INTRODUCTION: Gene expression profiling has been extensively used to predict outcome in breast cancer patients. We have previously reported on biological hypothesis-driven analysis of gene expression profiling data and we wished to extend this approach through the combinations of various gene signatures to improve the prediction of outcome in breast cancer. METHODS: We have used gene expression data (25.000 gene probes) from a previously published study of tumours from 295 early stage breast cancer patients from the Netherlands Cancer Institute using updated follow-up. Tumours were assigned to three prognostic groups using the previously reported Wound-response and hypoxia-response signatures, and the outcome in each of these subgroups was evaluated. RESULTS: We have assigned invasive breast carcinomas from 295 stages I and II breast cancer patients to three groups based on gene expression profiles subdivided by the wound-response signature (WS) and hypoxia-response signature (HS). These three groups are (1) quiescent WS/non-hypoxic HS; (2) activated WS/non-hypoxic HS or quiescent WS/hypoxic tumours and (3) activated WS/hypoxic HS. The overall survival at 15 years for patients with tumours in groups 1, 2 and 3 are 79%, 59% and 27%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, this signature is not only independent of clinical and pathological risk factors; it is also the strongest predictor of outcome. Compared to a previously identified 70-gene prognosis profile, obtained with supervised classification, the combination of signatures performs roughly equally well and might have additional value in the ER-negative subgroup. In the subgroup of lymph node positive patients, the combination signature outperforms the 70-gene signature in multivariate analysis. In addition, in multivariate analysis, the WS/HS combination is a stronger predictor of outcome compared to the recently reported invasiveness gene signature combined with the WS. CONCLUSION: A combination of biological gene expression signatures can be used to identify a powerful and independent predictor for outcome in breast cancer patients.
INTRODUCTION: Gene expression profiling has been extensively used to predict outcome in breast cancerpatients. We have previously reported on biological hypothesis-driven analysis of gene expression profiling data and we wished to extend this approach through the combinations of various gene signatures to improve the prediction of outcome in breast cancer. METHODS: We have used gene expression data (25.000 gene probes) from a previously published study of tumours from 295 early stage breast cancerpatients from the Netherlands Cancer Institute using updated follow-up. Tumours were assigned to three prognostic groups using the previously reported Wound-response and hypoxia-response signatures, and the outcome in each of these subgroups was evaluated. RESULTS: We have assigned invasive breast carcinomas from 295 stages I and II breast cancerpatients to three groups based on gene expression profiles subdivided by the wound-response signature (WS) and hypoxia-response signature (HS). These three groups are (1) quiescent WS/non-hypoxic HS; (2) activated WS/non-hypoxic HS or quiescent WS/hypoxic tumours and (3) activated WS/hypoxic HS. The overall survival at 15 years for patients with tumours in groups 1, 2 and 3 are 79%, 59% and 27%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, this signature is not only independent of clinical and pathological risk factors; it is also the strongest predictor of outcome. Compared to a previously identified 70-gene prognosis profile, obtained with supervised classification, the combination of signatures performs roughly equally well and might have additional value in the ER-negative subgroup. In the subgroup of lymph node positive patients, the combination signature outperforms the 70-gene signature in multivariate analysis. In addition, in multivariate analysis, the WS/HS combination is a stronger predictor of outcome compared to the recently reported invasiveness gene signature combined with the WS. CONCLUSION: A combination of biological gene expression signatures can be used to identify a powerful and independent predictor for outcome in breast cancerpatients.
