Genomic Assays to Assess Local Recurrence Risk and Predict Radiation Therapy Benefit in Patients With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Tools to Guide Radiation Oncologists in the Management of DCIS

Similar to invasive breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ is also going through a phase of changes not only from a technical but also a conceptual standpoint. From prescribing radiotherapy to everyone to personalized approaches, including radiotherapy omission, there is still a lack of a comprehensive framework to guide radiation oncologists in decision making. Many pieces of the puzzle are finding their place as high-quality data mature and are disseminated, but very often, the interpretation of risk factors and the perception of risk remain very highly subjective. Sharing the therapeutic choice with patients requires effective communication for an understanding of risks and benefits, facilitating an informed decision that does not increase anxiety and concerns about prognosis. The purpose of this narrative review is to summarize the current state of knowledge to highlight the tools available to radiation oncologists for managing DCIS, with an outlook on future developments.

Analytical validation of the 7-gene biosignature for prediction of recurrence risk and radiation therapy benefit for breast ductal carcinoma in situ

Purpose

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), is a noninvasive breast cancer, representing 20-25% of breast cancer diagnoses in the USA. Current treatment options for DCIS include mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with or without radiation therapy (RT), but optimal risk-adjusted treatment selection remains a challenge. Findings from past and recent clinical trials have failed to identify a 'low risk' group of patients who do not benefit significantly from RT after BCS. To address this unmet need, a DCIS biosignature, DCISionRT (PreludeDx, Laguna Hills, CA), was developed and validated in multiple cohorts. DCISionRT is a molecular assay with an algorithm reporting a recurrence risk score for patients diagnosed with DCIS intended to guide DCIS treatment. In this study, we present results from analytical validity, performance assessment, and clinical performance validation and clinical utility for the DCISionRT test comprised of multianalyte assays with algorithmic analysis.

Methods

The analytical validation of each molecular assay was performed based on the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines Quality Assurance for Design Control and Implementation of Immunohistochemistry Assays and the College of American Pathologists/American Society of Clinical Oncology (CAP/ASCO) recommendations for analytic validation of immunohistochemical assays.

Results

The analytic validation showed that the molecular assays that are part of DCISionRT test have high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy/reproducibility (≥95%). The analytic precision of the molecular assays under controlled non-standard conditions had a total standard deviation of 6.6 (100-point scale), where the analytic variables (Lot, Machine, Run) each contributed <1% of the total variance. Additionally, the precision in the DCISionRT test result (DS) had a 95%CI ≤0.4 DS units under controlled non-standard conditions (Day, Lot, and Machine) for molecular assays over a wide range of clinicopathologic factor values. Clinical validation showed that the test identified 37% of patients in a low-risk group with a 10-year invasive IBR rate of ~3% and an absolute risk reduction (ARR) from RT of 1% (number needed to treat, NNT=100), while remaining patients with higher DS scores (elevated-risk) had an ARR for RT of 9% (NNT=11) and 96% clinical sensitivity for RT benefit.

Conclusion

The analytical performance of the PreludeDx DCISionRT molecular assays was high in representative formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded breast tumor specimens. The DCISionRT test has been analytically validated and has been clinically validated in multiple peer-reviewed published studies.

The Impact of Androgen Receptor and Histone Deacetylase 1 Expression on the Prognosis of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Purpose

Factors associated with invasive recurrence (REC) of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are less known. This study was aimed at identifying better biomarkers to predict the prognosis of DCIS.

Methods

RNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded blocks of twenty-four pure DCIS cases was subjected to differential gene expression analysis. The DCIS cases were selected by matching age and estrogen receptor status. Sixteen REC-free and 8 invasive-REC cases with disease-free interval of > 5 years were analyzed. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining was used to validate sixty-one independent pure DCIS cases, including invasive-REC (n = 16) and REC-free (n = 45) cases.

Results

Eight differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were statistically significant (log 2-fold change [FC] < -1 or > 1 and p < 0.001). Less than ½ fold expression of CUL1, androgen receptor (AR), RPS27A, CTNNB1, MAP3K1, PRKACA, GNG12, MGMT genes was observed in the REC group compared to the no evidence of disease group. AR and histone deacetylase 1 (HDAC1) genes were selected for external validation (AR: log 2-FC - 1.35, p < 0.001, and HDAC1: log 2-FC - 0.774, p < 0.001). External validation showed that the absence of AR and high HDAC1 expression were independent risk factors for invasive REC (hazard ratio [HR], 5.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-20.4; p = 0.023 and HR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.04-9.04; p = 0.042). High nuclear grade 3 was also associated with long-term invasive REC.

Conclusion

Comparative gene expression analysis of pure DCIS revealed 8 DEGs among recurring cases. External validation with IHC suggested that the absence of AR and overexpression of HDAC1 are associated with a greater risk of long-term invasive REC of pure DCIS.

Management of ductal carcinoma in situ with accelerated partial breast irradiation brachytherapy: Implications for guideline expansion

PURPOSE

Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is controversial, and the suitability criteria from the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS), American Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO), and the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) have important differences.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This is a single-institution retrospective review of 169 consecutive patients with DCIS who underwent lumpectomy followed by APBI intracavitary brachytherapy from 2003 to 2018. Outcomes, including overall survival, recurrence-free survival (RFS), ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence, and distant metastasis, were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

The median followup time was 62.5 months. Median age was 66 years (47-89 years). The majority of patients had estrogen receptor-positive disease (89%). Fifty patients (30%) had Grade 3 disease. Of the 142 patients with adequate pathology interpretation, 91 and 108 cases had margins ≥ 3 mm and ≥2 mm, respectively. Most patients (72%) were prescribed and started endocrine therapy. Of the patients evaluable for ABS criteria (N = 130), 97 met the suitability criteria. Of the patients evaluable for ASTRO criteria (N = 129), 42 were deemed cautionary and 33 were deemed unsuitable. Of the patients evaluable for GEC-ESTRO criteria (N = 143), 141 cases were at intermediate risk and two were at high risk. Five-year ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence, RFS, and overall survival were 0.6%, 97.7%, and 97.2%, respectively. The ABS, ASTRO, and GEC-ESTRO criteria failed to significantly predict for RFS.

CONCLUSIONS

These results, although limited by short-term followup, indicate that expansion of the eligibility criteria of APBI for patients with DCIS should be considered.