Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 3,113

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer: recommendations by an International TILs Working Group 2014

Open access
Salgado, R., Denkert, C., Demaria, S., Sirtaine, N., Klauschen, F., Pruneri, G., Wienert, S., Van den Eynden, G., Baehner, F.L., Penault-Llorca, F., Perez, E.A., Thompson, E.A., Symmans, W.F., Richardson, A.L., Brock, J., Criscitiello, C., Bailey, H., Ignatiadis, M., Floris, G., Sparano, J., Kos, Z., Nielsen, T., Rimm, D.L., Allison, K.H., Reis-Filho, J.S., Loibl, S., Sotiriou, C., Viale, G., Badve, S., Adams, S., Willard-Gallo, K., Loi, S.·2015·Annals of Oncology

Abstract

BACKGROUND The morphological evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer (BC) is gaining momentum as evidence strengthens for the clinical relevance of this immunological biomarker. Accumulating evidence suggests that the extent of lymphocytic infiltration in tumor tissue can be assessed as a major parameter by evaluation of hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained tumor sections. TILs have been shown to provide prognostic and potentially predictive value, particularly in triple-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-overexpressing BC. DESIGN A standardized methodology for evaluating TILs is now needed as a prerequisite for integrating this parameter in standard histopathological practice, in a research setting as well as in clinical trials. This article reviews current data on the clinical validity and utility of TILs in BC in an effort to foster better knowledge and insight in this rapidly evolving field, and to develop a standardized methodology for visual assessment on H&E sections, acknowledging the future potential of molecular/multiplexed approaches. CONCLUSIONS The methodology provided is sufficiently detailed to offer a uniformly applied, pragmatic starting point and improve consistency and reproducibility in the measurement of TILs for future studies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/annonc/mdu450

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 3,113

Metadata

Authors
Salgado, R., Denkert, C., Demaria, S., Sirtaine, N., Klauschen, F., Pruneri, G., Wienert, S., Van den Eynden, G., Baehner, F. L., Penault-Llorca, F., Perez, E. A., Thompson, E. A., Symmans, W. F., Richardson, A. L., Brock, J., Criscitiello, C., Bailey, H., Ignatiadis, M., Floris, G., Sparano, J., Kos, Z., Nielsen, T., Rimm, D. L., Allison, K. H., Reis-Filho, J. S., Loibl, S., Sotiriou, C., Viale, G., Badve, S., Adams, S., Willard-Gallo, K., & Loi, S.
Venue
Annals of Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
259-271
ISSN
0923-7534 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2120431466
Cited by
3,113
References
4
FWCI
39.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer: recommendations by an International TILs Working Group 2014. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/annonc/mdu450
The paper
Salgado, R., Denkert, C., Demaria, S., Sirtaine, N., Klauschen, F., Pruneri, G., Wienert, S., Van den Eynden, G., Baehner, F. L., Penault-Llorca, F., Perez, E. A., Thompson, E. A., Symmans, W. F., Richardson, A. L., Brock, J., Criscitiello, C., Bailey, H., Ignatiadis, M., Floris, G., . . . Loi, S. (2015). The evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer: recommendations by an International TILs Working Group 2014. Annals of Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu450

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.