Comparison of the RNA-based EndoPredict multigene test between core biopsies and corresponding surgical breast cancer sections

Reproducibility and intratumoral heterogeneity of the PAM50 breast cancer assay

BACKGROUND

The PAM50 assay is used routinely in clinical practice to determine breast cancer prognosis and management; however, research assessing how technical variation and intratumoral heterogeneity contribute to misclassification and reproducibility of these tests is limited.

METHODS

We evaluated the impact of intratumoral heterogeneity on the reproducibility of results for the PAM50 assay by testing RNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin embedded breast cancer blocks sampled at distinct spatial locations. Samples were classified according to intrinsic subtype (Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2-enriched, Basal-like, or Normal-like) and risk of recurrence with proliferation score (ROR-P, high, medium, or low). Intratumoral heterogeneity and technical reproducibility (replicate assays on the same RNA) were assessed as percent categorical agreement between paired intratumoral and replicate samples. Euclidean distances between samples, calculated across the PAM50 genes and the ROR-P score, were compared for concordant vs. discordant samples.

RESULTS

Technical replicates (N = 144) achieved 93% agreement for ROR-P group and 90% agreement on PAM50 subtype. For spatially distinct biological replicates (N = 40 intratumoral replicates), agreement was lower (81% for ROR-P and 76% for PAM50 subtype). The Euclidean distances between discordant technical replicates were bimodal, with discordant samples showing higher Euclidian distance and biologic heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

The PAM50 assay achieved very high technical reproducibility for breast cancer subtyping and ROR-P, but intratumoral heterogeneity is revealed by the assay in a small proportion of cases.

Lessons from other fields of medicine, Part 1: Breast cancer

Through the understanding of multiple etiologies, pathologies, and disease progression trajectories, breast cancer shifted historically from a singular malignancy of the breast to a complex of molecular/biological entities, translating into individualized disease-modifying treatments. As a result, this led to various de-escalations of treatment compared with the gold standard in the era preceding systems biology: radical mastectomy. Targeted therapies have minimized morbidity from the treatments and mortality from the disease. Biomarkers further individualized tumor genetics and molecular biology to optimize treatments targeting specific cancer cells. Landmark discoveries in breast cancer management have evolved through histology, hormone receptors, human epidermal growth factor, single-gene prognostic markers, and multigene prognostic markers. Relevant to the reliance on histopathology in neurodegenerative disorders, histopathology evaluation in breast cancer can serve as a marker of overall prognosis rather than predict response to therapies. This chapter reviews the successes and failures of breast cancer research through history, with focus on the transition from a universal approach for all patients to divergent biomarker development and individualized targeted therapies, discussing future areas of growth in the field that may apply to neurodegenerative disorders.

Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis

Simple Summary

Around 20 years ago, genomic profiling of breast carcinomas identified tumor subtypes with clinical implications and opened the door for a better understanding of breast cancer biology. The commercialization of multigene tests had a significant impact on clinical practice, and yet, controversy exists as to which methodology is best to inform the choice of therapy and existing recommendations are inconsistent and often driven by cost-effectiveness. Here we report data from a cohort of breast cancer patients in which pathological and molecular subtyping are directly compared in a clinical setting. The findings show that some patients with genomic low-risk tumors could receive unnecessary systemic therapy if only following the classical clinical parameters, while others could remain under-treated. This study suggests that to design precise treatment regimens for patients with early breast cancer, the conventional clinicopathological classification should be complemented with the robust prognostic information provided by molecular subtyping.

Abstract

Precise prognosis is crucial for selection of adjuvant therapy in breast cancer. Molecular subtyping is increasingly used to complement immunohistochemical and pathological classification and to predict recurrence. This study compares both outcomes in a clinical setting. Molecular subtyping (MammaPrint^®, TargetPrint^®, and BluePrint^®) and pathological classification data were compared in a cohort of 143 breast cancer patients. High risk clinical factors were defined by a value of the proliferation factor Ki67 equal or higher than 14% and/or high histological grade. The results from molecular classification were considered as reference. Core needle biopsies were found to be comparable to surgery samples for molecular classification. Discrepancies were found between molecular and pathological subtyping of the samples, including misclassification of HER2-positive tumors and the identification of a significant percentage of genomic high risk T1N0 tumors. In addition, 20% of clinical low-risk tumors showed genomic high risk, while clinical high-risk samples included 42% of cases with genomic low risk. According to pathological subtyping, a considerable number of breast cancer patients would not receive the appropriate systemic therapy. Our findings support the need to determine the molecular subtype of invasive breast tumors to improve breast cancer management.

