52
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Mammostrat ® as a tool to stratify breast cancer patients at risk of recurrence during endocrine therapy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Patients with early-stage breast cancer, treated with endocrine therapy, have approximately 90% 5-year disease-free survival. However, for patients at higher risk of relapse despite endocrine therapy, additional adjuvant therapy, such as chemotherapy, may be indicated. The challenge is to prospectively identify such patients. The Mammostrat ® test uses five immunohistochemical markers to stratify patients on tamoxifen therapy into risk groups to inform treatment decisions. We tested the efficacy of this panel in a mixed population of cases treated in a single center with breast-conserving surgery and long-term follow-up.

          Methods

          Tissue microarrays from a consecutive series (1981 to 1998) of 1,812 women managed by wide local excision and postoperative radiotherapy were collected following appropriate ethical review. Of 1,390 cases stained, 197 received no adjuvant hormonal or chemotherapy, 1,044 received tamoxifen only, and 149 received a combination of hormonal therapy and chemotherapy. Median age at diagnosis was 57, 71% were postmenopausal, 23.9% were node-positive and median tumor size was 1.5 cm. Samples were stained using triplicate 0.6 mm 2 tissue microarray cores, and positivity for p53, HTF9C, CEACAM5, NDRG1 and SLC7A5 was assessed. Each case was assigned a Mammostrat ® risk score, and distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by marker positivity and risk score.

          Results

          Increased Mammostrat ® scores were significantly associated with reduced DRFS, RFS and OS in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer ( P < 0.00001). In multivariate analyses the risk score was independent of conventional risk factors for DRFS, RFS and OS ( P < 0.05). In node-negative, tamoxifen-treated patients, 10-year recurrence rates were 7.6 ± 1.5% in the low-risk group versus 20.0 ± 4.4% in the high-risk group. Further, exploratory analyses revealed associations with outcome in both ER-negative and untreated patients.

          Conclusions

          This is the fifth independent study providing evidence that Mammostrat ® can act as an independent prognostic tool for ER-positive, tamoxifen-treated breast cancer. In addition, this study revealed for the first time a possible association with outcome regardless of node status and ER-negative tumors. When viewed in the context of previous results, these data provide further support for this antibody panel as an aid to patient management in early-stage breast cancer.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Biological processes associated with breast cancer clinical outcome depend on the molecular subtypes.

          Recently, several prognostic gene expression signatures have been identified; however, their performance has never been evaluated according to the previously described molecular subtypes based on the estrogen receptor (ER) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and their biological meaning has remained unclear. Here we aimed to perform a comprehensive meta-analysis integrating both clinicopathologic and gene expression data, focusing on the main molecular subtypes. We developed gene expression modules related to key biological processes in breast cancer such as tumor invasion, immune response, angiogenesis, apoptosis, proliferation, and ER and HER2 signaling, and then analyzed these modules together with clinical variables and several prognostic signatures on publicly available microarray studies (>2,100 patients). Multivariate analysis showed that in the ER+/HER2- subgroup, only the proliferation module and the histologic grade were significantly associated with clinical outcome. In the ER-/HER2- subgroup, only the immune response module was associated with prognosis, whereas in the HER2+ tumors, the tumor invasion and immune response modules displayed significant association with survival. Proliferation was identified as the most important component of several prognostic signatures, and their performance was limited to the ER+/HER2- subgroup. Although proliferation is the strongest parameter predicting clinical outcome in the ER+/HER2- subtype and the common denominator of most prognostic gene signatures, immune response and tumor invasion seem to be the main molecular processes associated with prognosis in the ER-/HER2- and HER2+ subgroups, respectively. These findings may help to define new clinicogenomic models and to identify new therapeutic strategies in the specific molecular subgroups.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Automated quantitative analysis (AQUA) of in situ protein expression, antibody concentration, and prognosis.

            Disparate results in the immunohistochemistry literature regarding the relationship between biomarker expression and patient outcome decrease the credibility of tissue biomarker studies. We investigated whether some of these disparities result from subjective optimization of antibody concentration. We used the automated quantitative analysis (AQUA) system and various concentrations of antibodies against HER2 (1 : 500 to 1 : 8000 dilutions), p53 (1 : 50 to 1 : 800 dilutions), and estrogen receptor (ER; 1 : 100 and 1 : 1000 dilutions) to assess expression of HER2 and p53 in a tissue microarray containing specimens from 250 breast cancer patients with long-term survival data available. HER2 expression in the tissue microarray was also assessed by conventional immunohistochemistry. Relative risk (RR) of disease-specific mortality was assessed for every cutpoint with the X-tile program. Cumulative disease-specific survival was assessed by the Kaplan-Meier method. All statistical tests were two-sided. For HER2 and p53 and an optimal cutpoint, when a high antibody concentration (i.e., 1 : 500 dilution) was used with the AQUA system, low expression was associated with poorer survival than high expression; however, when a low antibody concentration (i.e., 1 : 8000 dilution) was used, high expression was associated with poorer survival. For example, for a 1 : 8000 dilution of HER2 antibody and high expression defined as the top 15% of HER2 expression, high HER2 expression was associated with increased disease-specific mortality (RR = 1.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.21 to 3.23; P = .007), compared with low expression. However, for a 1 : 500 dilution of HER2 antibody and high expression defined as the top 85% of HER2 expression, high HER2 expression was associated with decreased disease-specific mortality (RR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.29 to 0.76; P = .002), compared with low HER2 expression. Biomarker antibody concentration appears to dramatically affect the apparent relationship between biomarker expression and outcome.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Quantitative analysis of breast cancer tissue microarrays shows that both high and normal levels of HER2 expression are associated with poor outcome.

              Using a tissue microarray cohort of 300 breast cancers and 84 samples of normal breast epithelium, we analyzed HER2/neu expression and compared traditional clinical (manual) scoring with a recently developed system for the quantitative measurement of immunohistochemical stains (AQUA). As expected, both methods identified a population (10-15%) of high-HER2-expressing tumors with poor 30-year disease-related survival. Using AQUA analysis, we found that normal epithelium expresses a low but detectable level of HER2 and that 17.5% of tumors exhibit similar low-level HER2 expression. This low group was not definable by manual scoring. Surprisingly, HER2-normal tumors were as aggressive as HER2-overexpressing tumors. Our studies suggest that in situ quantitative measurement of HER2 stratifies breast tumors into three expression levels: normal, intermediate, and high, where both normal and high levels are associated with a worse outcome.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Breast Cancer Res
                Breast Cancer Research : BCR
                BioMed Central
                1465-5411
                1465-542X
                2010
                8 July 2010
                : 12
                : 4
                : R47
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Endocrine Cancer Group, Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre, Edinburgh University, Carrington Crescent, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK
                [2 ]Edinburgh Cancer Centre, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road South, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK
                [3 ]Clarient Inc., 31 Columbia, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656, USA
                Article
                bcr2604
                10.1186/bcr2604
                2949634
                20615243
                3afdf974-721a-4746-bc24-b177d9c1ff6e
                Copyright ©2010 Bartlett et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 9 March 2010
                : 28 March 2010
                : 8 July 2010
                Categories
                Research Article

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article