Low ER+ breast cancer: Is this a distinct group?

Is Oncotype DX testing informative for breast cancers with low ER expression? A retrospective review from a biomarker testing referral center

PURPOSE

It remains unclear whether patients with HER2-negative, low-estrogen receptor (ER-low)-positive early breast cancer (BC) benefit from Oncotype DX® (ODX) testing.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of cases referred for ODX testing over a seven-year period from a breast biomarker testing referral center (n = 854). For each case, we recorded the ODX Recurrence Score (RS) along with percentage of ER nuclear positivity and staining intensity on immunohistochemistry. Our criteria for ER-low was defined as ≤10% cells with nuclear positivity and/or weak intensity of staining. Slides from all ER-low cases were reviewed and the reported ODX ER gene scores were recorded. We randomly selected a comparator group of 56 patients with ER > 10% positivity and non-weak staining intensity (ER-high).

RESULTS

We identified 27 cases (3.2%) that met our criteria for ER-low. Of these, 92.6% had a high RS (>25), and 7.4% had a RS of 25. All cases with ≤10% ER nuclear positivity had a high RS. Most ER-low cases (85.2%) had ODX quantitative ER gene scores in the negative range, whereas all (100%) ER-high cases had positive ER gene scores.

CONCLUSION

ODX does not appear to add significant additional information to inform treatment decisions for most patients with ER-low BC. Incorporating weak ER staining intensity in addition to low percentage of nuclear positivity identifies about twice as many ER-low patients, although with reduced specificity for high RS. Our study supports the contention that most ER-low early BC should be regarded similarly to ER-negative BC.

Quantitative expression of oestrogen receptor in breast cancer: Clinical and molecular significance

BACKGROUND

Oestrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer (BC) patients are eligible for endocrine therapy (ET), regardless of ER immunohistochemical expression level. There is a wide spectrum of ER expression and the response to ET is not uniform. This study aimed to assess the clinical and molecular consequences of ER heterogeneity with respect to ET-response.

METHODS

ER expression, categorised by percentage and staining intensity in a large BC cohort (n = 7559) was correlated with clinicopathological parameters and patient ET response. The Cancer Genome Atlas Data BC cohort (n = 1047) was stratified by ER expression and transcriptomic analysis completed to better understand the molecular basis of ER heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The quantitative proportional increase in ER expression was positively associated with favourable prognostic parameters. Tumours with 1-9% ER expression were characteristically similar to ER-negative (<1%) tumours. Maximum ET-response was observed in tumours with 100% ER expression, with responses significantly different to tumours exhibiting ER at < 100% and significantly decreased survival rates were observed in tumours with 50% and 10% of ER expression. The Histochemical-score (H-score), which considers both staining intensity and percentage, added significant prognostic value over ER percentage alone with significant outcome differences observed at H-scores of 30, 100 and 200. There was a positive correlation between ER expression and ESR1 mRNA expression and expression of ER-regulated genes. Pathway analysis identified differential expression in key cancer-related pathways in different ER-positive groups.

CONCLUSION

ET-response is statistically proportionally related to ER expression with significant differences observed at 10%, 50% and 100%. The H-score adds prognostic and predictive information.

Updates in the Use of Immunohistochemical Stains in Breast and Gynecologic Pathology

CONTEXT.—

The use of immunohistochemical stains in breast and gynecologic pathology has become increasingly complex, with various diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive applications.

OBJECTIVE.—

To provide an update and review of immunohistochemical stains used in the practice of breast and gynecologic pathology. Established and new entities are reviewed, with descriptions of histomorphology and immunohistochemical staining patterns and discussion of interpretive pitfalls.

DATA SOURCES.—

Data were obtained from review of the English-language literature and firsthand experience of the authors in breast and gynecologic pathology.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Many entities in breast and gynecologic pathology benefit from evaluation with various immunohistochemical stains. These studies not only aid in the diagnosis and staging of tumors but also can provide prognostic and predictive information. Updated guidelines for recommended ancillary studies such as mismatch repair, p53, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) studies in endometrium, as well as estrogen and progesterone receptors and HER2 in breast, are discussed. Finally, the use and interpretation of established and novel immunohistochemical stains are discussed in various breast and gynecologic malignancies.

Estrogen-Receptor-Low-Positive Breast Cancer: Pathological and Clinical Perspectives

The expression of estrogen receptors (ERs) in breast cancer (BC) represents a strong prognostic and predictive biomarker and directs therapeutic decisions in early and advanced stages. ER-low-positive BC, defined by the immunohistochemical (IHC) expression of ERs from 1% to 9%, constitutes a distinct subset of total BC cases. Guidelines recommend that a low expression of ERs be reported in pathology reports since the benefit of endocrine therapy in patients with ER-low-positive BC is uncertain. Recently, several cohorts, mostly of a retrospective nature, have been published, reporting the clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes of ER-low-positive BC. However, the majority of the data focus on early-stage BC and the use of (neo)adjuvant therapy, and there is a significant lack of data regarding metastatic ER-low-positive BC. Further factors, including tumor heterogeneity as well as the potential loss of ER expression due to endocrine resistance, should be considered. Including patients with ER-low-positive BC in clinical trials for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) might improve the understanding of this entity and allow novel therapeutic approaches. The design and conduction of randomized clinical trials regarding this subgroup of patients are greatly anticipated.

