|
1
|
Mueller C, Davis JB, Espina V. Protein biomarkers for subtyping breast cancer and implications for future research: a 2024 update. Expert Rev Proteomics 2024; 21:401-416. [PMID: 39474929 DOI: 10.1080/14789450.2024.2423625] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2024] [Accepted: 10/18/2024] [Indexed: 11/05/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Breast cancer subtyping is used clinically for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment decisions. Subtypes are categorized by cell of origin, histomorphology, gene expression signatures, hormone receptor status, and/or protein levels. Categorizing breast cancer based on gene expression signatures aids in assessing a patient's recurrence risk. Protein biomarkers, on the other hand, provide functional data for selecting therapies for primary and recurrent tumors. We provide an update on protein biomarkers in breast cancer subtypes and their application in prognosis and therapy selection. AREAS COVERED Protein pathways in breast cancer subtypes are reviewed in the context of current protein-targeted treatment options. PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies between 2017 and 17 August 2024. EXPERT OPINION Post-translationally modified proteins and their unmodified counterparts have become clinically useful biomarkers for defining breast cancer subtypes from a therapy perspective. Tissue heterogeneity influences treatment outcomes and disease recurrence. Spatial profiling has revealed complex cellular subpopulations within the breast tumor microenvironment. Deciphering the functional relationships between and within tumor clonal cell populations will further aid in defining breast cancer subtypes and create new treatment paradigms for recurrent, drug resistant, and metastatic disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudius Mueller
- Laboratory and Bioinformatics Department, Ignite Proteomics, Golden, CO, USA
| | - Justin B Davis
- Laboratory and Bioinformatics Department, Ignite Proteomics, Golden, CO, USA
| | - Virginia Espina
- Center for Applied Proteomics and Molecular Medicine, George Mason University, Manassas, VA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Guergan S, Boeer B, Fugunt R, Helms G, Roehm C, Solomianik A, Neugebauer A, Nuessle D, Schuermann M, Brunecker K, Jurjut O, Boehme KA, Dammeier S, Enderle MD, Bettio S, Gonzalez-Menendez I, Staebler A, Brucker SY, Kraemer B, Wallwiener D, Fend F, Hahn M. Optical Emission Spectroscopy for the Real-Time Identification of Malignant Breast Tissue. Diagnostics (Basel) 2024; 14:338. [PMID: 38337854 PMCID: PMC10855719 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14030338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2023] [Revised: 01/29/2024] [Accepted: 01/31/2024] [Indexed: 02/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Breast conserving resection with free margins is the gold standard treatment for early breast cancer recommended by guidelines worldwide. Therefore, reliable discrimination between normal and malignant tissue at the resection margins is essential. In this study, normal and abnormal tissue samples from breast cancer patients were characterized ex vivo by optical emission spectroscopy (OES) based on ionized atoms and molecules generated during electrosurgical treatment. The aim of the study was to determine spectroscopic features which are typical for healthy and neoplastic breast tissue allowing for future real-time tissue differentiation and margin assessment during breast cancer surgery. A total of 972 spectra generated by electrosurgical sparking on normal and abnormal tissue were used for support vector classifier (SVC) training. Specific spectroscopic features were selected for the classification of tissues in the included breast cancer patients. The average classification accuracy for all patients was 96.9%. Normal and abnormal breast tissue could be differentiated with a mean sensitivity of 94.8%, a specificity of 99.0%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 99.1% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.1%. For 66.6% patients all classifications reached 100%. Based on this convincing data, a future clinical application of OES-based tissue differentiation in breast cancer surgery seems to be feasible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Selin Guergan
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| | - Bettina Boeer
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| | - Regina Fugunt
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| | - Gisela Helms
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| | - Carmen Roehm
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| | - Anna Solomianik
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| | - Alexander Neugebauer
- Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Waldhoernlestr. 17, 72072 Tübingen, Germany; (A.N.); (D.N.); (M.S.); (O.J.); (K.A.B.); (S.D.); (M.D.E.)
| | - Daniela Nuessle
- Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Waldhoernlestr. 17, 72072 Tübingen, Germany; (A.N.); (D.N.); (M.S.); (O.J.); (K.A.B.); (S.D.); (M.D.E.)
| | - Mirjam Schuermann
- Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Waldhoernlestr. 17, 72072 Tübingen, Germany; (A.N.); (D.N.); (M.S.); (O.J.); (K.A.B.); (S.D.); (M.D.E.)
