Erratum: Beyond immune density: Critical role of spatial heterogeneity in estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer (Modern Pathology (2015) 28 (766-777) DOI:10.1038/modpathol.2015.37);Beyond immune density: Critical role of spatial heterogeneity in estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer

Modern Pathology

Volumn 28, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 766-777

  Nawaz, Sidra ^a,b   Heindl, Andreas ^a,b   Koelble, Konrad ^a,b   Yuan, Yinyin ^a,b  

^a INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL MARSDEN HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EOSIN; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; HEMATOXYLIN;

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CELL COMMUNICATION; CELL HETEROGENEITY; CELLULAR DISTRIBUTION; CLASSIFICATION ALGORITHM; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SPECIFIC SURVIVAL; DISTANT METASTASIS; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMMUNOCOMPETENT CELL; LOCAL METASTASIS; LYMPHOCYTE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; SURVIVAL RATE; TUMOR ASSOCIATED LEUKOCYTE; TUMOR VOLUME; ALGORITHM; BIOSYNTHESIS; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; IMMUNOLOGY; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; MORTALITY; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL;

ALGORITHMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; LYMPHOCYTES, TUMOR-INFILTRATING; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; RECEPTORS, ESTROGEN;

EID: 84930181019     PISSN: 08933952     EISSN: 15300285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2015.133     Document Type: Erratum

References (36)

1. Knight WA, Livingston RB, Gregory EJ, et al. Estrogen receptor as an independent prognostic factor for early recurrence in breast cancer. Cancer Res 1977;37: 4669-4671
2. Miglietta L, Morabito F, Provinciali N, et al. A prognostic model based on combining estrogen receptor expression and Ki-67 value after neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicts clinical outcome in locally advanced breast cancer: extension and analysis of a previously reported cohort of patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 2013;39:1046-1052
3. Hoefnagel LD, Moelans CB, Meijer SL, et al. Prognostic value of estrogen receptor alpha and progesterone receptor conversion in distant breast cancer metastases. Cancer 2012;118:4929-4935
4. Weigelt B, Reis-Filho JS. Back to the basis: breast cancer heterogeneity from an etiological perspective. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014;106:1
5. Brenton JD, Carey LA, Ahmed AA, et al. Molecular classification and molecular forecasting of breast 2005;23:7350-7360
6. Teschendorff AE, Miremadi A, Pinder SE, et al. An immune response gene expression module identifies a good prognosis subtype in estrogen receptor negative breast cancer. Genome Biol 2007;8:R157
7. Calabro A, Beissbarth T, Kuner R, et al. Effects of infiltrating lymphocytes and estrogen receptor on gene expression and prognosis in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2009;116:69-77
8. Ascierto ML, Kmieciak M, Idowu MO, et al. A signature of immune function genes associated with recurrencefree survival in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012;131:871-880
9. Denkert C, Loibl S, Noske A, et al. Tumor-associated lymphocytes as an independent predictor of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:105-113
10. Loi S, Sirtaine N, Piette 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;31:860-867
11. Issa-Nummer Y, Darb-Esfahani S, Loibl S, et al. Prospective validation of immunological infiltrate for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-negative breast cancer-a substudy of the neoadjuvant GeparQuinto trial. PLoS One 2013;8:e79775
12. Yuan Y, Failmezger H, Rueda OM, et al. Quantitative image analysis of cellular heterogeneity in breast tumors complements genomic profiling. Sci Transl Med 2012;4157ra43
13. Galon J, Costes A, Sanchez-Cabo F, et al. Type, density, and location of immune cells within human colorectal tumors predict clinical outcome. Science 2006;313: 1960-1964
14. Mahmoud SMA, Paish EC, Powe DG, et al. Tumorinfiltrating CD8+ lymphocytes predict clinical outcome in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:1949-1955
15. Kruger JM, Wemmert C, Sternberger L, et al. Combat or surveillance? Evaluation of the heterogeneous inflammatory breast cancer microenvironment. J Pathol 2013;229:569-578
16. Balsat C, Blacher S, Signolle N, et al. Whole slide quantification of stromal lymphatic vessel distribution and peritumoral lymphatic vessel density in early invasive cervical cancer: a method description. ISRN Obstet Gynecol 2011;2011:354861
17. Balsat C, Signolle N, Goffin F, et al. Improved computerassisted analysis of the global lymphatic network in human cervical tissues. Mod Pathol 2014;27:887-898
18. Singanamalli A, Sparks R, Rusu M, et al. Identifying in vivo DCE MRI parameters correlated with ex vivo quantitative microvessel architecture: a radiohistomorphometric approach. Proc SPIE 8676, Medical Imaging 2013: Digital Pathology, 867604 (March 29, 2013); doi:10.1117/12.2008136
19. Doyle S, Feldman M, Tomaszewski J, et al. A boosted Bayesian multiresolution classifier for prostate cancer detection from digitized needle biopsies. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2012;59:1205-1218
20. Janowczyk A, Chandran S, Madabhushi A. Quantifying local heterogeneity via morphologic scale: distinguishing tumoral from stromal regions. J Pathol Inform 2013;4:8
21. Basavanhally AN, Ganesan S, Agner S, et al. Computerized image-based detection and grading of lymphocytic infiltration in HER2+ breast cancer histopathology. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2010;57:642-653
22. Beck AH, Sangoi AR, Leung S, et al. Systematic analysis of breast cancer morphology uncovers stromal features associated with survival. Sci Transl Med 2011;3:108ra13
23. Belien JA, Somi S, de Jong JS, et al. Fully automated microvessel counting and hot spot selection by image processing of whole tumor sections in invasive breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 1999;52:184-192
24. Getis A, Ord JK. The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Geogr Anal 1992;24: 189-206
25. de Souza D, Kelly-Hope L, Lawson B, et al. Environmental factors associated with the distribution of Anopheles gambiae s.s in Ghana; an important vector of lymphatic filariasis and malaria. PLoS One 2010;5: e9927
26. Setiadi AF, Ray NC, Kohrt HE, et al. Quantitative, architectural analysis of immune cell subsets in tumordraining lymph nodes from breast cancer patients and healthy lymph nodes. PLoS One 2010;5:e12420
27. Curtis C, Shah SP, Chin SF, et al. The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumors reveals novel subgroups. Nature 2012;486:346-352
28. Francis K, Palsson BO. Effective intercellular communication distances are determined by the relative time constants for cyto/chemokine secretion and diffusion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1997;94:12258-12262
29. Cox DR. Regression models and life-tables. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 1972;34:187-220
30. Jonckheere AR. A distribution-free k-sample test against ordered alternatives. Biometrika 1954;41: 133-145
31. Valastyan S, Weinberg RA. Tumor metastasis: molecular insights and evolving paradigms. Cell 2011;147: 275-292
32. Wels J, Kaplan RN, Rafii S, et al. Migratory neighbors and distant invaders: tumor-associated niche cells. Genes Dev 2008;22:559-574
33. Gupta GP, Massague J. Cancer metastasis: building a framework. Cell 2006;127:679-695
34. Putti TC, El-Rehim DMA, Rakha EA, et al. Estrogen receptor-negative breast carcinomas: a review of morphology and immunophenotypical analysis. Mod Pathol 2004;18:26-35
35. Ripley BD. The second-order analysis of stationary point processes. J Appl Probab 1976;13:255-266
36. Salgado R, Denkert C, Demaria S, et al. The evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer: recommendations by an International TILs Working Group 2014. Ann Oncol 2014;26:259-271