Clinical Behavior, Management, and Treatment Response of Estrogen Receptor Low (1-10%) Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) guide management and impact outcomes of breast cancer (BC). This study compares ER-low (1-10%) with ER-negative (< 1%) and ER-positive (>10%) BC and investigates the significance of PR expression within ER-low disease.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients with HER2-negative invasive BC were identified from the National Cancer Database 2018-2019. Treatment and outcomes were compared using chi-squared tests and multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 232,762 patients, ER expression was: negative (13.8%), low (2.0%), and > 10% (84.2%). Chemotherapy was given in 83.9% of ER- disease, 82.4% of ER-low/PR- disease, 58.9% of ER-low/PR+ disease, and only in 22.9% of ER+ disease. Within the ER-low subgroup, adjuvant endocrine therapy, recurrence score, and Ki67 varied by PR status (all < 0.01). Patients with ER-low disease selected for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) were younger and had higher T and N category, tumor grade, and Ki67. With NAC, pathological complete response (pCR) rates were similar between ER-low/PR- and ER-low/PR+ (39.5% and 38.1%, respectively, p = 0.67), and were closer to the ER- group (39.7%) than the ER+ group (8.4%). On multivariable analysis, the adjusted effect of ER status (1-10% versus > 10%) on chemotherapy administration was odds ratio (OR) 8.2 (95% CI 7.3-9.2, p < 0.001) for PR-negative, and OR 3.3 (95% CI 7.3-9.2, p < 0.001) for PR-positive.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the tumor features and clinical management of ER-low tumors vary significantly by PR expression. Within ER-low tumors, PR- tumors more closely resemble ER- BC, while PR+ tumors exhibit less aggressive characteristics. In ER-low disease selected for treatment with NAC, response is similar to ER- regardless of PR status.

The Clinical and Biological Significance of Estrogen Receptor-Low Positive Breast Cancer

Estrogen receptor (ER) status in breast cancer (BC) is determined using immunohistochemistry (IHC) with nuclear expression in ≥1% of cells defined as ER-positive. BC with 1%-9% expression (ER-low-positive), is a clinically and biologically unique subgroup. In this study, we hypothesized that ER-low-positive BC represents a heterogeneous group with a mixture of ER-positive and ER-negative tumor, which may explain their divergent clinical behavior. A large BC cohort (n = 8171) was investigated and categorized into 3 groups: ER-low-positive (1%-9%), ER-positive (≥10%), and ER-negative (<1%) where clinicopathological and outcome characteristics were compared. A subset of ER-low-positive cases was further evaluated using IHC, RNAscope, and RT-qPCR. PAM50 subtyping and ESR1 mRNA expression levels were assessed in ER-low-positive cases within The Cancer Genome Atlas data set. The reliability of image analysis software in assessment of ER expression in the ER-low-positive category was also assessed. ER-low-positive tumors constituted <2% of BC cases examined and showed significant clinicopathological similarity to ER-negative tumors. Most of these tumors were nonluminal types showing low ESR1 mRNA expression. Further validation of ER status revealed that 45% of these tumors were ER-negative with repeated IHC staining and confirmed by RNAscope and RT-qPCR. ER-low-positive tumors diagnosed on needle core biopsy were enriched with false-positive ER staining. BCs with 10% ER behaved similar to ER-positive, rather than ER-negative or low-positive BCs. Moderate concordance was found in assessment of ER-low-positive tumors, and this was not improved by image analysis. Routinely diagnosed ER-low-positive BC includes a proportion of ER-negative cases. We recommend repeat testing of BC showing 1%-9% ER expression and using a cutoff ≥10% expression to define ER positivity to help better inform treatment decisions.

Impact of estrogen receptor expression level on response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and prognosis in HER2-negative breast cancers

BACKGROUND

Breast cancers with 1-10% cell staining for estrogen receptor (ER) present particular clinical features. The clinical data of estrogen receptor expression level and treatment effect are limited, particularly regarding chemotherapy benefit. We evaluated the pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in ER low positive tumors (ER staining 1-10%) and compared it with ER > 10% positive tumors (ER staining > 10%) and ER-negative tumors. We further explored the differences in recurrence and survival with respect to the ER expression level.

METHOD

Patients with stages II and III HER2-negative primary breast cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by definitive surgery were categorized according to their ER percentages into three groups: ER-negative, ER low positive, and ER > 10% positive. Logistic regression models were used to assess the association between each variable and pathologic complete response (pCR). Kaplan‒Meier analysis was used to estimate survival outcomes. Cox models were used to adjust for patient and tumor characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 241 patients were analyzed. Of all patients included, 22 (9.1%) had ER low positive tumors, 159 (66.0%) had ER > 10% positive tumors, and 60 (24.9%) were ER-negative. Low ER positivity was significantly associated with a higher pCR rate than ER > 10% positivity (OR, 0.249; 95% CI, 0.067-0.923; P = 0.038). After a median follow-up time of 32 months, the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of the patients with ER low positive tumors were significantly worse than those of the patients with ER > 10% positive tumors but similar to those with ER-negative tumors. After adjustment for covariates, ER low positive tumors were significantly associated with worse DFS than ER > 10% positive tumors.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicated that ER low positive breast cancer presents a better response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and significantly worse prognosis for patients than those with ER > 10% positive tumors, but similar to the ER-negative group. These data support that this category of patients behaves clinically like patients with ER-negative breast cancer and should be treated differently from patients with ER > 10% positive tumors. Further prospective study is needed.

Concordance of immunohistochemistry for predictive and prognostic factors in breast cancer between biopsy and surgical excision: a single-centre experience and review of the literature

PURPOSE

Accurate evaluation of breast cancer on bioptic samples is of fundamental importance to guide therapeutic decisions, especially in the neoadjuvant or metastatic setting. We aimed to assess concordance for oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), c-erbB2/HER2 and Ki-67. We also reviewed the current literature to evaluate our results in the context of the data available at present.

METHODS

We included patients who underwent both biopsy and surgical resection for breast cancer at San Matteo Hospital, Pavia, Italy, between January 2014 and December 2020. ER, PR, c-erbB2, and Ki-67 immunohistochemistry concordance between biopsy and surgical specimen was evaluated. ER was further analysed to include the recently defined ER-low-positive in our analysis.

RESULTS

We evaluated 923 patients. Concordance between biopsy and surgical specimen for ER, ER-low-positive, PR, c-erbB2 and Ki-67 was, respectively, 97.83, 47.8, 94.26, 68 and 86.13%. Cohen's κ for interobserver agreement was very good for ER and good for PR, c-erbB2 and Ki-67. Concordance was especially low (37%) in the c-erbB2 1 + category.

CONCLUSION

Oestrogen and progesterone receptor status can be safely assessed on preoperative samples. The results of this study advise caution in interpreting biopsy results regarding ER-low-positive, c-erbB2/HER and Ki-67 results due to a still suboptimal concordance. The low concordance for c-erbB2 1 + cases underlines the importance of further training in this area, in the light of the future therapeutic perspectives.