High concordance of 70-gene recurrence risk signature and 80-gene molecular subtyping signature between core needle biopsy and surgical resection specimens in early-stage breast cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

With increased neoadjuvant therapy recommendations for early-stage breast cancer patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is imperative that molecular diagnostic assays provide reliable results from preoperative core needle biopsies (CNB). The study objective was to determine the concordance of MammaPrint and BluePrint results between matched CNB and surgical resection (SR) specimens.

METHODS

Matched tumor specimens (n = 121) were prospectively collected from women enrolled in the FLEX trial (NCT03053193). Concordance is reported using overall percentage agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient. Correlation is reported using Pearson correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

We found good concordance for MammaPrint results between matched tumor samples (90.9%, κ = 0.817), and a very strong correlation of MammaPrint indices (r = 0.94). The concordance of BluePrint subtyping in matched samples was also excellent (98.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

CNB samples demonstrated high concordance with paired SR samples for MammaPrint risk classification and BluePrint molecular subtyping, suggesting that physicians are provided with accurate prognostic information that can be used to guide therapy decisions.

The implementation of a commercially available multi-gene profile test for breast cancer characterization in a department of pathology: what have we learned from the first 100 cases?

Analysis of breast cancer prognostic and predictive factors is still nowadays poorly accurate and standardized. The advent of multi-gene expression profiles (MGEPs) has improved the prediction of breast cancer outcome, particularly regarding early luminal breast cancers (LBCs). The availability in our Institute of EndoPredict® (EP), a last-generation prognostic gene signature assay, has prompted us to study a series of LBCs, firstly verifying its reproducibility on six routine representative cases, either presenting non-optimal preanalytical conditions or different tumor samples from the same patient; secondly, correlating EP results on 8 retrospectively recruited samples with patients' follow-up; thirdly, applying prospectively EP on 100 routinely diagnosed cases, assessing the oncologists' and pathologists' attitude toward it. The complete reproducibility of EP on all the samples investigated in the first phase allowed to state that EP overcomes the detrimental effects of an inaccurate pre-analytic phase, determining the most appropriate prognostic and predictive parameters of breast cancer. The second phase confirmed EP as a fundamental tool in guiding therapeutic decision, improving the classical bio-pathological characterization and recovering 38% patients' inadequately managed. Finally, the study disclosed how oncologists sometimes inadequately requested EP, but also how it allows a better stratification of breast cancer otherwise considered poorly aggressive and not requiring an EP test, such as G1 neoplasms or tubular histotype. In conclusion, the introduction of EP test in an Anatomic Pathology Department emerges as a useful tool in routine breast cancer diagnosis, both for the characterization of individual cases and, as a result, for more appropriate therapeutic choices.

The Potential Use of Tumour-Based Prognostic and Predictive Tools in Older Women with Primary Breast Cancer: A Narrative Review

A move is under way towards personalised cancer treatment, where tumour biology of an individual patient is examined to give unique predictive and prognostic information. This is extremely important in the setting of older women, who have treatment-specific goals which may differ from their younger counterparts, and may include conservation of quality of life rather than curative intent of treatment. One method employed to assist with this is the use of tumour-based prognostic and predictive tools. This article explores six of the most common tumour-based tools currently available on the market: MammaPrint, Oncotype DX, Mammostrat, Prosigna, EndoPredict, IHC4. The article discusses the creation and validation of these tools, their use and validation in older women, and future directions in the field. With the exception of Oncotype Dx, which has also been licensed for prediction of response from adjuvant chemotherapy, these tools have been licensed for use as prognostic tools only, mainly in the setting of adjuvant therapy following surgery. The evidence base for use in older women is strongest for Mammostrat and PAM50, although overall the evidence is much weaker than that in younger women. Where older women have been included in validation studies, this is often in small numbers, or the exact proportion of older women is unknown. In practice, all six of the tools are recommended to be utilised on surgical excision specimens, as well as in core needle biopsy (CNB) specimens in all of the tools except Mammostrat. This is extremely important in the setting of older women, of whom a large proportion do not undergo surgery. The suggested nature of the sample is formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded in all the tools except MammaPrint, which can also be performed on fresh-frozen samples. Future development of prognostic tools in older women with breast cancer should focus on treatment dilemmas specific to this population. This includes the decision of primary treatment between surgery or endocrine therapy and decisions regarding adjuvant therapy, in particular, chemotherapy.

