1
|
Van Alsten SC, Zipple I, Calhoun BC, Troester MA. Misclassification of second primary and recurrent breast cancer in the surveillance epidemiology and end results registry. Cancer Causes Control 2024:10.1007/s10552-024-01944-7. [PMID: 39702817 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-024-01944-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2024] [Accepted: 11/20/2024] [Indexed: 12/21/2024]
Abstract
The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry incorporates laterality, histology, latency, and topography to identify second primary breast cancers. Contralateral tumors are classified as second primaries, but ipsilaterals are subject to additional inclusion criteria that increase specificity but may induce biases. It is important to understand how classification methods affect accuracy of second tumor classification. We collected estrogen, progesterone, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ER, PR, Her2) status for 11,838 contralateral and 5,371 ipsilateral metachronous secondary tumors and estimated concordance odds ratios (cORs) to evaluate receptor dependence (the tendency for tumors to share receptor status) by laterality. If only second primaries are included, receptor dependence should be similar for contralateral and ipsilateral tumors. Thus, we compared ratios of cORs as a measure of inaccuracy. Cases who met ipsilateral second primary criteria were younger and had less aggressive primary tumor characteristics compared to contralateral tumors. Time to secondary tumors was (by definition) longer for ipsilaterals than contralaterals, especially among ER + primaries. Overall and in multiple strata, ipsilateral tumors showed higher receptor dependence than contralateral tumors (ratios of cORs > 1), suggesting some SEER-included ipsilaterals are recurrences. SEER multiple primary criteria increase specificity, but remain inaccurate and may lack sensitivity. The dearth of early occurring ipsilateral tumors (by definition), coupled with high observed receptor dependence among ipsilaterals, suggests important inaccuracies. Datasets that allow comparison of pathologist- and SEER-classification to true multi-marker genomic dependence are needed to understand inaccuracies induced by SEER definitions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah C Van Alsten
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box 7435, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - Isaiah Zipple
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - Benjamin C Calhoun
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - Melissa A Troester
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box 7435, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Alcantara VS, Chan SMZ, Wong FY, Allen JC, Lim GH. Determining the Need for Metastatic Staging in Patients with Bilateral Breast Cancers. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:1936-1946. [PMID: 38668048 PMCID: PMC11048779 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31040145] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/29/2024] [Revised: 03/23/2024] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Bilateral breast cancers (BBC) diagnosed at an interval apart are uncommon. While metastatic staging guidelines are established in patients with unilateral breast cancer, its role in BBC diagnosed at an interval apart is unclear. We aim to identify the subgroup who would benefit from metastatic staging at contralateral cancer diagnosis. Methods: Eligible patients were divided into three categories: (A) ipsilateral invasive cancer and contralateral ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), (B) bilateral invasive cancers and (C) ipsilateral DCIS and contralateral invasive cancer and reviewed retrospectively. We excluded patients with bilateral DCIS, synchronous BBC diagnosed within 6 months from first cancer, patients who were stage IV at first cancer diagnosis and patients with recurrence prior to contralateral cancer. Results: Of 4516 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, 79 patients were included. Systemic metastasis occurred in 15.6% of patients in Group B. Having nodal positivity of either cancer which were diagnosed ≤30 months apart and nodal positivity of only the contralateral cancer when diagnosed >30 months apart was significantly associated with systemic metastasis (p = 0.0322). Conclusions: Both the nodal status and a 30 months cut-off time interval between the two cancers can be used to identify patients who will benefit from metastatic staging. This finding requires validation in larger studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sut Mo Zachary Chan
- Breast Department, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore 229899, Singapore
| | - Fuh Yong Wong
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre, Singapore 168583, Singapore
| | | | - Geok Hoon Lim
- Breast Department, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore 229899, Singapore
- Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore 169857, Singapore;
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ramin C, Withrow DR, Davis Lynn BC, Gierach GL, Berrington de González A. Risk of contralateral breast cancer according to first breast cancer characteristics among women in the USA, 1992-2016. Breast Cancer Res 2021; 23:24. [PMID: 33596988 PMCID: PMC7890613 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-021-01400-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2020] [Accepted: 01/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Estimates of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk in the modern treatment era by year of diagnosis and characteristics of the first breast cancer are needed to assess the impact of recent advances in breast cancer treatment and inform clinical decision making. Methods We examined CBC risk among 419,818 women (age 30–84 years) who were diagnosed with a first unilateral invasive breast cancer and survived ≥ 1 year in the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program cancer registries from 1992 to 2015 (follow-up through 2016). CBC was defined as a second invasive breast cancer in the contralateral breast ≥ 12 months after the first breast cancer. We estimated standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) of CBC by year of diagnosis, age at diagnosis, and tumor characteristics for the first breast cancer. Cumulative incidence of CBC was calculated for women diagnosed with a first breast cancer in the recent treatment era (2004–2015, follow-up through 2016). Results Over a median follow-up of 8 years (range 1–25 years), 12,986 breast cancer patients developed CBC. Overall, breast cancer patients had approximately twice the risk of developing cancer in the contralateral breast when compared to that expected in the general population (SIR = 2.21, 95% CI = 2.17–2.25). SIRs for CBC declined by year of first diagnosis, irrespective of age at diagnosis and estrogen receptor (ER) status (p-trends < 0.001), but the strongest decline was after an ER-positive tumor. The 5-year cumulative incidence of CBC ranged from 1.01% (95% CI = 0.90–1.14%) in younger women (age < 50 years) with a first ER-positive tumor to 1.89% (95% CI = 1.61–2.21%) in younger women with a first ER-negative tumor. Conclusion Declines in CBC risk are consistent with continued advances in breast cancer treatment. The updated estimates of cumulative incidence inform breast cancer patients and clinicians on the risk of CBC and may help guide treatment decisions. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13058-021-01400-3.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cody Ramin
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| | - Diana R Withrow
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Brittny C Davis Lynn
- Integrative Tumor Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Gretchen L Gierach
- Integrative Tumor Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Amy Berrington de González
- Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Girolimetti G, Marchio L, De Leo A, Mangiarelli M, Amato LB, Zanotti S, Taffurelli M, Santini D, Gasparre G, Ceccarelli C. Mitochondrial DNA analysis efficiently contributes to the identification of metastatic contralateral breast cancers. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2020; 147:507-516. [PMID: 33236215 PMCID: PMC7817585 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-020-03459-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2020] [Accepted: 11/06/2020] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Purpose In daily practice, a contralateral breast cancer (CBC) is usually considered as a new independent tumor despite the indications of several studies showing that the second neoplasia may be a metastatic spread of the primary tumor. Recognition of clonal masses in the context of multiple synchronous or metachronous tumors is crucial for correct prognosis, therapeutic choice, and patient management. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequencing shows high informative potential in the diagnosis of synchronous neoplasms, based on the fact that somatic mtDNA mutations are non-recurrent events, whereas tumors sharing them have a common origin. We here applied this technique to reveal clonality of the CBC with respect to the first tumor. Methods We analyzed 30 sample pairs of primary breast cancers and synchronous or metachronous CBCs with detailed clinical information available and compared standard clinico-pathological criteria with mtDNA sequencing to reveal the metastatic nature of CBCs. Results MtDNA analysis was informative in 23% of the cases, for which it confirmed a clonal origin of the second tumor. In addition, it allowed to solve two ambiguous cases where histopathological criteria had failed to be conclusive and to suggest a clonal origin for two additional cases that had been classified as independent by pathologists. Conclusion Overall, the mtDNA-based classification showed a more accurate predictive power than standard histopathology in identifying cases of metastatic rather than bilateral breast cancers in our cohort, suggesting that mtDNA sequencing may be a more precise and easy-to-use method to be introduced in daily routine to support and improve histopathological diagnoses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Girolimetti
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Center for Applied Biomedical Research (CRBA), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Centro di Studio e Ricerca sulle Neoplasie Ginecologiche, University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Unit of Medical Genetics, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University Hospital S.Orsola-Malpighi, Via G. Massarenti, 9, 40138, Bologna, BO, Italy
| | - Lorena Marchio
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Center for Applied Biomedical Research (CRBA), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Centro di Studio e Ricerca sulle Neoplasie Ginecologiche, University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Unit of Medical Genetics, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University Hospital S.Orsola-Malpighi, Via G. Massarenti, 9, 40138, Bologna, BO, Italy
| | - Antonio De Leo
- Centro di Studio e Ricerca sulle Neoplasie Ginecologiche, University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine (DIMES), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| | - Miriam Mangiarelli
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Unit of Medical Genetics, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University Hospital S.Orsola-Malpighi, Via G. Massarenti, 9, 40138, Bologna, BO, Italy
| | - Laura Benedetta Amato
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Center for Applied Biomedical Research (CRBA), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Centro di Studio e Ricerca sulle Neoplasie Ginecologiche, University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Unit of Medical Genetics, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University Hospital S.Orsola-Malpighi, Via G. Massarenti, 9, 40138, Bologna, BO, Italy
| | - Simone Zanotti
- Breast Unit, Department of Woman, Child and Urological Diseases, Sant'Orsola Hospital, University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| | - Mario Taffurelli
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Breast Unit, Department of Woman, Child and Urological Diseases, Sant'Orsola Hospital, University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| | - Donatella Santini
- Centro di Studio e Ricerca sulle Neoplasie Ginecologiche, University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Operative Unit of Pathology, Sant'Orsola Hospital, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Gasparre
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy. .,Center for Applied Biomedical Research (CRBA), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy. .,Centro di Studio e Ricerca sulle Neoplasie Ginecologiche, University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy. .,Unit of Medical Genetics, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University Hospital S.Orsola-Malpighi, Via G. Massarenti, 9, 40138, Bologna, BO, Italy.
