Luminal subtypes predict improved survival following central nervous system metastasis in patients with surgically managed metastatic breast carcinoma

Identification of risk factors for central nervous system metastasis in patients with breast cancer with neurologic symptoms

BACKGROUND

The current study was performed to identify factors that are present at the time of breast cancer (BC) diagnosis that are associated with a higher rate of central nervous system metastasis (CNSm).

METHODS

The authors analyzed a database of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of BC who were referred for a neuro-oncology consultation at the National Cancer Institute in Mexico City, Mexico, from June 2009 to June 2017. Information was collected prospectively and included demographic, pathologic, and clinical data at the time of diagnosis of BC. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models were built to estimate the associations between the development of CNSm and the time after BC diagnosis.

RESULTS

Among 970 patients with BC, 263 (27%) were diagnosed with CNSm. The median time from BC diagnosis to the development of CNSm was 33 months (interquartile range, 15-76 months). After multivariate analysis, age <50 years at the time of BC diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 2.5; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.8-3.5 [P < .0001]), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive status (HER2+) (OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 2.1-6.1 [P < .0001]), luminal B/HER2+ subtype (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.9-5.3 [P < .001]), triple-negative subtype(OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.5-4 [P = .001]), and Karnofsky performance status ≤70 (OR, 6.6; 95% CI, 4.5-9.6 [P < .0001]) were associated with a higher frequency of CNSm. Brain parenchyma was the most common site of CNSm. The median overall survival after a diagnosis of CNSm was 12.2 months (95% CI, 9.3-15.1 months).

CONCLUSIONS

CNSm is not uncommon among patients with BC, particularly in those with neurologic symptoms who require neuro-oncology evaluation and are aged <50 years at the time of diagnosis, have HER2+ or triple-negative subtypes, have a poor Karnofsky performance status, and/or have ≥2 non-CNS metastases.

Predictive and Prognostic Brain Metastases Assessment in Luminal Breast Cancer Patients: FN14 and GRP94 from Diagnosis to Prophylaxis

FN14 has been implicated in many intracellular signaling pathways, and GRP94 is a well-known endoplasmic reticulum protein regulated by glucose. Recently, both have been associated with metastasis progression in breast cancer patients. We studied the usefulness of FN14 and GRP94 expression to stratify breast cancer patients according their risk of brain metastasis (BrM) progression. We analyzed FN14 and GRP94 by immunohistochemistry in a retrospective multicenter study using tissue microarrays from 208 patients with breast carcinomas, of whom 52 had developed BrM. Clinical and pathological characteristics and biomarkers expression in Luminal and non-Luminal patients were analyzed using a multivariate logistic regression model adjusted for covariates, and brain metastasis-free survival (BrMFS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and the Cox proportional hazards model. FN14 expression was associated with BrM progression mainly in Luminal breast cancer patients with a sensitivity (53.85%) and specificity (89.60%) similar to Her2 expression (46.15 and 89.84%, respectively). Moreover, the likelihood to develop BrM in FN14-positive Luminal carcinomas increased 36.70-fold (3.65-368.25, p = 0.002). Furthermore, the worst prognostic factor for BrMFS in patients with Luminal carcinomas was FN14 overexpression (HR = 8.25; 95% CI: 2.77-24.61; p = 0.00015). In these patients, GRP94 overexpression also increased the risk of BrM (HR = 3.58; 95% CI: 0.98-13.11; p = 0.054-Wald test). Therefore, FN14 expression in Luminal breast carcinomas is a predictive/prognostic biomarker of BrM, which combined with GRP94 predicts BrM progression in non-Luminal tumors 4.04-fold (1.19-8.22, p = 0.025), suggesting that both biomarkers are useful to stratify BrM risk at early diagnosis. We propose a new follow-up protocol for the early prevention of clinical BrM of breast cancer patients with BrM risk.

Brain Metastases in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study

Importance

Population-based estimates of the incidence and prognosis of brain metastases at diagnosis of breast cancer are lacking.

Objective

To characterize the incidence proportions and median survivals of patients with breast cancer and brain metastases at the time of cancer diagnosis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Patients with breast cancer and brain metastases at the time of diagnosis were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database of the National Cancer Institute. Data were stratified by subtype, age, sex, and race. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression were performed to identify predictors of the presence of brain metastases at diagnosis and factors associated with all-cause mortality, respectively. For incidence, we identified a population-based sample of 238 726 adult patients diagnosed as having invasive breast cancer between 2010 and 2013 for whom the presence or absence of brain metastases at diagnosis was known. Patients diagnosed at autopsy or with an unknown follow-up were excluded from the survival analysis, leaving 231 684 patients in this cohort.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Incidence proportion and median survival of patients with brain metastases and newly diagnosed breast cancer.