Discordance in 21-gene recurrence scores between paired breast cancer samples is inversely associated with patient age

Background

The Oncotype DX 21-gene Recurrence Score is a genomic-based algorithm that guides adjuvant chemotherapy treatment decisions for women with early-stage, oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. However, there are age-related differences in chemotherapy benefit for women with intermediate Oncotype DX Recurrence Scores that are not well understood. Menstrual cycling in younger women is associated with hormonal fluctuations that might affect the expression of genomic predictive biomarkers and alter Recurrence Scores. Here, we use paired human breast cancer samples to demonstrate that the clinically employed Oncotype DX algorithm is critically affected by patient age.

Methods

RNA was extracted from 25 pairs of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded, invasive ER-positive breast cancer samples that had been collected approximately 2 weeks apart. A 21-gene signature analogous to the Oncotype DX platform was assessed through quantitative real-time PCR, and experimental recurrence scores were calculated using the Oncotype DX algorithm.

Results

There was a significant inverse association between patient age and discordance in the recurrence score. For every 1-year decrease in age, discordance in recurrence scores between paired samples increased by 0.08 units (95% CI − 0.14, − 0.01; p = 0.017). Discordance in recurrence scores for women under the age of 50 was driven primarily by proliferation- and HER2-associated genes.

Conclusion

The Oncotype DX 21-gene Recurrence Score algorithm is critically affected by patient age. These findings emphasise the need for the consideration of patient age, particularly for women younger than 50, in the development and application of genomic-based algorithms for breast cancer care.

Genomic profiling in oncology clinical practice

The development of high-throughput technologies such as next-generation sequencing for DNA sequencing together with the decrease in their cost has led to the progressive introduction of genomic profiling in our daily practice in oncology. Nowadays, genomic profiling is part of genetic counseling, cancer diagnosis, molecular characterization, and as a biomarker of prognosis and response to treatment. Furthermore, germline or somatic genomic characterization of the tumor may provide new treatment opportunities for patients with cancer. In this review, we will summarize the clinical applications and limitations of genomic profiling in oncology clinical practice, focusing on next-generation sequencing.

Efficacy of an RNA-based multigene assay with core needle biopsy samples for risk evaluation in hormone-positive early breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Gene expression profiling provides key information for prognosis of breast cancer to establish treatment strategy. However, the genetic assessment should be available before induction of treatment to be useful for clinical practice. To evaluate the reliability of using needle biopsy samples for gene assays, we compared gene-expression profiling results between core needle biopsy (CNB) samples and surgical specimens in breast cancer.

METHODS

Thirty-one paired, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded CNB and surgical specimen samples were selected from patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Total RNA was extracted from the samples and the risk classifications based on GenesWell BCT scores were compared.

RESULTS

The BCT scores correlated between CNB samples and surgical specimens of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (Pearson r = 0.66). The overall concordance rate of risk classification (high/low risk) was 83.9%. However, when the breast cancer does not contain intratumoral microcalcification, the concordance rate increased as 92.0%. And, when the breast cancer formed a solitary nodule (non-multifocal), the concordance rate increased up to 95.8%.

CONCLUSION

Risk classification using the GenesWell BCT multigene kit with CNB samples could be considered reliable, when the breast cancer is a solitary nodule without intratumoral microcalcification. Such genetic profiling results should be helpful for establishing a treatment plan for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer before treatment induction.