| | - Claudio Ceccarelli
- Centro di Studio e Ricerca sulle Neoplasie Ginecologiche, University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy.,Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine (DIMES), University of Bologna, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kramer I, Hooning MJ, Mavaddat N, Hauptmann M, Keeman R, Steyerberg EW, Giardiello D, Antoniou AC, Pharoah PDP, Canisius S, Abu-Ful Z, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Aronson KJ, Augustinsson A, Becher H, Beckmann MW, Behrens S, Benitez J, Bermisheva M, Bogdanova NV, Bojesen SE, Bolla MK, Bonanni B, Brauch H, Bremer M, Brucker SY, Burwinkel B, Castelao JE, Chan TL, Chang-Claude J, Chanock SJ, Chenevix-Trench G, Choi JY, Clarke CL, Collée JM, Couch FJ, Cox A, Cross SS, Czene K, Daly MB, Devilee P, Dörk T, Dos-Santos-Silva I, Dunning AM, Dwek M, Eccles DM, Evans DG, Fasching PA, Flyger H, Gago-Dominguez M, García-Closas M, García-Sáenz JA, Giles GG, Goldgar DE, González-Neira A, Haiman CA, Håkansson N, Hamann U, Hartman M, Heemskerk-Gerritsen BAM, Hollestelle A, Hopper JL, Hou MF, Howell A, Ito H, Jakimovska M, Jakubowska A, Janni W, John EM, Jung A, Kang D, Kets CM, Khusnutdinova E, Ko YD, Kristensen VN, Kurian AW, Kwong A, Lambrechts D, Le Marchand L, Li J, Lindblom A, Lubiński J, Mannermaa A, Manoochehri M, Margolin S, Matsuo K, Mavroudis D, Meindl A, Milne RL, Mulligan AM, Muranen TA, Neuhausen SL, Nevanlinna H, Newman WG, Olshan AF, Olson JE, Olsson H, Park-Simon TW, Peto J, Petridis C, Plaseska-Karanfilska D, Presneau N, Pylkäs K, Radice P, Rennert G, Romero A, Roylance R, Saloustros E, Sawyer EJ, Schmutzler RK, Schwentner L, Scott C, See MH, Shah M, Shen CY, Shu XO, Siesling S, Slager S, Sohn C, Southey MC, Spinelli JJ, Stone J, Tapper WJ, Tengström M, Teo SH, Terry MB, Tollenaar RAEM, Tomlinson I, Troester MA, Vachon CM, van Ongeval C, van Veen EM, Winqvist R, Wolk A, Zheng W, Ziogas A, Easton DF, Hall P, Schmidt MK. Breast Cancer Polygenic Risk Score and Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk. Am J Hum Genet 2020; 107:837-848. [PMID: 33022221 PMCID: PMC7675034 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2020.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2020] [Accepted: 09/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Previous research has shown that polygenic risk scores (PRSs) can be used to stratify women according to their risk of developing primary invasive breast cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the association between a recently validated PRS of 313 germline variants (PRS313) and contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk. We included 56,068 women of European ancestry diagnosed with first invasive breast cancer from 1990 onward with follow-up from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Metachronous CBC risk (N = 1,027) according to the distribution of PRS313 was quantified using Cox regression analyses. We assessed PRS313 interaction with age at first diagnosis, family history, morphology, ER status, PR status, and HER2 status, and (neo)adjuvant therapy. In studies of Asian women, with limited follow-up, CBC risk associated with PRS313 was assessed using logistic regression for 340 women with CBC compared with 12,133 women with unilateral breast cancer. Higher PRS313 was associated with increased CBC risk: hazard ratio per standard deviation (SD) = 1.25 (95%CI = 1.18-1.33) for Europeans, and an OR per SD = 1.15 (95%CI = 1.02-1.29) for Asians. The absolute lifetime risks of CBC, accounting for death as competing risk, were 12.4% for European women at the 10th percentile and 20.5% at the 90th percentile of PRS313. We found no evidence of confounding by or interaction with individual characteristics, characteristics of the primary tumor, or treatment. The C-index for the PRS313 alone was 0.563 (95%CI = 0.547-0.586). In conclusion, PRS313 is an independent factor associated with CBC risk and can be incorporated into CBC risk prediction models to help improve stratification and optimize surveillance and treatment strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iris Kramer
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands
| | - Maartje J Hooning
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology, Rotterdam 3015 CN, the Netherlands
| | - Nasim Mavaddat
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands; Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute of Biostatistics and Registry Research, Neuruppin 16816, Germany
| | - Renske Keeman
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands; Erasmus MC, Department of Public Health, Rotterdam 3015 GD, the Netherlands
| | - Daniele Giardiello
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands; Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands
| | - Antonis C Antoniou
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Paul D P Pharoah
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK; University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Sander Canisius
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands; The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Carcinogenesis, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands
| | - Zumuruda Abu-Ful
- Carmel Medical Center and Technion Faculty of Medicine, Clalit National Cancer Control Center, Haifa 35254, Israel
| | - Irene L Andrulis
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute of Mount Sinai Hospital, Fred A. Litwin Center for Cancer Genetics, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5, Canada; University of Toronto, Department of Molecular Genetics, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada
| | - Hoda Anton-Culver
- University of California Irvine, Department of Epidemiology, Genetic Epidemiology Research Institute, Irvine, CA 92617, USA
| | - Kristan J Aronson
- Queen's University, Department of Public Health Sciences, and Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada
| | - Annelie Augustinsson
- Lund University, Department of Cancer Epidemiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund 222 42, Sweden
| | - Heiko Becher
- University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Institute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, Hamburg 20246, Germany; Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Berlin 10117, Germany
| | - Matthias W Beckmann
- University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, Erlangen 91054, Germany
| | - Sabine Behrens
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Javier Benitez
- Centro de Investigación en Red de Enfermedades Raras (CIBERER), Madrid 28029, Spain; Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Human Cancer Genetics Programme, Madrid 28029, Spain
| | - Marina Bermisheva
- Ufa Federal Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Biochemistry and Genetics, Ufa 450054, Russia
| | - Natalia V Bogdanova
- Hannover Medical School, Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover 30625, Germany; Hannover Medical School, Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover 30625, Germany; N.N. Alexandrov Research Institute of Oncology and Medical Radiology, Minsk 223040, Belarus
| | - Stig E Bojesen
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev 2730, Denmark; Copenhagen University Hospital, Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev 2730, Denmark; University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Copenhagen 2200, Denmark
| | - Manjeet K Bolla
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Bernardo Bonanni
- IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Hiltrud Brauch
- Dr. Margarete Fischer-Bosch-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Stuttgart 70376, Germany; University of Tübingen, iFIT-Cluster of Excellence, Tübingen 72074, Germany; German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, Tübingen 72074, Germany
| | - Michael Bremer
- Hannover Medical School, Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover 30625, Germany
| | - Sara Y Brucker
- University of Tübingen, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Tübingen 72076, Germany
| | - Barbara Burwinkel
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Molecular Epidemiology Group, C080, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Molecular Biology of Breast Cancer, University Womens Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Jose E Castelao
- Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria Galicia Sur (IISGS), Xerencia de Xestion Integrada de Vigo-SERGAS, Oncology and Genetics Unit, Vigo 36312, Spain
| | - Tsun L Chan
- Hong Kong Hereditary Breast Cancer Family Registry, Hong Kong; Hong Kong Sanatorium and Hospital, Department of Pathology, Happy Valley, Hong Kong
| | - Jenny Chang-Claude
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Cancer Epidemiology Group, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH), Hamburg 20246, Germany
| | - Stephen J Chanock
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, MD 20850, USA
| | - Georgia Chenevix-Trench
- QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Department of Genetics and Computational Biology, Brisbane, QLD 4006, Australia
| | - Ji-Yeob Choi
- Seoul National University Graduate School, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Seoul 03080, Korea; Seoul National University, Cancer Research Institute, Seoul 03080, Korea