Lineage plasticity enables low-ER luminal tumors to evolve and gain basal-like traits

Stratifying breast cancer into specific molecular or histologic subtypes aids in therapeutic decision-making and predicting outcomes; however, these subtypes may not be as distinct as previously thought. Patients with luminal-like, estrogen receptor (ER)-expressing tumors have better prognosis than patients with more aggressive, triple-negative or basal-like tumors. There is, however, a subset of luminal-like tumors that express lower levels of ER, which exhibit more basal-like features. We have found that breast tumors expressing lower levels of ER, traditionally considered to be luminal-like, represent a distinct subset of breast cancer characterized by the emergence of basal-like features. Lineage tracing of low-ER tumors in the MMTV-PyMT mouse mammary tumor model revealed that basal marker-expressing cells arose from normal luminal epithelial cells, suggesting that luminal-to-basal plasticity is responsible for the evolution and emergence of basal-like characteristics. This plasticity allows tumor cells to gain a new lumino-basal phenotype, thus leading to intratumoral lumino-basal heterogeneity. Single-cell RNA sequencing revealed SOX10 as a potential driver for this plasticity, which is known among breast tumors to be almost exclusively expressed in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and was also found to be highly expressed in low-ER tumors. These findings suggest that basal-like tumors may result from the evolutionary progression of luminal tumors with low ER expression.

Interleukin-1 and Nuclear Factor Kappa B Signaling Promote Breast Cancer Progression and Treatment Resistance

While meant for wound healing and immunity in response to injury and infection, inflammatory signaling is usurped by cancerous tumors to promote disease progression, including treatment resistance. The interleukin-1 (IL-1) inflammatory cytokine family functions in wound healing and innate and adaptive immunity. Two major, closely related IL-1 family members, IL-1α and IL-1β, promote tumorigenic phenotypes and contribute to treatment resistance in cancer. IL-1 signaling converges on transactivation of the Nuclear Factor Kappa B (NF-κB) and Activator protein 1 (AP-1) transcription factors. NF-κB and AP-1 signaling are also activated by the inflammatory cytokine Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNFα) and microbe-sensing Toll-Like Receptors (TLRs). As reviewed elsewhere, IL-1, TNFα, and TLR can promote cancer progression through NF-κB or AP-1. In this review, we focus on what is known about the role of IL-1α and IL-1β in breast cancer (BCa) progression and therapeutic resistance, and state evidence for the role of NF-κB in mediating IL-1-induced BCa progression and therapeutic resistance. We will present evidence that IL-1 promotes BCa cell proliferation, BCa stem cell expansion, angiogenesis, and metastasis. IL-1 also regulates intracellular signaling and BCa cell hormone receptor expression in a manner that confers a growth advantage to the tumor cells and allows BCa cells to evade therapy. As such, the IL-1 receptor antagonist, anakinra, is in clinical trials to treat BCa and multiple other cancer types. This article presents a review of the literature from the 1990s to the present, outlining the evidence supporting a role for IL-1 and IL-1-NF-κB signaling in BCa progression.

Heterogeneity between Core Needle Biopsy and Synchronous Axillary Lymph Node Metastases in Early Breast Cancer Patients-A Comparison of HER2, Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Expression Profiles during Primary Treatment Regime

Simple Summary

All initial therapeutic decisions in early breast cancer are commonly based on the intrinsic subtype consisting of estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR), the human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) receptors and the proliferation marker Ki67. However, breast cancer is a very heterogeneous disease, and receptor expression is reported to change during progression. Little is known about receptor changes at the primary site. In a German single center study, we retrospectively analyzed a mostly therapy naive cohort of 215 primary breast cancer patients with axillary synchronous lymph node metastases (LNM). We compared core needle biopsy tissue of the primary tumor (t-CNB) to axillary LNM and detected receptor discordance for all three receptors at the primary site.

Abstract

In breast cancer therapeutic decisions are based on the expression of estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR), the human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) receptors and the proliferation marker Ki67. However, only little is known concerning heterogeneity between the primary tumor and axillary lymph node metastases (LNM) in the primary site. We retrospectively analyzed receptor profiles of 215 early breast cancer patients with axillary synchronous LNM. Of our cohort, 69% were therapy naive and did not receive neoadjuvant treatment. Using immunohistochemistry, receptor status and Ki67 were compared between core needle biopsy of the tumor (t-CNB) and axillary LNM obtained during surgery. The discordance rates between t-CNB and axillary LNM were 12% for HER2, 6% for ER and 20% for PR. Receptor discordance appears to already occur at the primary site. Receptor losses might play a role concerning overtreatment concomitant with adverse drug effects, while receptor gains might be an option for additional targeted or endocrine therapy. Hence, not only receptor profiles of the tumor tissue but also of the synchronous axillary LNM should be considered in the choice of treatment.

Updates on breast biomarkers

Recent advancements in breast cancer treatment have ushered in a new era of precision medicine. Novel trials have led to the approval of a growing list of personalized therapies and corresponding biomarkers. These advancements have shifted the pathologist's practice into a leading role in the management breast cancer. Understanding the complex algorithms and diagnostic modalities used to assess predictive and prognostic biomarkers is central for quality oncology care. ER and HER2 subcategorize breast cancers into treatment groups under which different biomarkers and therapies are indicated, while they also serve as predictive biomarkers for specific targeted treatments. This review will cover the evolution and latest updates of the CAP/ASCO guidelines relevant to these two important biomarkers in breast cancer. Still evolving concepts such as HER2 heterogeneity, HER2 "low," and HER2-mutated cancers have the potential to continue to change HER2 testing in breast cancers. In addition to ER and HER2, biomarkers used in specific clinical scenarios will be covered. In early-stage ER-positive/HER2-negative disease, multi-gene expression panels (such as OncotypeDX) have emerged as the new standard biomarker when determining if chemotherapy should be added to endocrine therapy. In the more aggressive ER-negative/HER2-positive or triple negative early-stage breast cancers, response to neoadjuvant therapy has proved to be a useful biomarker to help determine if additional therapy should be added for patients with an incomplete response. Ki67 has also recently emerged as a marker that can be used to identify the highest risk ER-positive and HER2-negative cancers if considering adding a cell cycle inhibitor (abemaciclib) to endocrine therapy. Importantly, in the metastatic setting, numerous predictive biomarkers have emerged, including recommendations for germline BRCA mutation testing for all metastatic patients (to determine if PARP inhibitor therapy is an option) and other ER-/HER2-dependent biomarkers such as PD-L1 (for potential immunotherapy in triple negative patients) and PIK3CA mutation status (for potential PI3K inhibitor therapy in ER-positive metastatic patients). Other less common biomarkers of targeted therapy options (e.g., MSI/MMR, TMB, NTRK) as well as comprehensive genomic profiling to identify uncommon targets are also available in the metastatic setting to determine additional treatment options.

