PURPOSE: The cell cycle mediators Aurora A and B are targets of drugs currently in clinical development. As with other targeted therapies in breast cancer, response to therapy might be associated with target expression in tumors. We therefore assessed expression of Aurora A and B in breast tumors and studied associations with clinical/pathologic variables. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Tissue microarrays containing primary specimens from 638 patients with 15-year follow-up were employed to assess expression of Aurora A and B using our automated quantitative analysis method; we used cytokeratin to define pixels as breast cancer (tumor mask) within the array spot and measured Aurora A and B expression within the mask using Cy5-conjugated antibodies. RESULTS: Aurora A and B expression was variable in primary breast tumors. High Aurora A expression was strongly associated with decreased survival (P = 0.0005). On multivariable analysis, it remained an independent prognostic marker. High Aurora A expression was associated with high nuclear grade and high HER-2/neu and progesterone receptor expression. Aurora B expression was not associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: Aurora A expression defines a population of patients with decreased survival, whereas Aurora B expression does not, suggesting that Aurora A might be the preferred drug target in breast cancer. Aurora A expression in early-stage breast cancer may identify a subset of patients requiring more aggressive or pathway-targeted treatment. Prospective studies are needed to confirm the prognostic role of Aurora A as well as the predictive role of Aurora A expression in patients treated with Aurora A inhibitors.
PURPOSE: The cell cycle mediators Aurora A and B are targets of drugs currently in clinical development. As with other targeted therapies in breast cancer, response to therapy might be associated with target expression in tumors. We therefore assessed expression of Aurora A and B in breast tumors and studied associations with clinical/pathologic variables. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Tissue microarrays containing primary specimens from 638 patients with 15-year follow-up were employed to assess expression of Aurora A and B using our automated quantitative analysis method; we used cytokeratin to define pixels as breast cancer (tumor mask) within the array spot and measured Aurora A and B expression within the mask using Cy5-conjugated antibodies. RESULTS:Aurora A and B expression was variable in primary breast tumors. High Aurora A expression was strongly associated with decreased survival (P = 0.0005). On multivariable analysis, it remained an independent prognostic marker. High Aurora A expression was associated with high nuclear grade and high HER-2/neu and progesterone receptor expression. Aurora B expression was not associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS:Aurora A expression defines a population of patients with decreased survival, whereas Aurora B expression does not, suggesting that Aurora A might be the preferred drug target in breast cancer. Aurora A expression in early-stage breast cancer may identify a subset of patients requiring more aggressive or pathway-targeted treatment. Prospective studies are needed to confirm the prognostic role of Aurora A as well as the predictive role of Aurora A expression in patients treated with Aurora A inhibitors.
Authors: Sandrine Tchatchou; Michael Wirtenberger; Kari Hemminki; Christian Sutter; Alfons Meindl; Barbara Wappenschmidt; Marion Kiechle; Peter Bugert; Rita K Schmutzler; Claus R Bartram; Barbara Burwinkel Journal: Cancer Lett Date: 2006-06-09 Impact factor: 8.679
Authors: Silke Lassmann; Yi Shen; Uta Jütting; Philipp Wiehle; Axel Walch; Gerald Gitsch; Annette Hasenburg; Martin Werner Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-07-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Claire Ditchfield; Victoria L Johnson; Anthony Tighe; Rebecca Ellston; Carolyn Haworth; Trevor Johnson; Andrew Mortlock; Nicholas Keen; Stephen S Taylor Journal: J Cell Biol Date: 2003-04-28 Impact factor: 10.539
Authors: Elizabeth A Harrington; David Bebbington; Jeff Moore; Richele K Rasmussen; Abi O Ajose-Adeogun; Tomoko Nakayama; Joanne A Graham; Cecile Demur; Thierry Hercend; Anita Diu-Hercend; Michael Su; Julian M C Golec; Karen M Miller Journal: Nat Med Date: 2004-02-22 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Kleiton Silva Borges; Angel Maurício Castro-Gamero; Daniel Antunes Moreno; Vanessa da Silva Silveira; Maria Sol Brassesco; Rosane Gomes de Paula Queiroz; Harley Francisco de Oliveira; Carlos Gilberto Carlotti; Carlos Alberto Scrideli; Luiz Gonzaga Tone Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2011-12-09 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Giulia Bertolin; Anne-Laure Bulteau; Marie-Clotilde Alves-Guerra; Agnes Burel; Marie-Thérèse Lavault; Olivia Gavard; Stephanie Le Bras; Jean-Philippe Gagné; Guy G Poirier; Roland Le Borgne; Claude Prigent; Marc Tramier Journal: Elife Date: 2018-08-02 Impact factor: 8.140
Authors: Ryan J Ice; Sarah L McLaughlin; Ryan H Livengood; Mark V Culp; Erik R Eddy; Alexey V Ivanov; Elena N Pugacheva Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Christopher P Gully; Fanmao Zhang; Jian Chen; James A Yeung; Guermarie Velazquez-Torres; Edward Wang; Sai-Ching Jim Yeung; Mong-Hong Lee Journal: Mol Cancer Date: 2010-02-22 Impact factor: 27.401