| | - Christine L Clarke
- University of Sydney, Westmead Institute for Medical Research, Sydney, NSW 2145, Australia
| | - J Margriet Collée
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Clinical Genetics, Rotterdam 3015 CN, the Netherlands
| | - Fergus J Couch
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Angela Cox
- University of Sheffield, Sheffield Institute for Nucleic Acids (SInFoNiA), Department of Oncology and Metabolism, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK
| | - Simon S Cross
- University of Sheffield, Academic Unit of Pathology, Department of Neuroscience, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK
| | - Kamila Czene
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm 171 65, Sweden
| | - Mary B Daly
- Fox Chase Cancer Center, Department of Clinical Genetics, Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA
| | - Peter Devilee
- Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Pathology, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands; Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Human Genetics, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands
| | - Thilo Dörk
- Hannover Medical School, Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover 30625, Germany
| | - Isabel Dos-Santos-Silva
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Department of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Alison M Dunning
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Miriam Dwek
- University of Westminster, School of Life Sciences, London W1B 2HW, UK
| | - Diana M Eccles
- University of Southampton, Faculty of Medicine, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
| | - D Gareth Evans
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester M13 9WL, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester M13 9WL, UK
| | - Peter A Fasching
- University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, Erlangen 91054, Germany; University of California at Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Medicine Division of Hematology and Oncology, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Henrik Flyger
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev 2730, Denmark
| | - Manuela Gago-Dominguez
- Grupo de Medicina Xenómica, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica, Santiago de Compostela 15706, Spain; University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA
| | - Montserrat García-Closas
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, MD 20850, USA
| | - José A García-Sáenz
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Centro Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC), Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid 28040, Spain
| | - Graham G Giles
- Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Epidemiology Division, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; Monash University, Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - David E Goldgar
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah School of Medicine, Department of Dermatology, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
| | - Anna González-Neira
- Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Human Cancer Genetics Programme, Madrid 28029, Spain
| | - Christopher A Haiman
- University of Southern California, Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Niclas Håkansson
- Karolinska Institutet, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Stockholm 171 77, Sweden
| | - Ute Hamann
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Mikael Hartman
- National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, Singapore 119077, Singapore; National University Health System, Department of Surgery, Singapore 119228, Singapore
| | | | - Antoinette Hollestelle
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology, Rotterdam 3015 CN, the Netherlands
| | - John L Hopper
- The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - Ming-Feng Hou
- Kaohsiung Medical University, Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung 807, Taiwan
| | - Anthony Howell
- University of Manchester, Division of Cancer Sciences, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Hidemi Ito
- Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan; Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan
| | - Milena Jakimovska
- MASA, Research Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 'Georgi D. Efremov', Skopje 1000, Republic of North Macedonia
| | - Anna Jakubowska
- Pomeranian Medical University, Department of Genetics and Pathology, Szczecin 71-252, Poland; Pomeranian Medical University, Independent Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Genetic Diagnostics, Szczecin 71-252, Poland
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- University Hospital Ulm, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Ulm 89075, Germany
| | - Esther M John
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology & Population Health, Stanford, CA 94304, USA
| | - Audrey Jung
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Daehee Kang
- Seoul National University Graduate School, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Seoul 03080, Korea; Seoul National University, Cancer Research Institute, Seoul 03080, Korea; Seoul National University College of Medicine, Department of Preventive Medicine, Seoul 03080, Korea
| | - C Marleen Kets
- the Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands
| | - Elza Khusnutdinova
- Ufa Federal Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Biochemistry and Genetics, Ufa 450054, Russia; Bashkir State University, Department of Genetics and Fundamental Medicine, Ufa 450000, Russia
| | - Yon-Dschun Ko
- Johanniter Krankenhaus, Department of Internal Medicine, Evangelische Kliniken Bonn gGmbH, Bonn 53177, Germany
| | - Vessela N Kristensen
- Oslo University Hospital-Radiumhospitalet, Department of Cancer Genetics, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo 0379, Norway; Oslo University Hospital and University of Olso, Department of Medical Genetics, Oslo 0379, Norway
| | - Allison W Kurian
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology & Population Health, Stanford, CA 94304, USA; Stanford University School of Medicine, Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Ava Kwong
- Hong Kong Hereditary Breast Cancer Family Registry, Hong Kong; The University of Hong Kong, Department of Surgery, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong; Hong Kong Sanatorium and Hospital, Cancer Genetics Center and Department of Surgery, Happy Valley, Hong Kong
| | - Diether Lambrechts
- VIB Center for Cancer Biology, Leuven 3001, Belgium; University of Leuven, Laboratory for Translational Genetics, Department of Human Genetics, Leuven 3000, Belgium
| | - Loic Le Marchand
- University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Epidemiology Program, Honolulu, HI 96813, USA
| | - Jingmei Li
- Genome Institute of Singapore, Human Genetics Division, Singapore 138672, Singapore
| | - Annika Lindblom
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Stockholm 171 76, Sweden; Karolinska University Hospital, Department of Clinical Genetics, Stockholm 171 76, Sweden
| | - Jan Lubiński
- Pomeranian Medical University, Department of Genetics and Pathology, Szczecin 71-252, Poland
| | - Arto Mannermaa
- University of Eastern Finland, Translational Cancer Research Area, Kuopio 70210, Finland; University of Eastern Finland, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Kuopio 70210, Finland; Kuopio University Hospital, Biobank of Eastern Finland, Kuopio 70210, Finland
| | - Mehdi Manoochehri
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Sara Margolin
- Södersjukhuset, Department of Oncology, Stockholm 118 83, Sweden; Karolinska Institutet, Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm 118 83, Sweden
| | - Keitaro Matsuo
- Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan; Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan
| | - Dimitrios Mavroudis
- University Hospital of Heraklion, Department of Medical Oncology, Heraklion 711 10, Greece
| | - Alfons Meindl
- University of Munich, Campus Großhadern, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Munich 81377, Germany
| | - Roger L Milne
- Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Epidemiology Division, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; Monash University, Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - Anna Marie Mulligan
- University of Toronto, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada; University Health Network, Laboratory Medicine Program, Toronto, ON M5G 2C4, Canada
| | - Taru A Muranen
- Helsinki University Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki 00290, Finland
| | - Susan L Neuhausen
- Beckman Research Institute of City of Hope, Department of Population Sciences, Duarte, CA 91010, USA
| | - Heli Nevanlinna
- Helsinki University Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki 00290, Finland
| | - William G Newman
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester M13 9WL, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester M13 9WL, UK
| | - Andrew F Olshan
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Janet E Olson