Authors: Laura J van 't Veer; Hongyue Dai; Marc J van de Vijver; Yudong D He; Augustinus A M Hart; Mao Mao; Hans L Peterse; Karin van der Kooy; Matthew J Marton; Anke T Witteveen; George J Schreiber; Ron M Kerkhoven; Chris Roberts; Peter S Linsley; René Bernards; Stephen H Friend Journal: Nature Date: 2002-01-31 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: C M Perou; T Sørlie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; C A Rees; J R Pollack; D T Ross; H Johnsen; L A Akslen; O Fluge; A Pergamenschikov; C Williams; S X Zhu; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale; P O Brown; D Botstein Journal: Nature Date: 2000-08-17 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Christos Sotiriou; Soek-Ying Neo; Lisa M McShane; Edward L Korn; Philip M Long; Amir Jazaeri; Philippe Martiat; Steve B Fox; Adrian L Harris; Edison T Liu Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2003-08-13 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Xiao-Jun Ma; Zuncai Wang; Paula D Ryan; Steven J Isakoff; Anne Barmettler; Andrew Fuller; Beth Muir; Gayatry Mohapatra; Ranelle Salunga; J Todd Tuggle; Yen Tran; Diem Tran; Ana Tassin; Paul Amon; Wilson Wang; Wei Wang; Edward Enright; Kimberly Stecker; Eden Estepa-Sabal; Barbara Smith; Jerry Younger; Ulysses Balis; James Michaelson; Atul Bhan; Karleen Habin; Thomas M Baer; Joan Brugge; Daniel A Haber; Mark G Erlander; Dennis C Sgroi Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Marc J van de Vijver; Yudong D He; Laura J van't Veer; Hongyue Dai; Augustinus A M Hart; Dorien W Voskuil; George J Schreiber; Johannes L Peterse; Chris Roberts; Matthew J Marton; Mark Parrish; Douwe Atsma; Anke Witteveen; Annuska Glas; Leonie Delahaye; Tony van der Velde; Harry Bartelink; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; Emiel T Rutgers; Stephen H Friend; René Bernards Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-12-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David J Wong; Dimitry S A Nuyten; Aviv Regev; Meihong Lin; Adam S Adler; Eran Segal; Marc J van de Vijver; Howard Y Chang Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2008-01-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Jenny C Chang; Eric C Wooten; Anna Tsimelzon; Susan G Hilsenbeck; M Carolina Gutierrez; Richard Elledge; Syed Mohsin; C Kent Osborne; Gary C Chamness; D Craig Allred; Peter O'Connell Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-08-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Therese Sorlie; Robert Tibshirani; Joel Parker; Trevor Hastie; J S Marron; Andrew Nobel; Shibing Deng; Hilde Johnsen; Robert Pesich; Stephanie Geisler; Janos Demeter; Charles M Perou; Per E Lønning; Patrick O Brown; Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale; David Botstein Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2003-06-26 Impact factor: 12.779
Authors: Howard Y Chang; Julie B Sneddon; Ash A Alizadeh; Ruchira Sood; Rob B West; Kelli Montgomery; Jen-Tsan Chi; Matt van de Rijn; David Botstein; Patrick O Brown Journal: PLoS Biol Date: 2004-01-13 Impact factor: 8.029
Authors: Andrea Cornero; Massimo Acquaviva; Paolo Fardin; Rogier Versteeg; Alexander Schramm; Alessandra Eva; Maria Carla Bosco; Fabiola Blengio; Sara Barzaghi; Luigi Varesio Journal: BMC Bioinformatics Date: 2012-03-28 Impact factor: 3.169
Authors: Marco von Strauss und Torney; Ulrich Güller; Farid Rezaeian; Philippe Brosi; Luigi Terracciano; Markus Zuber Journal: World J Surg Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Torsten Stein; Nathan Salomonis; Dimitry S A Nuyten; Marc J van de Vijver; Barry A Gusterson Journal: J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia Date: 2009-04-30 Impact factor: 2.673
Authors: Qing-Bai She; Sofia K Gruvberger-Saal; Matthew Maurer; Yilun Chen; Mervi Jumppanen; Tao Su; Meaghan Dendy; Ying-Ka Ingar Lau; Lorenzo Memeo; Hugo M Horlings; Marc J van de Vijver; Jorma Isola; Hanina Hibshoosh; Neal Rosen; Ramon Parsons; Lao H Saal Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Margit L H Riis; Xi Zhao; Fateme Kaveh; Hilde S Vollan; Anne-Jorunn Nesbakken; Hiroko K Solvang; Torben Lüders; Ida R K Bukholm; Vessela N Kristensen Journal: ISRN Oncol Date: 2013-02-28
Authors: Xi Zhao; Einar Andreas Rødland; Therese Sørlie; Hans Kristian Moen Vollan; Hege G Russnes; Vessela N Kristensen; Ole Christian Lingjærde; Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 4.430