| | - Kristin Brunecker
- Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Waldhoernlestr. 17, 72072 Tübingen, Germany; (A.N.); (D.N.); (M.S.); (O.J.); (K.A.B.); (S.D.); (M.D.E.)
| | - Ovidiu Jurjut
- Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Waldhoernlestr. 17, 72072 Tübingen, Germany; (A.N.); (D.N.); (M.S.); (O.J.); (K.A.B.); (S.D.); (M.D.E.)
| | - Karen A. Boehme
- Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Waldhoernlestr. 17, 72072 Tübingen, Germany; (A.N.); (D.N.); (M.S.); (O.J.); (K.A.B.); (S.D.); (M.D.E.)
| | - Sascha Dammeier
- Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Waldhoernlestr. 17, 72072 Tübingen, Germany; (A.N.); (D.N.); (M.S.); (O.J.); (K.A.B.); (S.D.); (M.D.E.)
| | - Markus D. Enderle
- Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Waldhoernlestr. 17, 72072 Tübingen, Germany; (A.N.); (D.N.); (M.S.); (O.J.); (K.A.B.); (S.D.); (M.D.E.)
| | - Sabrina Bettio
- Institute of Pathology and Neuropathology, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (S.B.); (I.G.-M.); (A.S.); (F.F.)
| | - Irene Gonzalez-Menendez
- Institute of Pathology and Neuropathology, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (S.B.); (I.G.-M.); (A.S.); (F.F.)
| | - Annette Staebler
- Institute of Pathology and Neuropathology, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (S.B.); (I.G.-M.); (A.S.); (F.F.)
| | - Sara Y. Brucker
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| | - Bernhard Kraemer
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| | - Diethelm Wallwiener
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| | - Falko Fend
- Institute of Pathology and Neuropathology, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (S.B.); (I.G.-M.); (A.S.); (F.F.)
| | - Markus Hahn
- Department of Women’s Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; (B.B.); (R.F.); (G.H.); (C.R.); (A.S.); (S.Y.B.); (B.K.); (D.W.); (M.H.)
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Ionescu S, Nicolescu AC, Marincas M, Madge OL, Simion L. An Update on the General Features of Breast Cancer in Male Patients-A Literature Review. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022; 12:1554. [PMID: 35885460 PMCID: PMC9323942 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12071554] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2022] [Revised: 06/19/2022] [Accepted: 06/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Male breast cancers are uncommon, as men account for less than 1 percent of all breast carcinomas. Among the predisposing risk factors for male breast cancer, the following appear to be significant: (a) breast/chest radiation exposure, (b) estrogen use, diseases associated with hyper-estrogenism, such as cirrhosis or Klinefelter syndrome, and (c) family health history. Furthermore, there are clear familial tendencies, with a higher incidence among men who have a large number of female relatives with breast cancer and (d) major inheritance susceptibility. Moreover, in families with BRCA mutations, there is an increased risk of male breast cancer, although the risk appears to be greater with inherited BRCA2 mutations than with inherited BRCA1 mutations. Due to diagnostic delays, male breast cancer is more likely to present at an advanced stage. A core biopsy or a fine needle aspiration must be performed to confirm suspicious findings. Infiltrating ductal cancer is the most prevalent form of male breast cancer, while invasive lobular carcinoma is extremely uncommon. Male breast cancer is almost always positive for hormone receptors. A worse prognosis is associated with a more advanced stage at diagnosis for men with breast cancer. Randomized controlled trials which recruit both female and male patients should be developed in order to gain more consistent data on the optimal clinical approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sinziana Ionescu
- 1st Clinic of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Bucharest Oncology Institute, 022328 Bucharest, Romania; (S.I.); (L.S.)
- Department of Surgery, “Carol Davila” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 050474 Bucharest, Romania
| | | | - Marian Marincas
- 1st Clinic of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Bucharest Oncology Institute, 022328 Bucharest, Romania; (S.I.); (L.S.)
- Department of Surgery, “Carol Davila” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 050474 Bucharest, Romania
| | - Octavia-Luciana Madge
- 1st Clinic of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Bucharest Oncology Institute, 022328 Bucharest, Romania; (S.I.); (L.S.)
- Faculty of Letters, University of Bucharest, 050663 Bucharest, Romania
| | - Laurentiu Simion
- 1st Clinic of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Bucharest Oncology Institute, 022328 Bucharest, Romania; (S.I.); (L.S.)
- Department of Surgery, “Carol Davila” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 050474 Bucharest, Romania
| |
Collapse
|