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Health Sciences Research, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Håkan Olsson
- Lund University, Department of Cancer Epidemiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund 222 42, Sweden
| | | | - Julian Peto
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Department of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Christos Petridis
- King's College London, Research Oncology, Guy's Hospital, London SE1 9RT, UK
| | - Dijana Plaseska-Karanfilska
- MASA, Research Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 'Georgi D. Efremov', Skopje 1000, Republic of North Macedonia
| | - Nadege Presneau
- University of Westminster, School of Life Sciences, London W1B 2HW, UK
| | - Katri Pylkäs
- University of Oulu, Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Cancer and Translational Medicine Research Unit, Biocenter Oulu, Oulu 90220, Finland; Northern Finland Laboratory Centre Oulu, Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Oulu 90220, Finland
| | - Paolo Radice
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori (INT), Unit of Molecular Bases of Genetic Risk and Genetic Testing, Department of Research, Milan 20133, Italy
| | - Gad Rennert
- Carmel Medical Center and Technion Faculty of Medicine, Clalit National Cancer Control Center, Haifa 35254, Israel
| | - Atocha Romero
- Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Medical Oncology Department, Madrid 28222, Spain
| | - Rebecca Roylance
- UCLH Foundation Trust, Department of Oncology, London NW1 2PG, UK
| | | | - Elinor J Sawyer
- King's College London, School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Guy's Campus, London SE1 1UL, UK
| | - Rita K Schmutzler
- Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer, Cologne 50937, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Cologne 50937, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne (CMMC), Cologne 50931, Germany
| | - Lukas Schwentner
- University Hospital Ulm, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Ulm 89075, Germany
| | - Christopher Scott
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Health Sciences Research, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Mee-Hoong See
- University of Malaya, Breast Cancer Research Unit, University Malaya Cancer Research Institute, Faculty of Medicine, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
| | - Mitul Shah
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Chen-Yang Shen
- Academia Sinica, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Taipei 115, Taiwan; China Medical University, School of Public Health, Taichung 40402, Taiwan
| | - Xiao-Ou Shu
- Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Department of Research, Utrecht 3511 DT, the Netherlands; University of Twente, Department of Health Technology and Service Research, Technical Medical Center, Enschede 7522 NB, the Netherlands
| | - Susan Slager
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Health Sciences Research, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Christof Sohn
- University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg 69120, Germany
| | - Melissa C Southey
- Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Epidemiology Division, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia; Monash University, Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Department of Clinical Pathology, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - John J Spinelli
- BC Cancer, Population Oncology, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1G1, Canada; University of British Columbia, School of Population and Public Health, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
| | - Jennifer Stone
- The University of Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; Curtin University and University of Western Australia, The Curtin UWA Centre for Genetic Origins of Health and Disease, Perth, WA 6000, Australia
| | - William J Tapper
- University of Southampton, Faculty of Medicine, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
| | - Maria Tengström
- University of Eastern Finland, Translational Cancer Research Area, Kuopio 70210, Finland; Kuopio University Hospital, Department of Oncology, Cancer Center, Kuopio 70210, Finland; University of Eastern Finland, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Oncology, Kuopio 70210, Finland
| | - Soo Hwang Teo
- Cancer Research Malaysia, Breast Cancer Research Programme, Subang Jaya, Selangor 47500, Malaysia; University of Malaya, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
| | - Mary Beth Terry
- Columbia University, Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY 10032, USA
| | - Rob A E M Tollenaar
- Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands
| | - Ian Tomlinson
- University of Birmingham, Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK; University of Oxford, Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford OX3 7BN, UK
| | - Melissa A Troester
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Celine M Vachon
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Health Science Research, Division of Epidemiology, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Chantal van Ongeval
- Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven Multidisciplinary Breast Center, Department of Radiology, Leuven 3000, Belgium
| | - Elke M van Veen
- University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester M13 9WL, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, North West Genomics Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester M13 9WL, UK
| | - Robert Winqvist
- University of Oulu, Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Cancer and Translational Medicine Research Unit, Biocenter Oulu, Oulu 90220, Finland; Northern Finland Laboratory Centre Oulu, Laboratory of Cancer Genetics and Tumor Biology, Oulu 90220, Finland
| | - Alicja Wolk
- Karolinska Institutet, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Stockholm 171 77, Sweden; Uppsala University, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala 751 05, Sweden
| | - Wei Zheng
- Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Argyrios Ziogas
- University of California Irvine, Department of Epidemiology, Genetic Epidemiology Research Institute, Irvine, CA 92617, USA
| | - Douglas F Easton
- University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK; University of Cambridge, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Per Hall
- Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm 171 65, Sweden; Södersjukhuset, Department of Oncology, Stockholm 118 83, Sweden
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Division of Molecular Pathology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands; The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital, Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Amsterdam 1066 CX, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Primary mammary angiosarcomas harbor frequent mutations in KDR and PIK3CA and show evidence of distinct pathogenesis. Mod Pathol 2020; 33:1518-1526. [PMID: 32123305 DOI: 10.1038/s41379-020-0511-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2020] [Revised: 02/17/2020] [Accepted: 02/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Angiosarcoma (AS) is the most frequent primary sarcoma of the breast but nevertheless remains uncommon, accounting for <0.05% of breast malignancies. Secondary mammary AS arise following radiation therapy for breast cancer, in contrast to primary AS which occur sporadically. Essentially all show aggressive clinical behavior independent of histologic grade and most are treated by mastectomy. MYC amplification is frequently identified in radiation-induced AS but only rarely in primary mammary AS (PMAS). As a heterogeneous group, AS from various anatomic sites have been shown to harbor recurrent alterations in TP53, MAP kinase pathway genes, and genes involved in angiogenic signaling including KDR (VEGFR2) and PTPRB. In part due to its rarity, the pathogenesis of PMAS has not been fully characterized. In this study, we examined the clinical, pathologic, and genomic features of ten cases of PMAS, including one patient with bilateral disease. Recurrent genomic alterations were identified in KDR (70%), PIK3CA/PIK3R1 (70%), and PTPRB (30%), each at higher frequencies than reported in AS across all sites. Six tumors harbored a KDR p.T771R hotspot mutation, and all seven KDR-mutant cases showed evidence suggestive of biallelism (four with loss of heterozygosity and three with two aberrations). Of the seven tumors with PI3K alterations, six harbored pathogenic mutations other than in the canonical PIK3CA residues which are most frequent in breast cancer. Three AS were hypermutated (≥10 mutations/megabase (Mb)); hypermutation was seen concurrent with KDR or PIK3CA mutations. The patient with bilateral disease demonstrated shared alterations, indicative of contralateral metastasis. No MYC or TP53 aberrations were detected in this series. Immunohistochemistry for VEGFR2 was unable to discriminate between KDR-mutant tumors and benign vascular lesions of the breast. These findings highlight the underrecognized frequency of KDR and PIK3CA mutation in PMAS, and a significant subset with hypermutation, suggesting a pathogenesis distinct from other AS.