Outcome of breast cancer patients with low hormone receptor positivity: analysis of a 15-year population-based cohort

BACKGROUND

Guideline recommendations for the treatment of breast cancer with low hormone receptor (HR) expression (1%-9%) are ambiguous and several studies showed more similarities with HR-negative tumors than with HR strongly positive tumors (≥10%). We used a population-based 15-year cohort to compare patient characteristics and outcome of HR low positive tumors with HR-negative and HR strongly positive tumors, respectively.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 38  560 women diagnosed with early invasive breast cancer between 2004 and 2018 within the scope of the Munich Cancer Registry with 4.9 million inhabitants were included. Descriptive analyses of prognostic factors, treatment, and outcome analyses using the Kaplan-Meier method; cumulative incidence in consideration of competing risks; and multivariate analyses (Cox regression and Fine-Gray model) were conducted. Endpoints were time to local recurrence (TTLR), time to lymph node recurrence (TTLNR), time to metastasis (TTM), overall survival (OS), and relative survival (RS).

RESULTS

A total of 861 patients (2%) had HR low positive, 4862 (13%) HR-negative, and 32  837 (85%) HR strongly positive tumors. Within the HER2-negative cohort (n = 33  366), survival of HR low positive tumors was significantly worse than that of HR strongly positive tumors [OS hazard ratio 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.55-0.78)], whereas between HR low positive and HR-negative tumors no significant survival difference could be detected [OS hazard ratio 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.78-1.11)]. TTLR, TTLNR, and TTM showed similar results. By contrast, within the HER2-positive cohort (n = 5194), no statistically significant differences between the three HR groups could be detected in multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSION

Current definitions for HR positivity and its clinical relevance should be reconsidered. Patients with HR low positive/HER2-negative tumors could be regarded and treated similar to patients with triple-negative tumors.

Impact of estrogen receptor levels on outcome in non-metastatic triple negative breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy

Although 1% is the recommended cut-off to define estrogen receptor (ER) positivity, a 10% cut-off is often used in clinical practice for therapeutic purposes. We here evaluate clinical outcomes according to ER levels in a monoinstitutional cohort of non-metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (BC) patients undergoing (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Clinicopathological data of 406 patients with ER < 10% HER2-negative BC treated with (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy between 01/2000 and 04/2019 were collected. Patients were categorized in ER-negative (ER < 1%; N = 364) and ER-low positive (1-9%, N = 42). At a median follow-up of 54 months, 88 patients had relapsed and 64 died. No significant difference was observed in invasive relapse-free survival (iRFS) and overall survival (OS) according to ER expression levels, both at univariate and multivariate analysis (5-years iRFS 74.0% versus 73.1% for ER-negative and ER-low positive BC, respectively, p = 0.6; 5-years OS 82.3% versus 76.7% for ER-negative and ER-low positive BC, respectively, p = 0.8). Among the 165 patients that received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, pathological complete response rate was similar in the two cohorts (38% in ER-negative, 44% in ER-low positive, p = 0.498). In conclusion, primary BC with ER1-9% shows similar clinical behavior to ER 1% BC. Our results suggest the use of a 10% cut-off, rather than <1%, to define triple-negative BC.

Therapy response and prognosis of patients with early breast cancer with low positivity for hormone receptors - An analysis of 2765 patients from neoadjuvant clinical trials

AIM

To evaluate HER2-negative breast cancer (BC) with a low hormone receptor (HR) expression, with regard to pathological complete response (pCR) and survival, in comparison to triple-negative BC (TNBC) and strong HR-positive BC.

METHODS

We compared negative [oestrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) <1%], low-positive (ER and/or PR 1-9%) and strong-positive (ER or PR 10-100%) HR-expression in neoadjuvant clinical trial cohorts (n = 2765) of BC patients. End-points were disease-free survival (DFS), distant-disease free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS). We performed RNA sequencing on available tumour tissue samples from patients with low-HR expression (n = 38).

RESULTS

Ninety-four (3.4%) patients had low HR-positive tumours, 1769 (64.0%) had strong HR-positive tumours, and 902 (32.6%) had TNBC. There were no significant differences in pCR rates between women with low HR-positive tumours (27.7%) and women with TNBC (35.5%). DFS and DDFS were also not different [for DFS, hazard ratio 1.26, 95%-CI (confidence interval) : 0.87-1.83, log-rank test p = 0.951; for DDFS, hazard ratio 1.17, 95%-CI: 0.78-1.76, log-rank test p = 0.774]. Patients with strong HR-positive tumours had a significantly lower pCR rate (pCR 9.4%; odds ratio 0.38, 95%-CI: 0.23-0.63), but better DFS (hazard ratio 0.48, 95%-CI: 0.33-0.70) and DDFS (hazard ratio 0.49, 95%-CI: 0.33-0.74) than patients with low HR-positive tumours. Molecular subtyping (RNA sequencing) of low HR-positive tumours classified these predominantly into a basal subtype (86.8%).

CONCLUSION

Low HR-positive, HER2-negative tumours have a similar clinical behaviour to TNBC showing high pCR rates and poor survival and also a basal-like gene expression signature. Patients with low HR-positive tumours should be regarded as candidates for therapy strategies targeting TNBC.

Percentage of Hormone Receptor Positivity in Breast Cancer Provides Prognostic Value: A Single-Institute Study

Background

A majority of breast cancer tumors express estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PR); however, the percentage of cancer cells expressing these receptors can range from 0-100%. The prognostic and therapeutic impact of the percentage of cells expressing hormone receptors in breast cancer is not fully understood.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 411 breast cancer patients who were treated at the University of Nebraska Medical Center between 2010 and 2017 was performed. Patient tumors were evaluated for percentage of cells expressing ER and PR in conjunction with clinical outcomes.