EndoPredict versus uPA/PAI-1 in breast cancer: Comparison of markers and association with clinicopathological parameters

We retrospectively investigated concordance of EndoPredict (EPclin) with urokinase plasminogen activator and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (uPA/PAI-1) in 72 breast cancer patients and compared the results with grading, molecular subtype and chemotherapy recommendation. Compared to uPA/PAI-1, EPclin proved to be more conservative concerning correlation with clinicopathological parameters and was significantly associated with the recommendation of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Systematic review of the clinical and economic value of gene expression profiles for invasive early breast cancer available in Europe

Gene expression profiles with prognostic capacities have shown good performance in multiple clinical trials. However, with multiple assays available and numerous types of validation studies performed, the added value for daily clinical practice is still unclear. In Europe, the MammaPrint, OncotypeDX, PAM50/Prosigna and Endopredict assays are commercially available. In this systematic review, we aim to assess these assays on four important criteria: Assay development and methodology, clinical validation, clinical utility and economic value. We performed a literature search covering PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane, for studies related to one or more of the four selected assays. We identified 147 papers for inclusion in this review. MammaPrint and OncotypeDX both have evidence available, including level IA clinical trial results for both assays. Both assays provide prognostic information. Predictive value has only been shown for OncotypeDX. In the clinical utility studies, a higher reduction in chemotherapy was achieved by OncotypeDX, although the number of available studies differ considerably between tests. On average, economic evaluations estimate that genomic testing results in a moderate increase in total costs, but that these costs are acceptable in relation to the expected improved patient outcome. PAM50/prosigna and EndoPredict showed comparable prognostic capacities, but with less economical and clinical utility studies. Furthermore, for these assays no level IA trial data are available yet. In summary, all assays have shown excellent prognostic capacities. The differences in the quantity and quality of evidence are discussed. Future studies shall focus on the selection of appropriate subgroups for testing and long-term outcome of validation trials, in order to determine the place of these assays in daily clinical practice.

Analytical validation of a 12-gene molecular test for the prediction of distant recurrence in breast cancer

Aim:

To validate the analytical performance of a 12-gene molecular assay that predicts distant recurrence for early-stage ER+/HER2- invasive breast cancer as run within a central reference laboratory.

Materials & methods:

Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded breast resections were evaluated by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for the expression of eight target genes, three housekeeper genes and one control gene to assess for DNA contamination.

Results:

The assay results were highly correlated with a validated reference laboratory. The assay had a broad linear range for input RNA, with similar amplicon efficiencies for target and housekeeper genes. The assay test was highly reproducible, with comparable inter- and intrabatch precision to the reference laboratory.

Conclusion:

These studies demonstrate that the 12-gene molecular assay is highly robust and accurate.

Several tests have been developed to aid in breast cancer treatment decisions by assessing the likelihood that an individual’s breast cancer will recur. One such test is a 12-gene molecular assay. This test provides a clinical score that combines molecular information from genes within the tumor with clinical information to determine whether a breast cancer is at high or low risk of recurrence. The data presented here show that this test is very reproducible and robust, making it appropriate and reliable for clinical use.

Hormonal Modulation of Breast Cancer Gene Expression: Implications for Intrinsic Subtyping in Premenopausal Women

Clinics are increasingly adopting gene-expression profiling to diagnose breast cancer subtype, providing an intrinsic, molecular portrait of the tumor. For example, the PAM50-based Prosigna test quantifies expression of 50 key genes to classify breast cancer subtype, and this method of classification has been demonstrated to be superior over traditional immunohistochemical methods that detect proteins, to predict risk of disease recurrence. However, these tests were largely developed and validated using breast cancer samples from postmenopausal women. Thus, the accuracy of such tests has not been explored in the context of the hormonal fluctuations in estrogen and progesterone that occur during the menstrual cycle in premenopausal women. Concordance between traditional methods of subtyping and the new tests in premenopausal women is likely to depend on the stage of the menstrual cycle at which the tissue sample is taken and the relative effect of hormones on expression of genes versus proteins. The lack of knowledge around the effect of fluctuating estrogen and progesterone on gene expression in breast cancer patients raises serious concerns for intrinsic subtyping in premenopausal women, which comprise about 25% of breast cancer diagnoses. Further research on the impact of the menstrual cycle on intrinsic breast cancer profiling is required if premenopausal women are to benefit from the new technology of intrinsic subtyping.