Collapse
|
7
|
Kramer I, Schaapveld M, Oldenburg HSA, Sonke GS, McCool D, van Leeuwen FE, Van de Vijver KK, Russell NS, Linn SC, Siesling S, Menke-van der Houven van Oordt CW, Schmidt MK. The Influence of Adjuvant Systemic Regimens on Contralateral Breast Cancer Risk and Receptor Subtype. J Natl Cancer Inst 2020; 111:709-718. [PMID: 30698719 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2018] [Revised: 08/01/2018] [Accepted: 10/15/2018] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND An increasing number of breast cancer (BC) survivors are at risk of developing contralateral breast cancer (CBC). We aimed to investigate the influence of various adjuvant systemic regimens on, subtype-specific, risk of CBC. METHODS This population-based cohort study included female patients diagnosed with first invasive BC between 2003 and 2010; follow-up was complete until 2016. Clinico-pathological data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and additional data on receptor status through linkage with PALGA: the Dutch Pathology Registry. Cumulative incidences (death and distant metastases as competing risk) and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated for all invasive metachronous CBC and CBC subtypes. RESULTS Of 83 144 BC patients, 2816 developed a CBC; the 10-year cumulative incidence was 3.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.7% to 4.0%). Overall, adjuvant chemotherapy (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.62 to 0.80), endocrine therapy (HR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.41 to 0.52), and trastuzumab with chemotherapy (HR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.45 to 0.73) were strongly associated with a reduced CBC risk. Specifically, taxane-containing chemotherapy (HR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.36 to 0.62) and aromatase inhibitors (HR = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.44) were associated with a large CBC risk reduction. More detailed analyses showed that endocrine therapy statistically significantly decreased the risk of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive CBC (HR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.36 to 0.47) but not ER-negative CBC (HR = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.93) compared with no endocrine therapy. Patients receiving chemotherapy for ER-negative first BC had a higher risk of ER-negative CBC from 5 years of follow-up (HR = 2.84, 95% CI = 1.62 to 4.99) compared with patients not receiving chemotherapy for ER-negative first BC. CONCLUSION Endocrine therapy, chemotherapy, as well as trastuzumab with chemotherapy reduce CBC risk. However, each adjuvant therapy regimen had a different impact on the CBC subtype distribution. Taxane-containing chemotherapy and aromatase inhibitors were associated with the largest CBC risk reduction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iris Kramer
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Hester S A Oldenburg
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Koen K Van de Vijver
- Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Nicola S Russell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sabine C Linn
- Department of Surgical Oncology.,Department of Pathology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, the Netherlands.,Department of Health Technology and Service Research, Technical Medical Center, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Imyanitov EN, Kuligina ES. Systemic investigations into the molecular features of bilateral breast cancer for diagnostic purposes. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2019; 20:41-47. [PMID: 31835926 DOI: 10.1080/14737159.2020.1705157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Introduction: Many breast cancer (BC) patients develop the disease bilaterally. The emergence of two tumors in the same host is unlikely to be a random co-incidence: bilateral BC (biBC) patients are enriched by women who are susceptible to this disease due to genetic or non-genetic factors.Areas covered: Data on molecular pathogenesis and translational aspects of biBC research are summarized.Expert opinion: Studies on concordant and discordant molecular events occurring in paired tumors resemble twin studies, as they help to reveal core components of BC pathogenesis and to analyze interactions between host factors and tumor phenotype. Mutation profiling of biBC pairs suggested that most biBCs are clonally independent malignancies, although some instances of presumably contralateral metastatic spread were shown as well. Many biBCs, especially synchronous ones, demonstrate the similarity of essential tumor characteristics, which can be explained by sharing of genetic background, hormonal milieu, metabolic environment, and external exposures. biBC is strongly associated with BC-predisposing germline mutations; therefore, clinical management of biBC patients must include comprehensive genetic testing. Some contralateral metachronous BCs demonstrate high-level microsatellite instability (MSI-H). MSI-H is sometimes observed in radiation- and chemotherapy-induced tumors; therefore, it is possible that some second BCs are causally related to the therapy applied for the first cancer. MSI-H tumors are responsive to immune checkpoint blockade; hence, MSI-H analysis is advisable for biBC molecular testing. Systematic cataloging of biBC molecular portraits is likely to provide valuable information on fundamental aspects of cancer pathogenesis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Evgeny N Imyanitov
- Department of Tumour Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, St.-Petersburg, Russia.,Department of Clinical Genetics, St.-Petersburg Pediatric Medical University, St.-Petersburg, Russia.,Department of Oncology, I.I. Mechnikov North-Western Medical University, St.-Petersburg, Russia
| | - Ekatherina Sh Kuligina
- Department of Tumour Growth Biology, N.N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, St.-Petersburg, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Akdeniz D, Schmidt MK, Seynaeve CM, McCool D, Giardiello D, van den Broek AJ, Hauptmann M, Steyerberg EW, Hooning MJ. Risk factors for metachronous contralateral breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast 2018; 44:1-14. [PMID: 30580169 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2018] [Revised: 11/12/2018] [Accepted: 11/16/2018] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The risk of developing metachronous contralateral breast cancer (CBC) is a recurrent topic at the outpatient clinic. We aimed to provide CBC risk estimates of published patient, pathological, and primary breast cancer (PBC) treatment-related factors. METHODS PubMed was searched for publications on factors associated with CBC risk. Meta-analyses were performed with grouping of studies by mutation status (i.e., BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 c.1100delC), familial cohorts, and general population-based cohorts. RESULTS Sixty-eight papers satisfied our inclusion criteria. Strong associations with CBC were found for carrying a BRCA1 (RR = 3.7; 95%CI:2.8-4.9), BRCA2 (RR = 2.8; 95%CI:1.8-4.3) or CHEK2 c.1100delC (RR = 2.7; 95%CI:2.0-3.7) mutation. In population-based cohorts, PBC family history (RR = 1.8; 95%CI:1.2-2.6), body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 (RR = 1.5; 95%CI:1.3-1.9), lobular PBC (RR = 1.4; 95%CI:1.1-1.8), estrogen receptor-negative PBC (RR = 1.5; 95%CI:1.0-2.3) and treatment with radiotherapy <40 years (RR = 1.4; 95%CI:1.1-1.7) was associated with increased CBC risk. Older age at PBC diagnosis (RR per decade = 0.93; 95%CI:0.88-0.98), and treatment with chemotherapy (RR = 0.7; 95%CI:0.6-0.8) or endocrine therapy (RR = 0.6; 95%CI:0.5-0.7) were associated with decreased CBC risk. CONCLUSIONS Mutation status, family history, and PBC treatment are key factors for CBC risk. Age at PBC diagnosis, BMI, lobular histology and hormone receptor status have weaker associations and should be considered in combination with key factors to accurately predict CBC risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Delal Akdeniz
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Caroline M Seynaeve
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Danielle McCool
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Daniele Giardiello
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Alexandra J van den Broek
- Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Michael Hauptmann
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Maartje J Hooning
- Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Kanaizumi H, Higashi C, Tanaka Y, Hamada M, Shinzaki W, Azumi T, Hashimoto Y, Inui H, Houjou T, Komoike Y. PI3K/Akt/mTOR signalling pathway activation in patients with ER-positive, metachronous, contralateral breast cancer treated with hormone therapy. Oncol Lett 2018; 17:1962-1968. [PMID: 30675261 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2018.9759] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2018] [Accepted: 10/31/2018] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, metachronous, contralateral breast cancer (MCBC) sometimes develops during or soon after completion of hormone therapy (HT), but it is uncertain whether it is HT-resistant. We examined the association between ER-positive second cancer and activation of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways, which are associated with HT resistance. We examined the treatment-free interval (time after completion of HT for initial cancer) in 41 patients with ER-positive MCBC with a history of adjuvant HT for initial cancer (HT group), and initial-to-second period duration (time after operation of initial cancer to onset of second cancer) in 17 patients with ER-positive MCBC in whom adjuvant HT was not applied to the initial tumour (control group or no HT group). Phosphorylated S6 (pS6) and phosphorylated MAPK (pMAPK) were used as indicators of PI3K/Akt/mTOR and MAPK pathway activity, respectively. Tumours were classified as showing negative, positive or strongly positive staining, and the correlation between staining and treatment-free interval or initial-to-second period duration was evaluated using the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (ρ). Treatment-free interval and pS6 staining showed a negative correlation (ρ=-0.5355; P=0.0003) in the HT group. There was no correlation between initial-to-second period duration and pS6 staining in the no HT group (ρ=-0.0814; P=0.756). There was no correlation between pMAPK signalling and the treatment-free interval in the HT group (ρ=-0.1560; P=0.330) or the initial-to-second period duration in the no HT group (ρ=-0.0116; P=0.965). Development of a second ER-positive cancer during or soon after completion of HT for the initial cancer may be associated with activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway. Care should be taken during follow-up and when selecting adjuvant therapy for second cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hirofumi Kanaizumi
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| | - Chihiro Higashi
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| | - Yumiko Tanaka
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| | - Mika Hamada
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| | - Wataru Shinzaki
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Azumi
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| | - Yukihiko Hashimoto
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| | - Hiroki Inui
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| | - Toshiya Houjou
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| | - Yoshifumi Komoike
- Division of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka 589-8511, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Biermann J, Parris TZ, Nemes S, Danielsson A, Engqvist H, Werner Rönnerman E, Forssell-Aronsson E, Kovács A, Karlsson P, Helou K. Clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res 2018; 20:96. [PMID: 30092821 PMCID: PMC6085699 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-018-1022-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2018] [Accepted: 07/18/2018] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Molecular classification of tumour clonality is currently not evaluated in multiple invasive breast carcinomas, despite evidence suggesting common clonal origins. There is no consensus about which type of data (e.g. copy number, mutation, histology) and especially which statistical method is most suitable to distinguish clonal recurrences from independent primary tumours. Methods Thirty-seven invasive breast tumour pairs were stratified according to laterality and time interval between the diagnoses of the two tumours. In a multi-omics approach, tumour clonality was analysed by integrating clinical characteristics (n = 37), DNA copy number (n = 37), DNA methylation (n = 8), gene expression microarray (n = 7), RNA sequencing (n = 3), and SNP genotyping data (n = 3). Different statistical methods, e.g. the diagnostic similarity index (SI), were used to classify the tumours as clonally related recurrences or independent primary tumours. Results The SI and hierarchical clustering showed similar tendencies and the highest concordance with the other methods. Concordant evidence for tumour clonality was found in 46% (17/37) of patients. Notably, no association was found between the current clinical guidelines and molecular tumour features. Conclusions A more accurate classification of clonal relatedness between multiple breast tumours may help to mitigate treatment failure and relapse by integrating tumour-associated molecular features, clinical parameters, and statistical methods. Guidelines need to be defined with exact thresholds to standardise clonality testing in a routine diagnostic setting. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13058-018-1022-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jana Biermann
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Box 425, SE-405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden.
| | - Toshima Z Parris
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Box 425, SE-405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Szilárd Nemes
- Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Anna Danielsson
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Box 425, SE-405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Hanna Engqvist
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Box 425, SE-405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Elisabeth Werner Rönnerman
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Box 425, SE-405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden.,Department of Clinical Pathology and Genetics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 413 45, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Eva Forssell-Aronsson
- Department of Radiation Physics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Anikó Kovács
- Department of Clinical Pathology and Genetics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 413 45, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Per Karlsson
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Box 425, SE-405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Khalil Helou
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Cancer Center, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Box 425, SE-405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Mortality after contralateral breast cancer in Denmark. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2018; 171:489-499. [PMID: 29948403 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-018-4846-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2018] [Accepted: 05/29/2018] [Indexed: 10/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE How a second breast cancer diagnosis affects survival in comparison with unilateral breast cancer (UBC) is unclear. Prognostic factors for contralateral breast cancer (CBC) are also not well established. We aimed to investigate the survival pattern after CBC with particular focus on time between first and second breast cancer diagnosis and age at CBC diagnosis. METHODS Within the nationwide Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group database, we identified 68,466 breast cancer patients diagnosed during 1978-2012. Patients who subsequently developed CBC were identified in a previously established database (N = 3004). Patients were followed for breast cancer-specific death in the Danish Register of Causes of Death until 2015. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazard regression models. Cumulative breast cancer mortality from date of CBC was estimated using the Aalen-Johansen method. RESULTS Compared with UBC patients, the rate of dying from breast cancer was more than twofold higher following a CBC diagnosis, after adjustment for age, period, tumor characteristics, and treatment of the first breast cancer (HR 2.48; 95% CI 2.31-2.66). Short time interval (< 5 years) was associated with higher breast cancer-specific mortality after CBC among patients < 70 years at CBC diagnosis compared with longer time intervals, but not among patients ≥ 70 years at CBC diagnosis. CONCLUSION Breast cancer-specific mortality rates were markedly higher after compared with before a CBC diagnosis. We found higher breast cancer-specific mortality after CBC associated with a short interval between diagnoses among patients diagnosed with CBC before age 70 years.
Collapse
|
13
|
Yates LR, Desmedt C. Translational Genomics: Practical Applications of the Genomic Revolution in Breast Cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2018; 23:2630-2639. [PMID: 28572257 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-16-2548] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2017] [Revised: 03/06/2017] [Accepted: 04/06/2017] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
The genomic revolution has fundamentally changed our perception of breast cancer. It is now apparent from DNA-based massively parallel sequencing data that at the genomic level, every breast cancer is unique and shaped by the mutational processes to which it was exposed during its lifetime. More than 90 breast cancer driver genes have been identified as recurrently mutated, and many occur at low frequency across the breast cancer population. Certain cancer genes are associated with traditionally defined histologic subtypes, but genomic intertumoral heterogeneity exists even between cancers that appear the same under the microscope. Most breast cancers contain subclonal populations, many of which harbor driver alterations, and subclonal structure is typically remodeled over time, across metastasis and as a consequence of treatment interventions. Genomics is deepening our understanding of breast cancer biology, contributing to an accelerated phase of targeted drug development and providing insights into resistance mechanisms. Genomics is also providing tools necessary to deliver personalized cancer medicine, but a number of challenges must still be addressed. Clin Cancer Res; 23(11); 2630-9. ©2017 AACRSee all articles in this CCR Focus section, "Breast Cancer Research: From Base Pairs to Populations."