Results

Patient tumors demonstrated a highly bimodal pattern of ER and PR staining with a majority of tumors demonstrating either a high percentage (> 80% of cells) or lack of cells (0%) staining for ER or PR. An increase in the percentage of ER positivity correlated with decreased local recurrence and improved overall survival. An increase in the percentage of PR positivity demonstrated a trend towards decreased local recurrence and improved overall survival, but was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

Results based on both continuous and categorical evaluation of ER expression revealed that increasing expression correlated with improved patient outcomes. Similar evaluation of PR expression demonstrated a trend towards improved patient outcomes though not statistically significant. These findings suggest that the degree of hormone receptor positivity and not a Boolean representation of positivity could provide additional prognostic value in the treatment and management of breast cancer.

Prognostic and predictive parameters in breast pathology: a pathologist's primer

The pathologist's role in the breast cancer treatment team has evolved from rendering a diagnosis of breast cancer, to providing a growing list of prognostic and predictive parameters such that individualized treatment decisions can be made based on likelihood of benefit from additional treatments and potential benefit from specific therapies. In all stages, ER and HER2 status help segregate breast cancers into treatment groups with similar outcomes and treatment response rates, however, traditional pathologic parameters such as favorable histologic subtype, size, lymph node status, and Nottingham grade also have remained clinically relevant in early stage disease decision-making. This is especially true for the most common subtype of breast cancer; ER positive, HER2 negative disease. For this same group of breast cancers, an ever-expanding list of gene-expression panels also can provide prediction and prognostication about potential chemotherapy benefit beyond standard endocrine therapies, with the 21-gene Recurrence Score, currently the only prospectively validated predictive test for this purpose. In the more aggressive ER-negative cancer subtypes, response to neoadjuvant therapy and` the extent of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are more recently recognized powerful prognostic parameters, and clinical guidelines now offer additional treatment options for those high-risk patients with residual cancer after standard neoadjuvant therapy. In stage four disease, predictive tests like germline BRCA status, tumor PIK3CA mutation status (in ER+ metastatic disease) and PDL-1 status (in triple negative metastatic disease) are now used to determine additional new treatment options. The objective of this review is to describe the latest in prognostic and predictive parameters in breast cancer as they are relevant to standard pathology reporting and how they are used in breast cancer clinical treatment decisions.

Survey of low ER-positive expression and its correlation with other clinical and pathological factors in breast cancer

Introduction

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women. Owning to the prominent role of biomarkers in molecular classification of breast cancer in recent years, evaluation of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and Her2/neu seems to be required for prognosis and treatment of patients.

Material and Methods

One-hundred twenty two patients with primary breast carcinoma were selected and immunohistochemistry staining for ER, PR, and Her2/neu were performed on representative paraffin blocks. ER level can be semi-quantified by immunohistochemistry using the H-score. The score, given as the sum of the percent of tumor cells staining multiplied by the intensity level, ranges from 0 to 300 as low, intermediate, and high grades. The statistical association of ER expression with the level of PR and Her2/neu, tumor size, necrosis, microscopic grade, vascular invasion, and lymph node involvement were analyzed using SPSS16 software.

Results

Results showed that among 122 studied patients, 44.3% were in the low ER-positive group where most of these cases (22.1%) were Her2/neu negative. Although there was a reciprocal interplay between the expression of ER and Her2/neu, increased expression of ER had a direct relation with PR level. However, there was no statistical relation between ER level with age, tumor size, necrosis, microscopic grade, vascular invasion, and lymph node involvement.

Discussion

The study clearly indicated that low ER group encompasses the high frequency of breast cancer patients. Furthermore, the most cases of low ER patients were in Her2/neu negative group.

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are associated with poor prognosis in invasive lobular breast carcinoma

The prognostic impact of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) within invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) remains to be better characterized. In estrogen receptor (ER)-negative invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type (IDC-NST), TILs are associated with good prognosis. The aim of this study was to examine TILs in ILC, with particular focus on prognostic and clinicopathologic features. A cohort comprising 459 consecutive ILCs diagnosed in a single institution from 2005 to 2008 met the eligibility criteria for this study. The percentage of tumor area occupied by TILs was quantified by two breast pathologists and categorized into three groups: no TILs, ≤5%, >5%. Clinicopathologic features were tested by Fisher's exact tests or Chi² tests. Overall survival (OS) and invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard statistics. There were 239 TIL-negative cases, 185 cases with ≤5% TILs, and 35 cases with >5% TILs. TILs were associated with younger age, larger tumors, lymph node involvement, poor Nottingham prognostic index, HER2 amplification, multinucleation, and prominent nucleoli (p < 0.05). Poor OS was significantly associated with increasing TILs in the univariate Cox proportional hazards model (p < 0.001) and Kaplan-Meier estimator (p < 0.05, log-rank test). Similar results were observed for iDFS (p = 0.004 for Cox univariate and p = 0.005 for log-rank test). Notably, TILs can identify a subset of ILC patients with poor OS independently of molecular subtype and lymph node metastases (multivariate Cox, p < 0.001, OS hazard ratio (HR) = 4.38 and HR = 6.15, for ≤5% and >5% TILs, respectively, vs. absence of TILs). Prominent nucleoli was the only nuclear feature associated with poor OS (p = 0.05) and iDFS (p = 0.05) in univariate Cox survival analysis. TILs represent a promising new morphologic biomarker associated with poor outcome of ILC, in contrast with that observed in ER-negative IDC-NST.

Independent Prognostic Value of Intratumoral Heterogeneity and Immune Response Features by Automated Digital Immunohistochemistry Analysis in Early Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Carcinoma

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for ER, PR, HER2, and Ki67 is used to predict outcome and therapy response in breast cancer patients. The current IHC assessment, visual or digital, is based mostly on global biomarker expression levels in the tissue sample. In our study, we explored the prognostic value of digital image analysis of conventional breast cancer IHC biomarkers supplemented with their intratumoral heterogeneity and tissue immune response indicators. Surgically excised tumor samples from 101 female patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (HRBC) were stained for ER, PR, HER2, Ki67, SATB1, CD8, and scanned at 20x. Digital image analysis was performed using the HALO™ platform. Subsequently, hexagonal tiling was used to compute intratumoral heterogeneity indicators for ER, PR and Ki67 expression. Multiple Cox regression analysis revealed three independent predictors of the patient's overall survival: Haralick's texture entropy of PR (HR = 0.19, p = 0.0005), Ki67 Ashman's D bimodality (HR = 3.0, p = 0.01), and CD8+SATB1+ cell density in tumor tissue (HR = 0.32, p = 0.02). Remarkably, the PR and Ki67 intratumoral heterogeneity indicators were prognostically more informative than the rates of their expression. In particular, a distinct non-linear relationship between the rate of PR expression and its intratumoral heterogeneity was observed and revealed a non-linear prognostic effect of PR expression. The independent prognostic significance of CD8+SATB1+ cells infiltrating the tumor could indicate their role in anti-tumor immunity. In conclusion, we suggest that prognostic modeling, based entirely on the computational image-based IHC biomarkers, is possible in HRBC patients. The intratumoral heterogeneity and immune response indicators outperformed both conventional breast cancer IHC and clinicopathological variables while markedly increasing the power of the model.

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Update

PURPOSE.—

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS.—

A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.

RECOMMENDATIONS.—

The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: ASCO/CAP Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Prognosis and endocrine therapy selection for patients with low hormone receptor-positive breast cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A retrospective study of 570 patients in China

The 2010 American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines have reduced the immunohistochemistry cut-off value for determining estrogen receptor b positivity from 10 to 1% of stained cells in breast cancer. In clinical practice, low-hormone receptor positive (low HR+) tumors are classified in the luminal subtype, although they exhibit aggressive features and poor prognosis. Information regarding the prognosis of patients with breast cancer following treatment with optimal endocrine therapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is currently lacking. In the present study, the differences in clinical characteristics and survival of patients with breast cancer were compared among those with low and high HR+ breast cancer who received NAC. Furthermore, the effects of different types of endocrine therapies on the prognosis of patients with breast cancer were compared. The study population comprised patients with primary breast cancer who were treated at the Zhejiang Cancer Hospital between January, 2007 and December, 2017. Patients were divided into three groups based on the results of immunohistochemistry: HR+ (positive staining >10%), HR- (positive staining <1%) and low HR+ (positive staining 1–10%). The low HR+ group was further divided into three subgroups according to the different endocrine therapies administered: Tamoxifen, aromatase inhibitor or no treatment. Among the 570 patients included in the present study, 60 (10.53%) patients had low HR+ tumors. With a median follow-up of 48.98 months, patients with low HR+ tumors had reduced survival rates compared with those with HR+ tumors. Furthermore, the pathologic complete response rate (pCR) of patients with low HR+ was comprised between pCR from patients with HR+ and pCR from patients with HR- following NAC treatment. In addition, no significant difference in the overall prognosis was observed among patients with low HR+ following treatment with different endocrine therapies. Subsequently, patients in the low HR+ group were more likely to benefit from NAC compared with patients in the HR+ group. Intensive endocrine therapy may therefore improve the prognosis of patients with breast cancer and low HR+; however, further investigation is required.

IL-1 induces p62/SQSTM1 and autophagy in ERα+ /PR+ BCa cell lines concomitant with ERα and PR repression, conferring an ERα- /PR- BCa-like phenotype

Estrogen receptor α (ERα)^low/- tumors are associated with breast cancer (BCa) endocrine resistance, where ERα low tumors show a poor prognosis and a molecular profile similar to triple negative BCa tumors. Interleukin-1 (IL-1) downregulates ERα accumulation in BCa cell lines, yet the cells can remain viable. In kind, IL-1 and ERα show inverse accumulation in BCa patient tumors and IL-1 is implicated in BCa progression. IL-1 represses the androgen receptor hormone receptor in prostate cancer cells concomitant with the upregulation of the prosurvival, autophagy-related protein, Sequestome-1 (p62/SQSTM1; hereinafter, p62); and given their similar etiology, we hypothesized that IL-1 also upregulates p62 in BCa cells concomitant with hormone receptor repression. To test our hypothesis, BCa cell lines were exposed to conditioned medium from IL-1-secreting bone marrow stromal cells (BMSCs), IL-1, or IL-1 receptor antagonist. Cells were analyzed for the accumulation of ERα, progesterone receptor (PR), p62, or the autophagosome membrane protein, microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 (LC3), and for p62-LC3 interaction. We found that IL-1 is sufficient to mediate BMSC-induced ERα and PR repression, p62 and autophagy upregulation, and p62-LC3 interaction in ERα⁺ /PR⁺ BCa cell lines. However, IL-1 does not significantly elevate the high basal p62 accumulation or high basal autophagy in the ERα^- /PR^- BCa cell lines. Thus, our observations imply that IL-1 confers a prosurvival ERα^- /PR^- molecular phenotype in ERα⁺ /PR⁺ BCa cells that may be dependent on p62 function and autophagy and may underlie endocrine resistance.

Ancillary Prognostic and Predictive Testing in Breast Cancer: Focus on Discordant, Unusual, and Borderline Results

Ancillary testing in breast cancer has become standard of care to determine what therapies may be most effective for individual patients with breast cancer. Single-marker tests are required on all newly diagnosed and newly metastatic breast cancers. Markers of proliferation are also used, and include both single-marker tests like Ki67 as well as panel-based gene expression tests, which have made more recent contributions to prognostic and predictive testing in breast cancers. This review focuses on pathologist interpretation of these ancillary test results, with a focus on expected versus unexpected results and troubleshooting borderline, unusual, or discordant results.