Indications for prognostic gene expression profiling in early breast cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease. While breast cancer mortality has dropped substantially over the past three decades due to early detection and adjuvant systemic therapy (AST), the risk of recurrence is highly dependent upon numerous factors including tumor size, involvement of regional lymph nodes, histologic grade, expression of hormone receptors (estrogen and progesterone), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) amplification. We use these factors to determine which early breast cancer (EBC) patients should be treated with AST, including endocrine therapy (ET), chemotherapy, and HER2-directed treatments. While these factors aid in this determination, it remains challenging to identify those patients unlikely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy, resulting in over-treatment of patients. Given this dilemma, there has been great interest in the development of prognostic and predictive gene expression profiles. The most extensively studied profile, the 21-gene recurrence score (Oncotype Dx®), estimates 10-year risk of breast cancer recurrence in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative EBC and is likely predictive of chemotherapy benefit. This assay has established analytic validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility for this patient group and, therefore, is indicated in this patient population to help inform decisions regarding administration of adjuvant chemotherapy. Several other assays may have utility in this clinical context or perhaps to identify patients who do not require extended adjuvant ET. These assays include the following: PAM 50 Risk of Recurrence (ROR) Score (Prosigna™), Breast Cancer Index, and EndoPredict®.

Diagnostic procedures for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): recommendations of the European Expert Group

BACKGROUND

There is currently no Europe-wide consensus on the appropriate preanalytical measures and workflow to optimise procedures for tissue-based molecular testing of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To address this, a group of lung cancer experts (see list of authors) convened to discuss and propose standard operating procedures (SOPs) for NSCLC.

METHODS

Based on earlier meetings and scientific expertise on lung cancer, a multidisciplinary group meeting was aligned. The aim was to include all relevant aspects concerning NSCLC diagnosis. After careful consideration, the following topics were selected and each was reviewed by the experts: surgical resection and sampling; biopsy procedures for analysis; preanalytical and other variables affecting quality of tissue; tissue conservation; testing procedures for epidermal growth factor receptor, anaplastic lymphoma kinase and ROS proto-oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase (ROS1) in lung tissue and cytological specimens; as well as standardised reporting and quality control (QC). Finally, an optimal workflow was described.

RESULTS

Suggested optimal procedures and workflows are discussed in detail. The broad consensus was that the complex workflow presented can only be executed effectively by an interdisciplinary approach using a well-trained team.

CONCLUSIONS

To optimise diagnosis and treatment of patients with NSCLC, it is essential to establish SOPs that are adaptable to the local situation. In addition, a continuous QC system and a local multidisciplinary tumour-type-oriented board are essential.

EndoPredict predicts for the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer

The EndoPredict (EP) signature is a prognostic 11-gene expression signature specifically developed in ER+/HER2- node-negative/positive breast cancer. It is associated with relapse-free survival in patients treated with adjuvant hormone therapy, suggesting that EP low-risk patients could be treated with adjuvant hormone therapy alone whereas high-risk patients would deserve addition of adjuvant chemotherapy. Thus, it is important to determine whether EP high-risk patients are or are not more sensitive to chemotherapy than low-risk patients. Here, we have assessed the EP predictive value for pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER+/HER2- breast cancer. We gathered gene expression and histoclinical data of 553 pre-treatment ER+/HER2- breast carcinomas treated with anthracycline-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We searched for correlation between the pathological complete response (pCR) and the EP score-based classification. The overall pCR rate was 12%. Fifty-one percent of samples were classified as low-risk according to the EP score and 49% as high-risk. EP classification was associated with a pCR rate of 7% in the low-risk group and 17% in the high-risk group (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, the EP score remained significantly associated with pCR. Many genes upregulated in the high-risk tumours were involved in cell proliferation, whereas many genes upregulated in the low-risk tumours were involved in ER-signalling and stroma. Despite higher chemosensitivity, the high-risk group was associated with worse disease-free survival. In conclusion, EP high-risk ER+/HER2- breast cancers are more likely to respond to anthracycline-based chemotherapy.