Results

We identified 968 patients with brain metastases at the time of diagnosis of breast cancer, representing 0.41% of the entire cohort and 7.56% of the subset with metastatic disease to any site. A total of 57 were 18 to 40 years old, 423 were 41 to 60 years old, 425 were 61-80 years old, and 63 were older than 80 years. Ten were male and 958 were female. Incidence proportions were highest among patients with hormone receptor (HR)-negative human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive (1.1% among entire cohort, 11.5% among patients with metastatic disease to any distant site) and triple-negative (0.7% among entire cohort, 11.4% among patients with metastatic disease to any distant site) subtypes. Median survival among the entire cohort with brain metastases was 10.0 months. Patients with HR-positive HER2-positive subtype displayed the longest median survival (21.0 months); patients with triple-negative subtype had the shortest median survival (6.0 months).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this study provides population-based estimates of the incidence and prognosis for patients with brain metastases at time of diagnosis of breast cancer. The findings lend support to consideration of screening imaging of the brain for patients with HER2-positive or triple-negative subtypes and extracranial metastases.

Systems Medicine: Sketching the Landscape

To understand the meaning of the term Systems Medicine and to distinguish it from seemingly related other expressions currently in use, such as precision, personalized, -omics, or big data medicine, its underlying history and development into present time needs to be highlighted. Having this development in mind, it becomes evident that Systems Medicine is a genuine concept as well as a novel way of tackling the manifold complexity that occurs in nowadays clinical medicine-and not just a rebranding of what has previously been done in the past. So looking back it seems clear to many in the field that Systems Medicine has its origin in an integrative method to unravel biocomplexity, namely, Systems Biology. Here scientist by now gained useful experience that is on the verge toward implementation in clinical research and practice.Systems Medicine and Systems Biology have the same underlying theoretical principle in systems-based thinking-a methodology to understand complexity that can be traced back to ancient Greece. During the last decade, however, and due to a rapid methodological development in the life sciences and computing/IT technologies, Systems Biology has evolved from a scientific concept into an independent discipline most competent to tackle key questions of biocomplexity-with the potential to transform medicine and how it will be practiced in the future. To understand this process in more detail, the following section will thus give a short summary of the foundation of systems-based thinking and the different developmental stages including systems theory, the development of modern Systems Biology, and its transition into clinical practice. These are the components to pave the way toward Systems Medicine.

CNS metastases in breast cancer patients: prognostic implications of tumor subtype

Development of brain metastases (BM) in breast cancer leads to limited survival. The therapeutical options are limited. There are less data about the risk factors and prognostic importance in BM. Objective is to investigate predictors of central nervous system metastases and outcome after diagnosis of BM according to tumor subtype. Based on medical records, 80 consecutive patients with primary non-metastatic operable breast cancer, treated at Department of Gynecology, University of Tübingen, and who developed BM during follow-up, were retrospectively analyzed. Clinicopathological parameters and their prognostic impact were evaluated. A node involvement (40 %), ER/PR negative (53.75 vs. 61.25 %), triple negative (28.75 %) and HER2+ status (40 %) were associated with BM. BM in breast cancer patients lead to a shortened survival. In cerebral metastatic breast cancer patients with HER2-negative and triple-negative, patients had significant shorter survival after detection of BM compared with HER2-positive and non-triple-negative patients (p = 0.001; p = 0.03). Risk of BM varies significantly by subtype. Understanding the biology of metastases can help categorize patients into prognostically useful categories and tailor treatment regimens for individual patients. Prospective clinical trials would be required for evaluating the potential role of screening for asymptomatic BM and of treatment of triple-negative patients.

Adjuvant systemic treatment for elderly breast cancer patients; addressing safety concerns

INTRODUCTION

The issue of systemic treatment for early breast cancer in the elderly has always been challenging and in spite of the clear evidence of the potential benefits of adjuvant treatment in older women, they are usually undertreated with the potential consequence of worse outcomes.

AREAS COVERED

This article will review the evidence surrounding the various systemic options in the treatment armamentarium of early-stage breast cancer in elderly patients. The risks and benefits, with particular attention to a number of newly introduced targeted agents, along with the potential role of incorporating a combined geriatric/oncologic assessment as a routine part of the management of elderly patients with breast cancer are considered.

EXPERT OPINION

Administration of available options for (neo)adjuvant endocrine, chemo, as well as targeted therapeutics in fit elderly patients is feasible and tolerable; however, a routine input from geriatric medicine and psycho-oncology experts as well as the training of specialized oncology staff with special interest in geriatric oncology are believed to improve the outcome of elderly patients.