Analysis reveals distinct immune phenotypes affecting treatment response in breast cancer due to ancestry differences.
Breast cancer immune phenotypes influence treatment response and clinical outcomes, yet their ancestry-specific variations remain underexplored. Here, we analyzed transcriptomic data from over 13,000 breast tumors across six ancestry groups to characterize immune-stromal profiles and their association with ancestry, biological features, treatment response, and survival outcomes. Expression patterns were validated by spatial proteomics and immunohistochemistry. K-means clustering consistently identified three immune phenotypes (Hot, Moderate, or Cold) that varied significantly by ancestry, age, molecular subtype, and prognosis. Logistic regression and ancestry-associated analyses revealed that while immune phenotypes were primarily driven by PAM50 subtype, age, and disease stage, notable ancestry-related differences persisted, with European ancestry generally exhibiting higher immune and stromal activity across breast cancer subtypes. Hot tumors, enriched in the Basal-like and HER2 subtypes, were associated with younger age, higher immune infiltration, and improved overall survival. African ancestry was linked to elevated immune scores and upregulation of BTLA-mediated T cell co-inhibition, suggesting sensitivity to immunotherapy. European and East Asian tumors showed stromal enrichment, particularly inflammatory and myofibroblastic cancer-associated fibroblasts, associated with poor prognosis. Core immune activation genes (e.g., CD3 , CD2 , and CXCL10 ) were conserved, while ancestry-specific signatures and chemokine signaling were identified. This study uncovers both shared and ancestry-specific immunogenomic features of breast cancer, highlighting the role of ancestry and other biological features in shaping the tumor immune microenvironment. These findings re-emphasize the need for population-informed approaches in breast cancer immunotherapy and biomarker development, to ensure equitable precision oncology strategies across global populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alamukii et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: