Tumor marker phenotype concordance in second primary breast cancer, California, 1999-2004

Survival After Contralateral Secondary Breast Cancer by Age Group in California

PURPOSE

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common secondary cancer and has poorer survival than primary BC (pBC) after any prior malignancy. For BC survivors, developing a contralateral secondary BC (CSBC) is the most frequent second-cancer event and is currently treated similarly to pBC. Identifying survival differences between pBC and CSBC could influence future counseling and treatments for patients with CSBC.

METHODS

Women (≥15 years) diagnosed with pBC from 1991 to 2015 in the California Cancer Registry (n = 377,176) were compared with those with CSBC (n = 15,586) by age group (15-39 years, n = 406; 40-64 years, n = 6814; ≥ 65 years, n = 8366). Multivariable logistic regression models assessed factors associated with CSBC. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models assessed BC-specific survival (BCSS), while accounting for the competing risk of death.

RESULTS

Across all ages, CSBC patients were more likely to have smaller tumors (T2 vs. T1a; 15-39 yeras: OR 0.25, CI 0.16-0.38; 40-64 years: OR 0.41, CI 0.37-0.45; ≥ 65 years: OR 0.46, CI 0.42-0.51) and lymph node-negative disease (positive vs. negative; 15-39 years: OR 0.86, CI 0.69-1.08; 40-64 years: OR 0.88, CI 0.83-0.93; ≥ 65 years: OR 0.89, CI 0.84-0.94). Additionally, CSBC was associated with worse survival compared with pBC across all ages (15-39 years: HR 2.73, CI 2.30-3.25; 40-64 years: HR 2.13, CI 2.01-2.26; ≥ 65 years: HR 1.52, CI 1.43-1.61).

CONCLUSION

BCSS is worse among all women diagnosed with CSBC compared with pBC, with the strongest impact seen in adolescent and young adult women. Worse survival after CSBC, despite associations with smaller tumors and lymph node negativity, suggests that CSBC may need eventual treatment reconsideration.

Survival Outcomes in Women with Unilateral, Triple-Negative, Breast Cancer Correlated with Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Despite increased utilization of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), there is insufficient evidence that it improves survival in average-risk women with unilateral breast cancer. CPM may be of heightened interest to patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) because these patients are more likely to have BRCA1 mutation-associated disease and are not candidates for the chemoprevention benefits of adjuvant endocrine therapy.

METHODS

Survival and recurrence outcomes were evaluated for all TNBC patients from a multi-institutional database (1999-2018) at two academic cancer programs in two metropolitan cities of the Northeast and Midwest. Median follow-up time was 3.7 years.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and nighty six TNBC patients were evaluated and 15.45% underwent CPM. Women undergoing CPM were more likely to be white (p < 0.001), younger (p < 0.001), and underwent genetic testing (p < 0.001). A borderline survival benefit was observed for TNBC patients undergoing CPM (5-year overall survival 95.1% vs. 85.0%; p = 0.05). There was no difference in survival when BRCA mutation carriers were excluded (5-year overall survival 94.1% vs. 85.2%; p = 0.12). For BRCA mutation carriers, a numeric trend was observed for improved survival for patients undergoing CPM (5-year overall survival 97.2% vs. 84.1%; p = 0.35). Among patients not undergoing CPM, the rate of developing a new primary breast cancer was 2.2% (15/673). Among these 15 patients, 20% (3/15) were known BRCA mutation carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate no survival benefit for TNBC patients without BRCA1/2 mutations undergoing CPM.

Secondary Breast Cancer Sociodemographic Characteristics and Survival by Age Group

Background

Secondary cancers account for 16% of all new cancer diagnoses, with breast cancer (BC) the most common secondary cancer. We have shown that secondary BC has unique characteristics and decreased survival compared with primary BC in adolescent and young adults (AYA; 15–39 years old). However, older BC populations are less well studied.

Methods

Females (age ≥ 15 years) diagnosed with primary BC during 1991–2015 (n = 377,167) and enrolled in the California Cancer Registry were compared with those with secondary BC (n = 37,625) by age (15–39, 40–64, ≥ 65 years). We examined BC-specific survival (BCSS) accounting for other causes of death as a competing risk using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression.

Results

Most secondary BC patients were of older age (15–39, n = 777; 40–64, n = 15,848; ≥ 65, n = 21,000). Compared with primary BC treatment, secondary BCs were more often treated with mastectomy and less often with chemotherapy and/or radiation. BCSS was shorter in secondary BC patients than primary BC patients, but the survival difference between secondary and primary BC diminished with age [15–39 hazard ratio (HR): 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.83–2.39; 40–64 HR: 1.51; 95% CI 1.44–1.58; ≥ 65 HR: 1.14; 95% CI 1.10–1.19]. Survival differences were most pronounced in women with hormone receptor positive disease and Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islanders 40–64 years of age.

Conclusions

When BC is diagnosed following a prior cancer of any organ site, BCSS is worse than when compared with patients for whom BC is the primary diagnosis, suggesting that we may need to tailor our treatments for women with secondary BC.

Risks of subsequent primary cancers among breast cancer survivors according to hormone receptor status

BACKGROUND

This study was aimed at examining the risks of subsequent primary cancers (SPCs) among breast cancer survivors by hormone receptor (HR) status and age at diagnosis.

METHODS

Data from 12 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were used to identify 431,222 breast cancer survivors (at least 1 year) diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 84 years from 1992 to 2015. Risks of SPCs were measured as the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) and the excess absolute risk (EAR) per 10,000 person-years. Poisson regression was used to test the difference in SIRs by HR status.

RESULTS

In comparison with the general population, the risk of new cancer diagnoses among survivors was 20% higher for those with HR-positive cancers (SIR, 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.21; EAR, 23.3/10,000 person-years) and 44% higher for those with HR-negative cancers (SIR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.41-1.47; EAR, 45.2/10,000 person-years), with the risk difference between HR statuses statistically significant. The higher risk after HR-negative cancer was driven by acute nonlymphocytic leukemia and breast, ovarian, peritoneal, and lung cancers. By age at diagnosis, the total EAR per 10,000 person-years ranged from 15.8 (95% CI, 14.1-17.5; SIR, 1.11) among late-onset (age, 50-84 years) HR-positive survivors to 69.4 (95% CI, 65.1-73.7; SIR, 2.24) among early-onset (age, 20-49 years) HR-negative survivors, with subsequent breast cancer representing 73% to 80% of the total EAR. After breast cancer, the greatest EARs were for ovarian cancer among early-onset HR-negative survivors, lung cancer among early- and late-onset HR-negative survivors, and uterine corpus cancer among late-onset HR-positive survivors.

CONCLUSIONS

Risks of SPCs after breast cancer differ substantially by subtype and age. This suggests that more targeted approaches for cancer prevention and early-detection strategies are needed in survivorship care planning.

Evidence for Etiologic Subtypes of Breast Cancer in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study

BACKGROUND

Distinctions in the etiology of triple-negative versus luminal breast cancer have become well established using immunohistochemical surrogates [notably estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)]. However, it is unclear whether established immunohistochemical subtypes are the sole or definitive means of etiologically subdividing breast cancers.

METHODS

We evaluated clinical biomarkers and tumor suppressor p53 with risk factor data from cases and controls in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, a population-based study of incident breast cancers. For each individual marker and combinations of markers, we calculated an aggregate measure to distinguish the etiologic heterogeneity of different classification schema. To compare schema, we estimated subtype-specific case-control odds ratios for individual risk factors and fit age-at-incidence curves with two-component mixture models. We also evaluated subtype concordance of metachronous contralateral breast tumors in the California Cancer Registry.

RESULTS

ER was the biomarker that individually explained the greatest variability in risk factor profiles. However, further subdivision by p53 significantly increased the degree of etiologic heterogeneity. Age at diagnosis, nulliparity, and race were heterogeneously associated with ER/p53 subtypes. The ER-/p53+ subtype exhibited a similar risk factor profile and age-at-incidence distribution to the triple-negative subtype.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical marker-based intrinsic subtypes have established value, yet other schema may also yield important etiologic insights.

IMPACT

Novel environmental or genetic risk factors may be identifiable by considering different etiologic schema, including cross-classification based on ER/p53.

Predictors of surveillance mammography outcomes in women with a personal history of breast cancer

PURPOSE

To identify predictors of poor mammography surveillance outcomes based on clinico-pathologic features.

METHODS

This study was HIPAA compliant and IRB approved. We performed an electronic medical record review for a cohort of women with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Stage I or II invasive breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy who developed subsequent in-breast treatment recurrence (IBTR) or contralateral breast cancer (CBC). Poor surveillance outcome was defined as second breast cancer not detected by surveillance mammography, including interval cancers (diagnosed within 365 days of surveillance mammogram with negative results) and clinically detected cancers (diagnosed without a surveillance mammogram in the preceding 365 days). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed to identify predictors of poor mammography surveillance outcome, including patient and primary tumor characteristics, breast density, mode of primary tumor detection, and time to second cancer diagnosis.

RESULTS

164 women met inclusion criteria (65 with IBTR, 99 with CBC); 124 had screen-detected second cancers. On univariate analysis, poor surveillance outcome (n = 40) was associated with age at primary cancer diagnosis < 50 years (p < 0.0001), AJCC stage II primary cancers (p = 0.007), and heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts (p = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, age < 50 years at primary breast cancer diagnosis remained a significant predictor of poor surveillance outcome (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Women younger than age 50 at primary breast cancer diagnosis are at risk of poor surveillance mammography outcomes, and may be appropriate candidates for more intensive clinical and imaging surveillance.

Etiologic field effect: reappraisal of the field effect concept in cancer predisposition and progression

The term 'field effect' (also known as field defect, field cancerization, or field carcinogenesis) has been used to describe a field of cellular and molecular alteration, which predisposes to the development of neoplasms within that territory. We explore an expanded, integrative concept, 'etiologic field effect', which asserts that various etiologic factors (the exposome including dietary, lifestyle, environmental, microbial, hormonal, and genetic factors) and their interactions (the interactome) contribute to a tissue microenvironmental milieu that constitutes a 'field of susceptibility' to neoplasia initiation, evolution, and progression. Importantly, etiological fields predate the acquisition of molecular aberrations commonly considered to indicate presence of filed effect. Inspired by molecular pathological epidemiology (MPE) research, which examines the influence of etiologic factors on cellular and molecular alterations during disease course, an etiologically focused approach to field effect can: (1) broaden the horizons of our inquiry into cancer susceptibility and progression at molecular, cellular, and environmental levels, during all stages of tumor evolution; (2) embrace host-environment-tumor interactions (including gene-environment interactions) occurring in the tumor microenvironment; and, (3) help explain intriguing observations, such as shared molecular features between bilateral primary breast carcinomas, and between synchronous colorectal cancers, where similar molecular changes are absent from intervening normal colon. MPE research has identified a number of endogenous and environmental exposures which can influence not only molecular signatures in the genome, epigenome, transcriptome, proteome, metabolome and interactome, but also host immunity and tumor behavior. We anticipate that future technological advances will allow the development of in vivo biosensors capable of detecting and quantifying 'etiologic field effect' as abnormal network pathology patterns of cellular and microenvironmental responses to endogenous and exogenous exposures. Through an 'etiologic field effect' paradigm, and holistic systems pathology (systems biology) approaches to cancer biology, we can improve personalized prevention and treatment strategies for precision medicine.

Heterogeneity in hormone-receptor status and survival outcomes among women with synchronous and metachronous bilateral breast cancers

To examine whether discordance in the hormone-receptor status predicts clinical outcomes in patients with bilateral synchronous (SBC) or metachronous breast cancer (MBC), we analyzed data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program (1998-2011) using Cox models. After excluding 10,231 patients with missing data on hormone receptors in at least one tumor, 4403 SBC and 7159 MBC were included in the study. Among SBC cases, patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-discordant tumors had higher mortality risk (multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.60-2.40) than patients with ER concordant-positive tumors, whereas patients with ER concordant-negative tumors had the highest risk (HR = 2.49, 95% CI 2.03-3.07). Among MBC cases, patients with a positive-to-negative change in ER status (HR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.08-1.62) or ER concordant-negative tumors (HR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.19-1.85) had worse survival than patients with ER concordant-positive tumors. In conclusion, discordance in the hormone-receptor status was an independent predictor of survival outcomes.

