria. On the other hand, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are effective when used as indicators for monitoring the immune tumor microenvironment (iTME) in the cancer host, and TILs play an important role as biomarkers in predicting prognosis and therapeutic effects. This study focused on the progression types of cancer in patients undergoing eribulin chemotherapy. In addition, the iTME in individuals with PPL and PNM was evaluated using TILs as a marker.

Methods: Of the 52 patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who underwent chemotherapy with eribulin, 40 remained in the study, and 12 patients were dropout cases. The antitumor effect was evaluated based on the RECIST criteria using version 1.1. TILs were defined as the infiltrating lymphocytes within tumor stroma and were expressed in proportion to the field investigated. In PPL cases, the high-TIL group was considered as type I and the low-TIL group was classified as type II. In PNM cases, the high-TIL group was considered as type III and the low-TIL group was classified as type IV.

Results: In 19 cases, individuals with type I progression had significantly longer progression free survival and overall survival (OS) compared to those with type III progression (p = 0.040, p < 0.001, log-rank). Individuals with type I progression had significantly prolonged survival post progression compared to those with type II progression (p = 0.048, log-rank). A multivariate analysis that validate the effect of OS showed that these were independent factors of good prognosis (p = 0.003; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.065) (p = 0.006; HR = 0.105).

Conclusions: The effects of eribulin chemotherapy suggested that patients with progressive-type breast cancer that proliferates in a good iTME may have a good prognosis.

Keywords: Breast cancer; Eribulin; Progressive disease; Tumor microenvironment; Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Consort diagram. A total of 322 patients with MBC underwent cancer treatment at Osaka City University Hospital from August 2000 to June 2013. In the present study, only 40 patients were included, and 270 patients with other drug therapies and 12 patients with dropout cases due to surgery or adverse events were excluded
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Differences in progression types and prognostic analysis. The 33 PPL group had a significantly longer PFS (p = 0.044, log-rank) (a) and OS (p = 0.017, log-rank) (b) compared to the 7 PNM group
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Effects of TIL expression and differences in progression type upon prognosis. In 19 cases, individuals with type I progression had significantly longer PFS compared to those with type III progression (p = 0.040, log-rank) (a). Furthermore, individuals with type I progression had significantly longer OS compared to those with type III and type II progression (p < 0.001 and p = 0.047, respectively; log-rank) (b)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Survival post progression. Individuals with type I progression had significantly prolonged survival post progression (SPP) compared to those with type II progression (p = 0.048, log-rank)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Forest plots. A univariate analysis that validate the effect of overall survival showed that “high objective response rate” and “progression due to pre-existing lesions and high-TILs” were considered as factors for a good prognosis (p = 0.006; HR = 0.160) (p = 0.020; HR = 0.221)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, Dancey J, Arbuck S, Gwyther S, Mooney M, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1) Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–247. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Litiere S, de Vries EG, Seymour L, Sargent D, Shankar L, Bogaerts J, Committee R The components of progression as explanatory variables for overall survival in the response evaluation criteria in solid tumours 1.1 database. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(10):1847–1853. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.03.014. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Twelves C, Cortes J, Kaufman PA, Yelle L, Awada A, Binder TA, Olivo M, Song J, O’Shaughnessy JA, Jove M, et al. “New” metastases are associated with a poorer prognosis than growth of pre-existing metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res. 2015;17(1):150. doi: 10.1186/s13058-015-0657-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zitvogel L, Kepp O, Kroemer G. Immune parameters affecting the efficacy of chemotherapeutic regimens. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2011;8(3):151–160. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.223. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fridman WH, Pages F, Sautes-Fridman C, Galon J. The immune contexture in human tumours: impact on clinical outcome. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012;12(4):298–306. doi: 10.1038/nrc3245. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types