Extracellular matrix proteins as diagnostic markers of breast carcinoma

Background Invasive ductal and lobular carcinomas (IDC and ILC) are the most common histological types of breast cancer. Clinical follow-up data and metastatic patterns suggest that the development and progression of these tumors are different. The aim of our study was to identify gene expression profiles of IDC and ILC in relation to normal breast epithelial cells. Methods We examined 30 samples (normal ductal and lobular cells from 10 patients, IDC cells from 5 patients, ILC cells from 5 patients) microdissected from cryosections of ten mastectomy specimens from postmenopausal patients. Fifty nanograms of total RNA were amplified and labeled by PCR and in vitro transcription. Samples were analysed upon Affymetrix U133 Plus 2.0 Arrays. The expression of seven differentially expressed genes (CDH1, EMP1, DDR1, DVL1, KRT5, KRT6, KRT17) was verified by immunohistochemistry on tissue microarrays. Expression of ASPN mRNA was validated by in situ hybridization on frozen sections, and CTHRC1, ASPN and COL3A1 were tested by PCR. Results Using GCOS pairwise comparison algorithm and rank products we have identified 84 named genes common to ILC versus normal cell types, 74 named genes common to IDC versus normal cell types, 78 named genes differentially expressed between normal ductal and lobular cells, and 28 named genes between IDC and ILC. Genes distinguishing between IDC and ILC are involved in epithelial-mesenchymal transition, TGF-beta and Wnt signaling. These changes were present in both tumor types but appeared to be more prominent in ILC. Immunohistochemistry for several novel markers (EMP1, DVL1, DDR1) distinguished large sets of IDC from ILC. Conclusion IDC and ILC can be differentiated both at the gene and protein levels. In this study we report two candidate genes, asporin (ASPN) and collagen triple helix repeat containing 1 (CTHRC1) which might be significant in breast carcinogenesis. Besides E-cadherin, the proteins validated on tissue microarrays (EMP1, DVL1, DDR1) may represent novel immunohistochemical markers helpful in distinguishing between IDC and ILC. Further studies with larger sets of patients are needed to verify the gene expression profiles of various histological types of breast cancer in order to determine molecular subclassifications, prognosis and the optimum treatment strategies.

CA 15-3 which detects soluble forms of MUC-1 protein is the most widely used serum marker in patients with breast cancer. Its main use is for monitoring therapy in patients with metastatic disease. In monitoring therapy in this setting, CA 15-3 should not be used alone but measured in conjunction with diagnostic imaging, clinical history and physical examination. CA 15-3 is particularly valuable for treatment monitoring in patients that have disease that cannot be evaluated using existing radiological procedures. CA 15-3 may also be used in the postoperative surveillance of asymptomatic women who have undergone surgery for invasive breast cancer. In this setting, serial determination can provide median lead-times of 5-6 months in the early detection of recurrent/metastatic breast cancer. It is unclear however, whether administering systemic therapy based on this lead-time improves patient outcome. Consequently, expert panels disagree on the utility of regularly measuring CA 15-3 in the postoperative surveillance of asymptomatic women following a diagnosis of breast cancer. The main limitation of CA 15-3 as a marker for breast cancer is that serum levels are rarely increased in patients with early or localized disease. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Although multiple serum-based tumor markers have been described for breast cancer, such as CA 15-3, BR 27.29 (CA27.29), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), tissue polypeptide antigen, tissue polypeptide specific antigen, and HER-2 (the extracellular domain), the most widely used are CA 15-3 and CEA. The literature relevant to serum tumor markers in breast cancer was reviewed. Particular attention was given to systematic reviews, prospective randomized trials, and guidelines issued by expert panels. Because of a lack of sensitivity for early disease and lack of specificity, none of the available markers is of value for the detection of early breast cancer. High preoperative concentrations of CA 15-3 are, however, associated with adverse patient outcome. Although serial determinations of tumor markers after primary treatment for breast cancer can preclinically detect recurrent/metastatic disease with lead times of approximately 2-9 months, the clinical value of this lead time remains to be determined. Serum markers, however, are the only validated approach for monitoring treatment in patients with advanced disease that cannot be evaluated by use of conventional criteria. CA 15-3 is one of the first circulating prognostic factors for breast cancer. Preoperative concentrations thus might be combined with existing prognostic factors for predicting outcome in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. At present, the most important clinical application of CA 15-3 is in monitoring therapy in patients with advanced breast cancer that is not assessable by existing clinical or radiologic procedures.