Genomic profiling in luminal breast cancer

The developments in gene expression analysis have made it possible to sub-classify hormone receptor-positive (luminal) breast cancer in different prognostic subgroups. This sub-classification is currently used in clinical routine as prognostic signature (e.g. 21-gene Onoctype DX®, 70-gene Mammaprint®). As yet, the optimal method for sub-classification has not been defined. Moreover, there is no evidence from prospective trials. This review explores widely used genomic signatures in luminal breast cancer, making a critical appraisal of evidence from retrospective/prospective trials. It is based on systematic literature search performed using Medline (accessed September 2013) and abstracts presented at the Annual Meeting of American Society of Clinical Oncology and San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

Performance characteristics of the MammaPrint® breast cancer diagnostic gene signature

BACKGROUND

The analytical performance of multigene signatures depends on many parameters, including precision, repeatability, reproducibility and intratumor heterogeneity. Indicators such as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value are typically used to define the clinical performance of a diagnostic test.

AIM

Here we study these performance characteristics of the MammaPrint^® (Agendia NV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) 70-gene signature using the US FDA-recommended guidelines, as well as predetermined acceptance criteria.

RESULTS

The clinical and analytical performance characteristics show that MammaPrint is a robust, reproducible, precise test, with a maximum variation of 5% in multiple samplings of the same tissue.

CONCLUSION

MammaPrint is a reliable indicator of distant metastasis in early-stage breast cancer patients of all ages and is well suited for personalized medical care.

From High-Throughput Microarray-Based Screening to Clinical Application: The Development of a Second Generation Multigene Test for Breast Cancer Prognosis

Several multigene tests have been developed for breast cancer patients to predict the individual risk of recurrence. Most of the first generation tests rely on proliferation-associated genes and are commonly carried out in central reference laboratories. Here, we describe the development of a second generation multigene assay, the EndoPredict test, a prognostic multigene expression test for estrogen receptor (ER) positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) negative (ER+/HER2−) breast cancer patients. The EndoPredict gene signature was initially established in a large high-throughput microarray-based screening study. The key steps for biomarker identification are discussed in detail, in comparison to the establishment of other multigene signatures. After biomarker selection, genes and algorithms were transferred to a diagnostic platform (reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR)) to allow for assaying formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. A comprehensive analytical validation was performed and a prospective proficiency testing study with seven pathological laboratories finally proved that EndoPredict can be reliably used in the decentralized setting. Three independent large clinical validation studies (n = 2,257) demonstrated that EndoPredict offers independent prognostic information beyond current clinicopathological parameters and clinical guidelines. The review article summarizes several important steps that should be considered for the development process of a second generation multigene test and offers a means for transferring a microarray signature from the research laboratory to clinical practice.

Luminal breast cancer cell lines overexpressing ZNF703 are resistant to tamoxifen through activation of Akt/mTOR signaling

BACKGROUND

Selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as tamoxifen, play a pivotal role in the treatment of luminal-type breast cancer. However, in clinical applications, nearly half of breast cancer patients are insensitive to tamoxifen, a small number of whom have early recurrence or disease progression when receiving tamoxifen. The underlying mechanism of this resistance has not been determined. ZNF703 is a novel oncogene in the 15% of breast cancers that harbor 8p12 amplifications. Therefore, the goal of our study was to explore the role of ZNF703 in tamoxifen resistance.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We used immunohistochemistry techniques to examine ZNF703 expression in stage I-III primary breast cancer specimens and found a positive expression rate of 91.3%. All patients were divided into either high or low ZNF703 expression groups. We found that high ZNF703 expression mainly occurred in ER+ and PR+ breast cancers. Furthermore, 4-hydroxytamoxifen had different modes of action in breast cancer cell lines with high or low ZNF703 expression. ZNF703 overexpression in MCF-7 breast cancer cells activated the Akt/mTOR signaling pathway, downregulated ERα, and reduced the antitumor effect of tamoxifen. Low-dose tamoxifen did not suppress, but rather, stimulated the growth of cells overexpressing ZNF703. ZNF703 knockdown in MDA-MB-134 and HCC1500 luminal B-type breast cancer cell lines by siRNA significantly decreased survival rates when cells were treated with tamoxifen. Furthermore, targeting ZNF703 with a mTOR inhibitor increased the inhibitory effects of tamoxifen in ZNF703-overexpressing cells.

CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE

Our study suggests that ZNF703 expression levels may predict tamoxifen sensitivity. Tamoxifen should be administered with caution to those patients bearing tumors with ZNF703 overexpression. However, large clinical trials and prospective clinical studies are needed to verify these results.

Predictive molecular pathology and its role in targeted cancer therapy: a review focussing on clinical relevance

The increasing importance of targeting drugs in the treatment of several tumor entities (breast, colon, lung, malignant melanoma (MM), lymphoma, and so on) and the necessity of a companion diagnostic (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF), and so on) is leading to new challenges for surgical pathology. As all the biomarkers to be specifically detected are tissue based, a precise and reliable diagnostic is absolutely crucial. To meet this challenge, surgical pathology has adapted a number of molecular methods (semi-quantitative immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridization), PCR and its multiple variants, (pyro/Sanger) sequencing, next-generation sequencing, DNA-arrays, methylation analyses, and so on) to be applicable for formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue. To read a patients' tissue as 'deeply' as possible and to obtain information on morphological, genetic, proteomic as well as epigenetic background is the actual task of pathologists and molecular biologists in order to provide the clinicians with information relevant for individualized medicine. The intensified cooperation of clinicians and pathologists will provide the basis of improved clinical drug selection as well as guide development of new cancer gene therapies and molecularly targeted drugs by research units and the pharmaceutical industry. This review will give some information on (1) biomarker detection methods adapted to FFPE tissue, (2) the potency of predictive pathology in tumor detection and treatment and (3) the implications of pathology on the development of new drugs in molecularly targeted and gene therapies.

Decentral gene expression analysis: analytical validation of the Endopredict genomic multianalyte breast cancer prognosis test

BACKGROUND

EndoPredict (EP) is a clinically validated multianalyte gene expression test to predict distant metastasis in ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer treated with endocrine therapy alone. The test is based on the combined analysis of 12 genes in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue by reverse transcription-quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR). Recently, it was shown that EP is feasible for reliable decentralized assessment of gene expression. The aim of this study was the analytical validation of the performance characteristics of the assay and its verification in a molecular-pathological routine laboratory.

METHODS

Gene expression values to calculate the EP score were assayed by one-step RT-qPCR using RNA from FFPE tumor tissue. Limit of blank, limit of detection, linear range, and PCR efficiency were assessed for each of the 12 PCR assays using serial samples dilutions. Different breast cancer samples were used to evaluate RNA input range, precision and inter-laboratory variability.

RESULTS

PCR assays were linear up to Cq values between 35.1 and 37.2. Amplification efficiencies ranged from 75% to 101%. The RNA input range without considerable change of the EP score was between 0.16 and 18.5 ng/μl. Analysis of precision (variation of day, day time, instrument, operator, reagent lots) resulted in a total noise (standard deviation) of 0.16 EP score units on a scale from 0 to 15. The major part of the total noise (SD 0.14) was caused by the replicate-to-replicate noise of the PCR assays (repeatability) and was not associated with different operating conditions (reproducibility). Performance characteristics established in the manufacturer's laboratory were verified in a routine molecular pathology laboratory. Comparison of 10 tumor samples analyzed in two different laboratories showed a Pearson coefficient of 0.995 and a mean deviation of 0.15 score units.

CONCLUSIONS

The EP test showed reproducible performance characteristics with good precision and negligible laboratory-to-laboratory variation. This study provides further evidence that the EP test is suitable for decentralized testing in specialized molecular pathological laboratories instead of a reference laboratory. This is a unique feature and a technical advance in comparison with existing RNA-based prognostic multigene expression tests.