Major Functional Transcriptome of an Inferred Center Regulator of an ER(-) Breast Cancer Model System

We aimed to find clinically relevant gene activities ruled by the signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) proteins in an ER(-) breast cancer population via network approach. STAT3 is negatively associated with both lymph nodal category and stage. MYC is a component of STAT3 network. MYC and STAT3 may co-regulate gene expressions for Warburg effect, stem cell like phenotype, cell proliferation and angiogenesis. We identified a STAT3 network in silico showing its ability in predicting its target gene expressions primarily for specific tumor subtype, tumor progression, treatment options and prognostic features. The aberrant expressions of MYC and STAT3 are enriched in triple negatives (TN). They promote histological grade, vascularity, metastasis and tumor anti-apoptotic activities. VEGFA, STAT3, FOXM1 and METAP2 are druggable targets. High levels of METAP2, MMP7, IGF2 and IGF2R are unfavorable prognostic factors. STAT3 is an inferred center regulator at early cancer development predominantly in TN.

Comparison of hormonal receptor and HER-2 status between breast primary tumours and relapsing tumours: clinical implications of progesterone receptor loss

Differences in hormone receptor and HER-2 status between primary tumour and corresponding relapse could have a substantial impact on clinical management of patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate change in expression of hormone receptors and HER-2 status between primary tumour and corresponding local recurrence or distant metastasis. We analysed 140 primary tumours and related recurrent or metastatic samples. Hormone receptors status was evaluated by immunohistochemistry, while HER-2 status by immunohistochemistry and silver in situ hybridisation. A change in HER-2 was rare; 3.7% of cases by immunohistochemistry and only 0.7% by silver in situ hybridisation analysis. A change in estrogen and progesterone receptors was seen in 6.4% and 21.4% of cases, respectively. Estrogen receptor change was not affected by adjuvant therapy, whereas progesterone receptor was influenced by adjuvant chemotherapy associated to hormone therapy (P = 0.0005). A change in progesterone receptor was more frequent in distant metastases than in local recurrences (P = 0.03). In the setting of estrogen receptor positive tumours, patients with progesterone receptor loss in local recurrence had a statistically significant lower median metastasis free survival compared to others patients; progesterone receptor positive, 112 months; progesterone receptor negative, 24 months (P = 0.005). A change between primary tumour and corresponding relapse is frequent for progesterone receptor, infrequent for estrogen receptor and rare for HER-2. In cases with changes in HER-2, it is worthwhile reassessing HER-2 status with both immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridisation analysis. Progesterone receptor loss seems to be influenced by therapy and to correlate with a worse prognosis.

Adaptive changes result in activation of alternate signaling pathways and acquisition of resistance to aromatase inhibitors

Hormone therapy is an effective approach for the treatment of breast cancer. Although the antiestrogen tamoxifen has had a major impact on the treatment of the disease, aromatase inhibitors (AIs), which reduce estrogen synthesis, have recently proved to be more effective. These agents are now used as first-line therapy for postmenopausal breast cancer. Nevertheless, despite the efficacy of these agents, resistance to treatment eventually may occur in some patients. In an effort to overcome this resistance and extend the benefits of AIs, investigators have studied the mechanisms involved in resistance to AIs. Adaptive changes that result in activation of alternate signaling pathways in AI-resistant tumors have been identified in xenograft and cell line models. Expression of estrogen receptor α and aromatase was shown to be decreased in tumors after long-term treatment with AIs. In contrast, increased expression was observed in tyrosine kinase receptors such as Her-2 and insulin-like growth factor receptor, as well as in downstream signaling proteins such as mitogen-activated protein kinase. Functional activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway and dependency on growth factor receptor signaling have been observed in AI-resistant cells and tumors.