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy R Yates
- Cancer Genome Project, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, United Kingdom.,Department of Clinical Oncology, Guys and St Thomas' NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Christine Desmedt
- Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Begg CB, Ostrovnaya I, Geyer FC, Papanastasiou AD, Ng CKY, Sakr R, Bernstein JL, Burke KA, King TA, Piscuoglio S, Mauguen A, Orlow I, Weigelt B, Seshan VE, Morrow M, Reis-Filho JS. Contralateral breast cancers: Independent cancers or metastases? Int J Cancer 2018; 142:347-356. [PMID: 28921573 PMCID: PMC5749409 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.31051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2017] [Revised: 08/24/2017] [Accepted: 08/30/2017] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
A cancer in the contralateral breast in a woman with a previous or synchronous breast cancer is typically considered to be an independent primary tumor. Emerging evidence suggests that in a small subset of these cases the second tumor represents a metastasis. We sought to investigate the issue using massively parallel sequencing targeting 254 genes recurrently mutated in breast cancer. We examined the tumor archives at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center for the period 1995-2006 to identify cases of contralateral breast cancer where surgery for both tumors was performed at the Center. We report results from 49 patients successfully analyzed by a targeted massively parallel sequencing assay. Somatic mutations and copy number alterations were defined by state-of-the-art algorithms. Clonal relatedness was evaluated by statistical tests specifically designed for this purpose. We found evidence that the tumors in contralateral breasts were clonally related in three cases (6%) on the basis of matching mutations at codons where somatic mutations are rare. Clinical data and the presence of similar patterns of gene copy number alterations were consistent with metastasis for all three cases. In three additional cases, there was a solitary matching mutation at a common PIK3CA locus. The results suggest that a subset of contralateral breast cancers represent metastases rather than independent primary tumors. Massively parallel sequencing analysis can provide important evidence to clarify the diagnosis. However, given the inter-tumor mutational heterogeneity in breast cancer, sufficiently large gene panels need to be employed to define clonality convincingly in all cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Colin B Begg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Irina Ostrovnaya
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Felipe C Geyer
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Anastasios D Papanastasiou
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Metaxa Cancer Hospital/University of Patras, Patras, Greece
| | - Charlotte KY Ng
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Basel, Switzerland
| | - Rita Sakr
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jonine L Bernstein
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kathleen A Burke
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- IBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA USA
| | - Tari A King
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA USA
| | - Salvatore Piscuoglio
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Basel, Switzerland
| | - Audrey Mauguen
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Irene Orlow
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Britta Weigelt
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Venkatraman E Seshan
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Monica Morrow
- Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jorge S Reis-Filho
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Dissecting Time- from Tumor-Related Gene Expression Variability in Bilateral Breast Cancer. Int J Mol Sci 2018; 19:ijms19010196. [PMID: 29315233 PMCID: PMC5796145 DOI: 10.3390/ijms19010196] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2017] [Revised: 12/29/2017] [Accepted: 01/05/2018] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Metachronous (MBC) and synchronous bilateral breast tumors (SBC) are mostly distinct primaries, whereas paired primaries and their local recurrences (LRC) share a common origin. Intra-pair gene expression variability in MBC, SBC, and LRC derives from time/tumor microenvironment-related and tumor genetic background-related factors and pairs represents an ideal model for trying to dissect tumor-related from microenvironment-related variability. Pairs of tumors derived from women with SBC (n = 18), MBC (n = 11), and LRC (n = 10) undergoing local-regional treatment were profiled for gene expression; similarity between pairs was measured using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) computed for each gene and compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA). When considering biologically unselected genes, the highest correlations were found for primaries and paired LRC, and the lowest for MBC pairs. By instead limiting the analysis to the breast cancer intrinsic genes, correlations between primaries and paired LRC were enhanced, while lower similarities were observed for SBC and MBC. Focusing on stromal-related genes, the ICC values decreased for MBC and were significantly different from SBC. These findings indicate that it is possible to dissect intra-pair gene expression variability into components that are associated with genetic origin or with time and microenvironment by using specific gene subsets.
Collapse
|
16
|
Yates LR. Intratumoral heterogeneity and subclonal diversification of early breast cancer. Breast 2017; 34 Suppl 1:S36-S42. [PMID: 28666921 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2017.06.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Heterogeneity has long been recognized as a feature of some primary breast cancers manifesting as mixed histopathological subtypes or variable expression of the therapeutic targets ER, PgR and HER2. The recent emergence of next generation sequencing (NGS) technologies has revolutionized our understanding of the extent and nature of subclonal diversification. Careful examination of primary breast cancers often reveals multiple genomically distinct subclones that may contain driver alterations that follow spatial patterns of segregation. Subclonality is of clinical relevance as it forms the substrate of selection and can give rise to aggressive clinical features such as invasiveness, metastasis and treatment resistance. However, spatial and temporal intra-tumoral heterogeneity pose fundamental challenges to representative sampling and consequently the feasibility of a personalized medicine approach. Fundamental clinical and biological questions are starting to be addressed by applying NGS to the study of intra-tumoral heterogeneity and the insights that it provides should be used to better inform the prospective design of clinico-genomics trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy R Yates
- The Cancer Genome Project, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, St Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7EH, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Mauguen A, Seshan VE, Ostrovnaya I, Begg CB. Estimating the probability of clonal relatedness of pairs of tumors in cancer patients. Biometrics 2017; 74:321-330. [PMID: 28482133 DOI: 10.1111/biom.12710] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2016] [Revised: 03/01/2017] [Accepted: 03/01/2017] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Next generation sequencing panels are being used increasingly in cancer research to study tumor evolution. A specific statistical challenge is to compare the mutational profiles in different tumors from a patient to determine the strength of evidence that the tumors are clonally related, that is, derived from a single, founder clonal cell. The presence of identical mutations in each tumor provides evidence of clonal relatedness, although the strength of evidence from a match is related to how commonly the mutation is seen in the tumor type under investigation. This evidence must be weighed against the evidence in favor of independent tumors from non-matching mutations. In this article, we frame this challenge in the context of diagnosis using a novel random effects model. In this way, by analyzing a set of tumor pairs, we can estimate the proportion of cases that are clonally related in the sample as well as the individual diagnostic probabilities for each case. The method is illustrated using data from a study to determine the clonal relationship of lobular carcinoma in situ with subsequent invasive breast cancers, where each tumor in the pair was subjected to whole exome sequencing. The statistical properties of the method are evaluated using simulations, demonstrating that the key model parameters are estimated with only modest bias in small samples in most configurations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Audrey Mauguen
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Avenue, 2nd Floor, New York, New York 10017, U.S.A
| | - Venkatraman E Seshan
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Avenue, 2nd Floor, New York, New York 10017, U.S.A
| | - Irina Ostrovnaya
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Avenue, 2nd Floor, New York, New York 10017, U.S.A
| | - Colin B Begg
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Avenue, 2nd Floor, New York, New York 10017, U.S.A
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Brown D, Smeets D, Székely B, Larsimont D, Szász AM, Adnet PY, Rothé F, Rouas G, Nagy ZI, Faragó Z, Tőkés AM, Dank M, Szentmártoni G, Udvarhelyi N, Zoppoli G, Pusztai L, Piccart M, Kulka J, Lambrechts D, Sotiriou C, Desmedt C. Phylogenetic analysis of metastatic progression in breast cancer using somatic mutations and copy number aberrations. Nat Commun 2017; 8:14944. [PMID: 28429735 PMCID: PMC5474888 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms14944] [Citation(s) in RCA: 112] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2016] [Accepted: 02/15/2017] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Several studies using genome-wide molecular techniques have reported various degrees of genetic heterogeneity between primary tumours and their distant metastases. However, it has been difficult to discern patterns of dissemination owing to the limited number of patients and available metastases. Here, we use phylogenetic techniques on data generated using whole-exome sequencing and copy number profiling of primary and multiple-matched metastatic tumours from ten autopsied patients to infer the evolutionary history of breast cancer progression. We observed two modes of disease progression. In some patients, all distant metastases cluster on a branch separate from their primary lesion. Clonal frequency analyses of somatic mutations show that the metastases have a monoclonal origin and descend from a common 'metastatic precursor'. Alternatively, multiple metastatic lesions are seeded from different clones present within the primary tumour. We further show that a metastasis can be horizontally cross-seeded. These findings provide insights into breast cancer dissemination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Brown
- Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bld de Waterloo 121, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Dominiek Smeets
- Laboratory of Translational Genetics, Vesalius Research Center, VIB, Campus Gasthuisberg, O&N IV Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
- Laboratory of Translational Genetics, Department of Oncology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, O&N IV Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - Borbála Székely
- Second Department of Pathology, Semmelweis University, Üllői út 93, 1091 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Denis Larsimont
- Department of Pathology, Institut Jules Bordet, Bld de Waterloo 121, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
| | - A. Marcell Szász
- Second Department of Pathology, Semmelweis University, Üllői út 93, 1091 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Pierre-Yves Adnet
- Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bld de Waterloo 121, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Françoise Rothé
- Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bld de Waterloo 121, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Ghizlane Rouas
- Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bld de Waterloo 121, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Zsófia I. Nagy
- Second Department of Pathology, Semmelweis University, Üllői út 93, 1091 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Zsófia Faragó
- Second Department of Pathology, Semmelweis University, Üllői út 93, 1091 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Anna-Mária Tőkés
- Second Department of Pathology, Semmelweis University, Üllői út 93, 1091 Budapest, Hungary
- 2 Department of Pathology, MTA-SE Tumor Progression Research Group, Semmelweis University, Üllői út 93, 1091 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Magdolna Dank
- Semmelweis University Cancer Center, Semmelweis University, Tömő u. 25-29, 1083 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Gyöngyvér Szentmártoni
- Semmelweis University Cancer Center, Semmelweis University, Tömő u. 25-29, 1083 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Nóra Udvarhelyi
- Surgical and Molecular Tumor Pathology Centre, National Institute of Oncology, Ráth György u. 7-9, 1122 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Gabriele Zoppoli
- University of Genova and Istituto di Cura a Carattere Clinico e Scientifico Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria San Martino—Instituto Nazionale Tumori, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132 Genoa, Italy
| | - Lajos Pusztai
- Yale University, Cedar Street 333, New Haven, Connecticut 05620, USA
| | - Martine Piccart
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bld de Waterloo 121, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Janina Kulka
- Second Department of Pathology, Semmelweis University, Üllői út 93, 1091 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Diether Lambrechts
- Laboratory of Translational Genetics, Vesalius Research Center, VIB, Campus Gasthuisberg, O&N IV Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
- Laboratory of Translational Genetics, Department of Oncology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, O&N IV Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - Christos Sotiriou
- Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bld de Waterloo 121, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Christine Desmedt
- Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bld de Waterloo 121, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Abstract
With the rapid development of next-generation sequencing, deeper insights are being gained into the molecular evolution that underlies the development and clinical progression of breast cancer. It is apparent that during evolution, breast cancers acquire thousands of mutations including single base pair substitutions, insertions, deletions, copy number aberrations, and structural rearrangements. As a consequence, at the whole genome level, no two cancers are identical and few cancers even share the same complement of "driver" mutations. Indeed, two samples from the same cancer may also exhibit extensive differences due to constant remodeling of the genome over time. In this review, we summarize recent studies that extend our understanding of the genomic basis of cancer progression. Key biological insights include the following: subclonal diversification begins early in cancer evolution, being detectable even in in situ lesions; geographical stratification of subclonal structure is frequent in primary tumors and can include therapeutically targetable alterations; multiple distant metastases typically arise from a common metastatic ancestor following a "metastatic cascade" model; systemic therapy can unmask preexisting resistant subclones or influence further treatment sensitivity and disease progression. We conclude the review by describing novel approaches such as the analysis of circulating DNA and patient-derived xenografts that promise to further our understanding of the genomic changes occurring during cancer evolution and guide treatment decision making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christine Desmedt
- J.-C. Heuson Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Boulevard de Waterloo 121, 1000, Brussels, Belgium.
| | - Lucy Yates
- Cancer Genome Project, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, CB10 1SA, UK
| | - Janina Kulka
- 2nd Department of Pathology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Choi YJ, Lee SH, Kim MS, Jung SH, Hur SY, Chung YJ, Lee SH. Whole-exome sequencing identified the genetic origin of a mucinous neoplasm in a mature cystic teratoma. Pathology 2016; 48:372-6. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pathol.2016.02.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2015] [Revised: 01/30/2016] [Accepted: 02/08/2016] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
|
21
|
Roukos DH. Crossroad between linear and nonlinear transcription concepts in the discovery of next-generation sequencing systems-based anticancer therapies. Drug Discov Today 2016; 21:663-73. [PMID: 26912452 DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2016.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2015] [Revised: 01/20/2016] [Accepted: 02/11/2016] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
The unprecedented potential of standard and new next-generation sequencing applications and methods to explore cancer genome evolution and tumor heterogeneity as well as transcription networks in time and space shapes the development of next-generation therapeutics. However, biomedical and pharmaceutical research for overcoming heterogeneity-based therapeutic resistance is at an important crossroads. Focus on linear transcription-based drug development targeting dynamics of simple intrapatient structured genome diversity represents a realistic medium-term goal. By contrast, the discovery of nonlinear transcription drugs for targeting structural and functional genome and transcriptome heterogeneity represents a long-term rational strategy. This review compares effectiveness, challenges and expectations between linear and nonlinear drugs targeting simple intrapatient variation and aberrant transcriptional biocircuits, respectively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dimitrios H Roukos
- Centre for Biosystems and Genomic Network Medicine and Research & Innovation Commission of Ioannina University, School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece; Hellenic Genomic Center and Systems Biology Unit of Biomedical Research Foundation of the Academy of Athens (BRFAA), Athens, Greece.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Verigos J, Magklara A. Revealing the Complexity of Breast Cancer by Next Generation Sequencing. Cancers (Basel) 2015; 7:2183-200. [PMID: 26561834 PMCID: PMC4695885 DOI: 10.3390/cancers7040885] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2015] [Revised: 10/18/2015] [Accepted: 10/26/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Over the last few years the increasing usage of "-omic" platforms, supported by next-generation sequencing, in the analysis of breast cancer samples has tremendously advanced our understanding of the disease. New driver and passenger mutations, rare chromosomal rearrangements and other genomic aberrations identified by whole genome and exome sequencing are providing missing pieces of the genomic architecture of breast cancer. High resolution maps of breast cancer methylomes and sequencing of the miRNA microworld are beginning to paint the epigenomic landscape of the disease. Transcriptomic profiling is giving us a glimpse into the gene regulatory networks that govern the fate of the breast cancer cell. At the same time, integrative analysis of sequencing data confirms an extensive intertumor and intratumor heterogeneity and plasticity in breast cancer arguing for a new approach to the problem. In this review, we report on the latest findings on the molecular characterization of breast cancer using NGS technologies, and we discuss their potential implications for the improvement of existing therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John Verigos
- Laboratory of Clinical Chemistry, Faculty of Medicine, School of Health Sciences, University of Ioannina, Ioannina 45110, Greece.
- Department of Biomedical Research, Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology,Foundation for Research & Technology-Hellas, Ioannina 45110, Greece.
| | - Angeliki Magklara
- Laboratory of Clinical Chemistry, Faculty of Medicine, School of Health Sciences, University of Ioannina, Ioannina 45110, Greece.
- Department of Biomedical Research, Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology,Foundation for Research & Technology-Hellas, Ioannina 45110, Greece.
| |
Collapse
|