PROGNOSTIC IMPACT OF LOW ESTROGEN AND PROGESTERONE POSITIVITY IN LUMINAL B (HER2 NEGATIVE) BREAST CANCER

- Luminal B (HER2 negative) subtype is the most diversiform type of breast cancers, with a high Ki-67 proliferation index (>20%) or/and low progesterone (PR; <20%) with various intensity and distribution of hormone receptors. Considerable difference has also been noticed in disease outcome, wherefore there is the need for a more detailed classification of this tumor subtype. The clinical and pathologic parameters of 147 luminal B (HER2 negative) breast cancers were examined. The expression of hormone receptors in correlation with other prognostic factors and disease outcome was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox regression analysis. The Kaplan-Mayer analysis showed that low positivity of estrogen (ER) and PR receptors in tumors was associated with a significantly worse disease outcome (overall survival (ER), p=0.020; disease free survival (ER), p=0.019; overall survival (PR), p=0.026; disease free survival (PR), p=0.038)), unlike Ki-67, which did not show a statistically significant connection (overall survival, p=0.343; disease free survival, p=0.322). The intensity of receptor staining and Ki-67 relative to other histopathologic prognostic factors showed a statistically significant correlation solely with histologic grade of tumor. By using the Cox regression model, PR proved to be an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (p=0.004) and disease free survival (p=0.029). The luminal B (HER2 negative) breast cancer with low expression of hormone receptors, independent of the Ki-67 proliferation index, and in correlation with a higher histologic grade, could be a unique subtype of cancer.

Low Estrogen Receptor (ER)-Positive Breast Cancer and Neoadjuvant Systemic Chemotherapy: Is Response Similar to Typical ER-Positive or ER-Negative Disease?

OBJECTIVES

Pathologic complete response (pCR) rate after neoadjuvant chemotherapy was compared between 141 estrogen receptor (ER)-negative (43%), 41 low ER+ (13%), 47 moderate ER+ (14%), and 98 high ER+ (30%) tumors.

METHODS

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive cases, cases without semiquantitative ER score, and patients treated with neoadjuvant endocrine therapy alone were excluded.

RESULTS

The pCR rate of low ER+ tumors was similar to the pCR rate of ER- tumors (37% and 26% for low ER and ER- respectively, P = .1722) but significantly different from the pCR rate of moderately ER+ (11%, P = .0049) and high ER+ tumors (4%, P < .0001). Patients with pCR had an excellent prognosis regardless of the ER status. In patients with residual disease (no pCR), the recurrence and death rate were higher in ER- and low ER+ cases compared with moderate and high ER+ cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Low ER+ breast cancers are biologically similar to ER- tumors. Semiquantitative ER H-score is an important determinant of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Tumor biomarker conversion between primary and metastatic breast cancer: mRNA assessment and its concordance with immunohistochemistry

Biomarker changes between primary (PT) and metastatic tumor (MT) site may be significant in individualizing treatment strategies and can result from actual clonal evolution, biomarker conversion, or technical limitations of diagnostic tests. This study explored biomarker conversion during breast cancer (BC) progression in 67 patients with different tumor subtypes and metastatic sites via mRNA quantification and subsequently analyzed the concordance between real-time qPCR and immunohistochemistry (IHC). Immunostaining for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), HER2, and Ki-67 was performed on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded PT and MT tissue sections. RT-qPCR was performed using a multiplex RT-qPCR kit for ESR1, PGR, ERBB2, and MKI67 and the reference genes B2M and CALM2. Subsequent measurement of tumor biomarker mRNA expression to detect conversion revealed significant decreases in ESR1 and PGR mRNA and MKI67 upregulation (all p < 0.001) in MT compared to PT of all tumor subtypes and ERBB2 upregulation in MT from triple-negative PT patients (p = 0.023). Furthermore, ERBB2 mRNA was upregulated in MT brain biopsies, particularly those from triple-negative PTs (p = 0.023). High concordance between RT-qPCR and IHC was observed for ER/ESR1 (81%(κ 0.51) in PT and 84%(κ 0.34) in MT, PR/PGR (70%(κ 0.10) in PT and 78% (κ -0.32) in MT), and for HER2/ERBB2 (100% in PT and 89% in MT). Discordance between mRNA biomarker assessments of PT and MT resulting from receptor conversion calls for dynamic monitoring of BC tumor biomarkers. Overall, RT-qPCR assessment of BC target genes and their mRNA expression is highly concordant with IHC protein analysis in both primary and metastatic tumor.

Comparison of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Antibody Reagents Using Proficiency Testing Data

CONTEXT

- Immunohistochemical analysis of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) expression in breast cancer is the current standard of care and directly determines therapy. In 2010 the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) published guidelines for ER and PgR predictive testing, encompassing preanalytic, analytic, postanalytic factors; antibody validation; and proficiency testing.

OBJECTIVE

- To compare the performance of different antibody reagents for ER and PgR immunohistochemical analysis by using CAP proficiency testing data.

DESIGN

- The CAP PM2 survey uses tissue microarrays of ten 2-mm cores per slide. We analyzed survey data from 80 ER and 80 PgR cores by antibody clone from more than 1200 laboratories.

RESULTS

- Laboratories used the ER antibodies SP1 (72%), 6F11 (17%), 1D5 (3%), and the PgR antibodies 1E2 (61%), 16 (12%), PgR-636 (13%), PgR-1294 (8%) in 2015. While 63 of 80 ER cores (79%) were scored similarly using each of the 3 antibodies, there were significant differences for others, with SP1 yielding more positive interpretations. Four cores were scored as ER negative by more than half of the laboratories using 1D5 or 6F11, while SP1 produced positive results in more than 70% of laboratories using that antibody. Despite the greater variety of PgR antibody reagents and greater PgR tumor heterogeneity, 61 of 80 cores (76%) were scored similarly across the 4 PgR antibodies.

CONCLUSIONS

- Accurate ER and PgR testing in breast cancer is crucial for appropriate treatment. The CAP proficiency testing data demonstrate differences in staining results by ER clone, with SP1 yielding more positive results.