Risk of a second breast cancer associated with hormone-receptor and HER2/neu status of the first breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

Hormone-receptor (HR) and HER2/neu-receptor (HER2) status of breast tumors are important indicators for targeted therapies. We examine the association of receptor status and risk for a second breast cancer.

METHODS

We analyzed data on 106,331 women in the California Cancer Registry whose first cancer is locoregional invasive breast disease, diagnosed from 1999 through 2005, yielding 1,613 second primary breast cancers. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate risk of second tumors, accounting for age at first diagnosis, duration at risk, and race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

Among non-Hispanic whites, HR-positive first tumors signal a reduction in risk for second breast cancers (SIR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.77-0.89) whereas HR-negative status signals elevated risk (SIR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.29-1.70). Asian/Pacific Islanders, African Americans, and Hispanics are at elevated risk of second breast cancers regardless of HR status of the first tumor. Hispanics with HR-negative first tumors are at greater risk than those with HR-positive disease (HR(-): SIR = 3.76, 95% CI: 2.97-4.71; HR(+): SIR = 1.86, 95% CI: 1.56-2.20). HER2 status does not differentiate risk for second tumors in any group examined.

CONCLUSIONS

HR status of a first breast cancer is a marker for risk of a second breast cancer. HER2 status does not seem to be a marker of risk for a second breast cancer. Risk differences across race/ethnic groups by HR status suggest heterogeneity of breast cancers across race/ethnicity.

IMPACT

These data suggest that HR status may be helpful in shaping strategies to reduce risk of a second breast cancer, while HER2 status seems uninformative for this purpose.

A strategy for distinguishing optimal cancer subtypes

Much attention is directed currently to identifying subtypes of cancers that are genetically and clinically distinct. The expectation is that subtyping on the basis of somatic genomic characteristics will supplant traditional pathological subtypes with respect to relevance for targeted therapies and clinical course. Less attention has been paid to the goal of validating subtypes on the basis of the distinctiveness of their etiologies. In this article it is shown that studies of individuals with double primary malignancies provide uniquely valuable information for establishing the etiologic distinctiveness of candidate tumor subtypes. Studies of double primaries have the potential to definitively rank candidate taxonomic systems with respect to their etiological relevance by determining which subtypes are most highly correlated in the double primaries. The concept is illustrated with data from studies of the concordance of estrogen and progestin status in bilateral breast cancers, where it is shown that double primaries are much more likely to be concordant with respect to estrogen receptor (ER) status than for PR status. The high concordance of ER status is consistent with a growing literature demonstrating the etiologic distinctiveness of ER+ and ER- tumors.

Risk of second breast cancer according to estrogen receptor status and family history

A recent study reported an increased risk of contralateral estrogen-negative breast cancer after a first primary estrogen-negative breast cancer. Our study aims to confirm this result and to evaluate how the risk of second breast cancer occurrence is affected by family history of breast cancer and anti-estrogen treatment. We included all 4,152 women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1995 and 2007, using data from the population-based Geneva Cancer Registry. We compared the incidence of second breast cancer among patients according to estrogen receptor (ER) status with that expected in the general population by age-period Standardized Incidence Ratios (SIRs). Among the cohort, 63 women developed second breast cancer. Patients with ER-positive first tumors had a decreased risk of second breast cancer occurrence (SIR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.48-0.90), whereas patients with ER-negative primary tumors had an increased risk (SIR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.19-3.09) limited to ER-negative second tumors (SIR: 7.94, 95% CI: 3.81-14.60). Patients with positive family history had a tenfold (SIR: 9.74, 95% CI: 3.57-21.12) higher risk of ER-negative second tumor which increased to nearly 50-fold (SIR: 46.18, 95% CI: 12.58-118.22) when the first tumor was ER-negative. Treatment with anti-estrogen decreased the risk of second ER-positive tumors but not ER-negative tumors. The risk of second ER-negative breast cancer is very high after a first ER-negative tumor, in particular among women with strong family history. Surveillance and prevention of second cancer occurrence should consider both ER status of the first tumor and family history.