BACKGROUND: Hundreds of hypermethylated genes have been described in breast cancer, yet the nature and contribution of these genes in their methylated state to overall risk and prognosis is under-characterized in non-sporadic breast cancers. We therefore compared associations of DNA methylation with tumor stage, hormone/growth receptor status, and clinical outcomes in a familial breast cancer cohort. Because few previous methylation studies have considered the oncogenic or tumor suppressor properties of their gene sets, this functional status was included as part of our correlative analysis. RESULTS: We found methylation of oncogenes was associated with better prognostic indicators, whereas tumor suppressor gene methylation was associated with a more severe phenotype in women that were either HER2+ or lymph node positive at diagnosis, and/or tended to recur or develop distant metastases. For example, the methylation of the tumor suppressor gene APC was strongly associated with a specific subset of tumors that were both ER+ and HER2+, while methylation of the TWIST oncogene was associated with breast cancers that did not metastasize. METHODS: This was a retrospective, hospital-based study of n = 99 archival breast tumors derived from women with a germline genetic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation and/or familial breast cancer history. DNA methylation was quantified from formalin fixed, paraffin embedded tumors using the established protocol of quantitative multiplex-methylation specific PCR (QM-MSP). Non-parametric statistics were used to analyze candidate gene methylation in association with clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: We report several novel, positive associations between percent methylation of the APC, RASSF1A, TWIST, ERα, CDH1, and Cyclin D2 genes and key variables such as tumor stage, hormone and growth receptor status, and a history of recurrent or metastatic disease. Our data suggest the potential utility of parsing gene methylation by functional status and breast tumor subtype.
BACKGROUND: Hundreds of hypermethylated genes have been described in breast cancer, yet the nature and contribution of these genes in their methylated state to overall risk and prognosis is under-characterized in non-sporadic breast cancers. We therefore compared associations of DNA methylation with tumor stage, hormone/growth receptor status, and clinical outcomes in a familial breast cancer cohort. Because few previous methylation studies have considered the oncogenic or tumor suppressor properties of their gene sets, this functional status was included as part of our correlative analysis. RESULTS: We found methylation of oncogenes was associated with better prognostic indicators, whereas tumor suppressor gene methylation was associated with a more severe phenotype in women that were either HER2+ or lymph node positive at diagnosis, and/or tended to recur or develop distant metastases. For example, the methylation of the tumor suppressor gene APC was strongly associated with a specific subset of tumors that were both ER+ and HER2+, while methylation of the TWIST oncogene was associated with breast cancers that did not metastasize. METHODS: This was a retrospective, hospital-based study of n = 99 archival breast tumors derived from women with a germline genetic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation and/or familial breast cancer history. DNA methylation was quantified from formalin fixed, paraffin embedded tumors using the established protocol of quantitative multiplex-methylation specific PCR (QM-MSP). Non-parametric statistics were used to analyze candidate gene methylation in association with clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: We report several novel, positive associations between percent methylation of the APC, RASSF1A, TWIST, ERα, CDH1, and Cyclin D2 genes and key variables such as tumor stage, hormone and growth receptor status, and a history of recurrent or metastatic disease. Our data suggest the potential utility of parsing gene methylation by functional status and breast tumor subtype.
Authors: James M Flanagan; Sibylle Cocciardi; Nic Waddell; Cameron N Johnstone; Anna Marsh; Stephen Henderson; Peter Simpson; Leonard da Silva; Kumkum Khanna; Sunil Lakhani; Chris Boshoff; Georgia Chenevix-Trench Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2010-03-04 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Kristina A Trujillo; Christopher M Heaphy; Minh Mai; Keith M Vargas; Anna C Jones; Phung Vo; Kimberly S Butler; Nancy E Joste; Marco Bisoffi; Jeffrey K Griffith Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2011-02-11 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Yoon Hee Cho; Jing Shen; Marilie D Gammon; Yu-Jing Zhang; Qiao Wang; Karina Gonzalez; Xinran Xu; Patrick T Bradshaw; Susan L Teitelbaum; Gail Garbowski; Hanina Hibshoosh; Alfred I Neugut; Jia Chen; Regina M Santella Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-08-12 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Jacob Ulirsch; Cheng Fan; George Knafl; Ming Jing Wu; Brett Coleman; Charles M Perou; Theresa Swift-Scanlan Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Jolien S de Groot; Xiaojuan Pan; Jan Meeldijk; Elsken van der Wall; Paul J van Diest; Cathy B Moelans Journal: Cell Oncol (Dordr) Date: 2014-08-16 Impact factor: 6.730
Authors: Roisin M Connolly; Mary Jo Fackler; Zhe Zhang; Xian C Zhou; Matthew P Goetz; Judy C Boughey; Bridget Walsh; John T Carpenter; Anna Maria Storniolo; Stanley P Watkins; Edward W Gabrielson; Vered Stearns; Saraswati Sukumar Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-09-16 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Eva Jezkova; Karol Kajo; Pavol Zubor; Marian Grendar; Bibiana Malicherova; Andrea Mendelova; Karol Dokus; Zora Lasabova; Lukas Plank; Jan Danko Journal: Tumour Biol Date: 2016-10-15
Authors: Bradley M Downs; Claudia Mercado-Rodriguez; Ashley Cimino-Mathews; Chuang Chen; Jing-Ping Yuan; Eunice Van Den Berg; Leslie M Cope; Fernando Schmitt; Gary M Tse; Syed Z Ali; Danielle Meir-Levi; Rupali Sood; Juanjuan Li; Andrea L Richardson; Marina B Mosunjac; Monica Rizzo; Suzana Tulac; Kriszten J Kocmond; Timothy de Guzman; Edwin W Lai; Brian Rhees; Michael Bates; Antonio C Wolff; Edward Gabrielson; Susan C Harvey; Christopher B Umbricht; Kala Visvanathan; Mary Jo Fackler; Saraswati Sukumar Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-07-12 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Susan R Sturgeon; Raji Balasubramanian; Catherine Schairer; Hyman B Muss; Regina G Ziegler; Kathleen F Arcaro Journal: Epigenetics Date: 2012-09-17 Impact factor: 4.528