PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify genes enriched in breast cancer stroma, assess the stromal gene expression differences between estrogen receptor (ER) -positive and -negative cancers, and separately determine their prognostic value in these two subtypes of breast cancers. METHODS: We compared gene expression profiles of pairs of fine-needle (stroma-poor) and core-needle (stroma-rich) biopsies from 37 cancers to identify stroma-associated genes. We defined stromal metagenes and tested their prognostic values in 684 node-negative patients who received no systemic adjuvant therapy and 259 tamoxifen-treated patients. RESULTS: We identified 293 probe sets overexpressed in core biopsies; these included five highly coexpressed gene clusters (metagenes) corresponding to immune functions and extracellular matrix components. These genes showed quantitative and qualitative differences between ER-positive and ER-negative cancers. A B-cell/plasma cell metagene showed strong prognostic value in ER-positive highly proliferative cancers, a lesser prognostic value in ER-negative cancers, and no prognostic value in ER-positive cancers with low proliferation. The hazard ratio for distant relapse in the lowest compared with the highest tertile of the pooled prognostic data set was 4.29 (95% CI, 2.04 to 9.01; P = .001) in ER-positive cancers and 3.34 (95% CI, 1.60 to 6.97; P = .001) in ER-negative cancers. This remained significant in multivariate analysis including routine variables and other genomic prognostic scores. As a result of quantitative differences in this metagene between ER-positive and ER-negative cancers, different thresholds apply in the two subgroups. Other stromal metagenes had inconsistent prognostic value. CONCLUSION: Among ER-negative and ER-positive highly proliferative cancers, a subset of tumors with high expression of a B-cell/plasma cell metagene carries a favorable prognosis.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify genes enriched in breast cancer stroma, assess the stromal gene expression differences between estrogen receptor (ER) -positive and -negative cancers, and separately determine their prognostic value in these two subtypes of breast cancers. METHODS: We compared gene expression profiles of pairs of fine-needle (stroma-poor) and core-needle (stroma-rich) biopsies from 37 cancers to identify stroma-associated genes. We defined stromal metagenes and tested their prognostic values in 684 node-negative patients who received no systemic adjuvant therapy and 259 tamoxifen-treated patients. RESULTS: We identified 293 probe sets overexpressed in core biopsies; these included five highly coexpressed gene clusters (metagenes) corresponding to immune functions and extracellular matrix components. These genes showed quantitative and qualitative differences between ER-positive and ER-negative cancers. A B-cell/plasma cell metagene showed strong prognostic value in ER-positive highly proliferative cancers, a lesser prognostic value in ER-negative cancers, and no prognostic value in ER-positive cancers with low proliferation. The hazard ratio for distant relapse in the lowest compared with the highest tertile of the pooled prognostic data set was 4.29 (95% CI, 2.04 to 9.01; P = .001) in ER-positive cancers and 3.34 (95% CI, 1.60 to 6.97; P = .001) in ER-negative cancers. This remained significant in multivariate analysis including routine variables and other genomic prognostic scores. As a result of quantitative differences in this metagene between ER-positive and ER-negative cancers, different thresholds apply in the two subgroups. Other stromal metagenes had inconsistent prognostic value. CONCLUSION: Among ER-negative and ER-positive highly proliferative cancers, a subset of tumors with high expression of a B-cell/plasma cell metagene carries a favorable prognosis.
Authors: Tess O'Meara; Anton Safonov; David Casadevall; Tao Qing; Andrea Silber; Brigid Killelea; Christos Hatzis; Lajos Pusztai Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-02-06 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Christer Larsson; Anna Ehinger; Sofia Winslow; Karin Leandersson; Marie Klintman; Ludvig Dahl; Johan Vallon-Christersson; Jari Häkkinen; Cecilia Hegardt; Jonas Manjer; Lao Saal; Lisa Rydén; Martin Malmberg; Åke Borg; Niklas Loman Journal: NPJ Breast Cancer Date: 2020-07-06
Authors: Tal Teitz; Madoka Inoue; Marcus B Valentine; Kejin Zhu; Jerold E Rehg; Wei Zhao; David Finkelstein; Yong-Dong Wang; Melissa D Johnson; Christopher Calabrese; Marcelo Rubinstein; Razqallah Hakem; William A Weiss; Jill M Lahti Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2013-03-27 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: James L Murray; Patricia Thompson; Suk Young Yoo; Kim-Anh Do; Mala Pande; Renke Zhou; Yanhong Liu; Aysegul A Sahin; Melissa L Bondy; Abenaa M Brewster Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2013-03-26 Impact factor: 4.872