The impact of isolated local recurrence on long-term outcome in early-breast cancer patients after breast-conserving therapy

Proteogenomics decodes the evolution of human ipsilateral breast cancer

Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) is a clinically important event, where an isolated in-breast recurrence is a potentially curable event but associated with an increased risk of distant metastasis and breast cancer death. It remains unclear if IBTRs are associated with molecular changes that can be explored as a resource for precision medicine strategies. Here, we employed proteogenomics to analyze a cohort of 27 primary breast cancers and their matched IBTRs to define proteogenomic determinants of molecular tumor evolution. Our analyses revealed a relationship between hormonal receptors status and proliferation levels resulting in the gain of somatic mutations and copy number. This in turn re-programmed the transcriptome and proteome towards a highly replicating and genomically unstable IBTRs, possibly enhanced by APOBEC3B. In order to investigate the origins of IBTRs, a second analysis that included primaries with no recurrence pinpointed proliferation and immune infiltration as predictive of IBTR. In conclusion, our study shows that breast tumors evolve into different IBTRs depending on hormonal status and proliferation and that immune cell infiltration and Ki-67 are significantly elevated in primary tumors that develop IBTR. These results can serve as a starting point to explore markers to predict IBTR formation and stratify patients for adjuvant therapy.

The clinical relevance of various methods of classifying ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence as either true local recurrence or new primary

PURPOSE

Describes the relevance of -various classification methods for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) as either true recurrence (TR) or new primary (NP) on both disease-specific survival (DSS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS).

METHOD

Two hundred and thirty-four of 4359 women undergoing breast-conserving therapy experienced IBTR. We compared the impact of four known classification methods and two newly created classification methods.

RESULTS

For three of the methods, a better DSS was observed for NP compared to TR with the hazard ratio (HR) ranging from 0.5 to 0.6. The new Twente method classification, comprising all classification criteria of three known methods, and the new Morphology method, using only morphological criteria, had the best HR and confidence interval with a HR 0.5 (95% CI 0.2-1.0) and a HR 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-1.1), respectively. For DMFS, the HR for NP compared to TR ranged from 0.6 to 0.9 for all six methods. The new Morphology method and the Twente method noted the best HR and confidence intervals with a HR 0.6 (95% CI 0.3-1.1) and a HR 0.6 (95% CI 0.4-1.2), respectively.

CONCLUSION

IBTR classified as TR or NP has a prognostic value for both DSS and DMFS, but depends on the classification method used. Developing and validating a generally accepted form of classification are imperative for using TR and NP in clinical practice.