Controversies in treatment selection for patients with equivocal ER and HER2 results

Formally, the term "equivocal" should not be used when reporting results of the assessment of ER status, but controversies exist about the prognostic and predictive value of a low ER expression (i.e. 1-9% positive cells) in breast cancer (so called ER-poor tumors). Because of the rarity of these cases, prospective clinical trials have not been conducted (and are unlikely to be conducted in the future) to define the optimal treatment strategy for the small subset of patients with ER-poor breast cancer. Therefore, the only available data stem from retrospective subgroup analyses of randomized clinical trials or from clinical datasets of individual Institutions. The still unanswered question is whether these tumors are responsive to endocrine treatment, and what is the magnitude of the benefit of endocrine interventions for patients with ER-poor breast cancer. Since a potentially life-saving benefit from empirical adjuvant endocrine therapy cannot be excluded, the safest clinical approach may be to consider both adjuvant endocrine therapy and chemotherapy in this rare subset of patients. Testing for HER2 overexpression by immunohistochemistry or for gene amplification by in situ hybridization techniques may end up with equivocal results. Patients with equivocal HER2 status were not eligible for the pivotal clinical trials of adjuvant trastuzumab, and the possible benefit of HER2-targeted therapies for this subset of patients is unknown. The clinical results of the NSABP B47 clinical trial will eventually clarify if trastuzumab is effective, and what is the magnitude of its effect, in this patient population.

[Non-metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in 2016: Definitions and management]

Triple-negative breast cancer (TN), as defined by the triple negativity in immunohistochemistry: the absence of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and the absence of overexpression or amplification of HER2, corresponds to 15 % of invasive breast cancers. This is a very heterogeneous group of tumors both at the genomic and transcriptomic level and at morphological, clinical and prognostic level. Although there are some good prognosis forms, the majority of TN tumors is characterized by a poor prognosis with a greater frequency of visceral metastases and a maximum risk of relapse in the first two years after diagnosis. Systemic adjuvant treatment with chemotherapy is almost always indicated. The surgical treatment and radiotherapy treatment should be comparable to the other subtypes and obey the same rules of oncologic surgery. TN tumors are not associated with a higher risk of locoregional relapse after conservative treatment and adjuvant radiotherapy. Optimization of systemic therapies is currently and for the last decade a challenge. A number of targeted therapies and efficiency biomarkers identification of these targeted therapies is essential to allow significant progress in optimizing systemic therapy for these tumors.

Biomarkers in Breast Cancer: Where Are We and Where Are We Going?

Biomarkers play an important role in the detection and management of patients with breast cancer. Thus, BRCA1/2 mutation testing is used for risk assessment in families with a high prevalence of breast and ovarian cancer. Following a diagnosis of breast cancer, measurement of multi-analyte profiles such as uPA/PAI-1 or Oncotype DX may be used for determining prognosis and identifying lymph node-negative patients who may be spared from having to receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Other -gene tests such as the PAM50 ROR, Breast Cancer Index, and EndoPredict have been reported to predict the development of late recurrences and thus may be of value in selecting patients for extended hormone therapy. Mandatory assays include estrogen receptors for identification of endocrine-sensitive cancers and HER2 in selecting patients for treatment with anti-HER2 therapy (e.g., trastuzumab, lapatinib, pertuzumab, and ado-trastuzumab emtansine). Finally, serum biomarkers such as CA 15-3 or CEA may be used in monitoring therapy in patients with advanced disease receiving systemic therapy. Promising new biomarkers undergoing evaluation include circulating tumor cells and circulating tumor-derived DNA.

Divergent and convergent evolution in metastases suggest treatment strategies based on specific metastatic sites

Cancer cells, although maximally fit at their primary site, typically have lower fitness on the adaptive landscapes offered by the metastatic sites due to organ-specific variations in mesenchymal properties and signaling pathways. Clinically evident metastases will exhibit time-dependent divergence from the phenotypic mean of the primary population as the tumor cells evolve and adapt to their new circumstances. In contrast, tumors from different primary sites evolving on identical metastatic adaptive landscapes exhibit phenotypic convergence so that, for example, metastases in the liver from different primary tumors will evolve toward similar adaptive phenotypes. The combination of evolutionary divergence from the primary cancer phenotype and convergence towards similar adaptive strategies in the same tissue cause significant variations in treatment responses particularly for highly targeted therapies.

This suggest that optimal therapies for disseminated cancer must take into account the site(s) of metastatic growth as well as the primary organ.

Background and objective: Systemic therapy for metastatic cancer is currently determined exclusively by the site of tumor origin. Yet, there is increasing evidence that the molecular characteristics of metastases significantly differ from the primary tumor. We define the evolutionary dynamics of metastases that govern this molecular divergence and examine their potential contribution to variations in response to targeted therapies.

Methodology: Darwinian interactions of transformed cells with the tissue microenvironments at primary and metastatic sites are analyzed using evolutionary game theory. Computational models simulate responses to targeted therapies in different organs within the same patient.

Results: Tumor cells, although maximally fit at their primary site, typically have lower fitness on the adaptive landscapes offered by the metastatic sites due to organ-specific variations in mesenchymal properties and signaling pathways. Clinically evident metastases usually exhibit time-dependent divergence from the phenotypic mean of the primary population as the tumor cells evolve and adapt to their new circumstances. In contrast, tumors from different primary sites evolving on identical metastatic adaptive landscapes exhibit phenotypic convergence. Thus, metastases in the liver from different primary tumors and even in different hosts will evolve toward similar adaptive phenotypes. The combination of evolutionary divergence from the primary cancer phenotype and convergence towards similar adaptive strategies in the same tissue cause significant variations in treatment responses particularly for highly targeted therapies.

Conclusion and implications: The results suggest that optimal therapies for disseminated cancer must take into account the site(s) of metastatic growth as well as the primary organ.

Predictive markers in breast cancer: An update on ER and HER2 testing and reporting

Gene expression profiling of human tumors has provided a new paradigm for classifying breast carcinomas, predicting response to treatment, and risk of recurrence. Estrogen receptor (ER), human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) receptor, and proliferation-related genes are the main drivers of classification in many of the gene expression profiling tests for breast cancer. However, ER, progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2 receptor status remain essential in determining the need and type of adjuvant therapy. These biomarkers are routinely tested for in all invasive breast carcinomas; ER testing is also performed on cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). This article will provide an update on current guidelines from the American Society of Clinical Oncologists (ASCO) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) for ER and HER2 testing by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH). The populations to be tested, antibody selection, criteria for interpretation, and reporting are discussed. The molecular alterations that correlate with IHC results, alternative methods of testing, and the current approach to complex aspects of HER2 testing, including heterogeneity and polysomy, also are summarized.