INTRODUCTION: Triple negative breast cancer is associated with poorer prognosis and unresponsiveness to endocrine and anti-HER2 directed agents. Despite emerging data supporting the use of polyADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, complete and durable responses are rare and exploration of additional targeted therapies is needed. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is expressed in triple negative breast cancer and several clinical trials are testing the role of anti-EGFR directed therapy. However, the rate of EGFR mutations is poorly defined. We, therefore, sought to characterize EGFR mutations in triple negative breast cancers. METHODS: Seventy samples were randomly chosen from a cohort of 653 triple negative breast tumours for EGFR mutation analysis. These samples were immunostained for EGFR protein expression and consisted of negatively stained and positively stained cases. DNA was extracted from paraffin blocks and polymerase chain reaction was performed to amplify exon regions 18 to 21 of the EGFR gene. Direct sequencing of the purified PCR products was performed. RESULTS: EGFR mutations were found in 8 of 70 samples (11.4%). Mutations were predominantly exon 19 deletions (4 of 70 samples, 5.7%), which clustered in the region spanning codons 746 to 759 within the kinase domain of EGFR. Two types of exon 19 deletions were seen: a 15 nucleotide deletion (del E746-A750) (2 of 70 samples) and a 24 nucleotide deletion (del S752 - I759) (2 of 70 samples). Other exon 19 mutations observed were the inversion of the complementary strand (1 of 70 samples). Exon 21 mutations included missense substitution, L858R (1 of 70 samples) and T847I (2 of 70 samples). Mutations observed were independent of EGFR protein expression determined by immunohistochemical staining. CONCLUSIONS: This study is among the first to document the presence and estimate the prevalence of EGFR mutations in triple negative breast cancer. These findings have potential implications for the design of clinical trials involving anti-EGFR directed therapy which currently do not select for patients based on presence of activating EGFR mutations, which may hence be underpowered to detect significant benefit in unselected populations. More complete sampling of EGFR mutation status in triple negative breast cancer is needed to determine the true mutation rate.
INTRODUCTION: Triple negative breast cancer is associated with poorer prognosis and unresponsiveness to endocrine and anti-HER2 directed agents. Despite emerging data supporting the use of polyADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, complete and durable responses are rare and exploration of additional targeted therapies is needed. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is expressed in triple negative breast cancer and several clinical trials are testing the role of anti-EGFR directed therapy. However, the rate of EGFR mutations is poorly defined. We, therefore, sought to characterize EGFR mutations in triple negative breast cancers. METHODS: Seventy samples were randomly chosen from a cohort of 653 triple negative breast tumours for EGFR mutation analysis. These samples were immunostained for EGFR protein expression and consisted of negatively stained and positively stained cases. DNA was extracted from paraffin blocks and polymerase chain reaction was performed to amplify exon regions 18 to 21 of the EGFR gene. Direct sequencing of the purified PCR products was performed. RESULTS:EGFR mutations were found in 8 of 70 samples (11.4%). Mutations were predominantly exon 19 deletions (4 of 70 samples, 5.7%), which clustered in the region spanning codons 746 to 759 within the kinase domain of EGFR. Two types of exon 19 deletions were seen: a 15 nucleotide deletion (del E746-A750) (2 of 70 samples) and a 24 nucleotide deletion (del S752 - I759) (2 of 70 samples). Other exon 19 mutations observed were the inversion of the complementary strand (1 of 70 samples). Exon 21 mutations included missense substitution, L858R (1 of 70 samples) and T847I (2 of 70 samples). Mutations observed were independent of EGFR protein expression determined by immunohistochemical staining. CONCLUSIONS: This study is among the first to document the presence and estimate the prevalence of EGFR mutations in triple negative breast cancer. These findings have potential implications for the design of clinical trials involving anti-EGFR directed therapy which currently do not select for patients based on presence of activating EGFR mutations, which may hence be underpowered to detect significant benefit in unselected populations. More complete sampling of EGFR mutation status in triple negative breast cancer is needed to determine the true mutation rate.
Authors: Susumu Kobayashi; Titus J Boggon; Tajhal Dayaram; Pasi A Jänne; Olivier Kocher; Matthew Meyerson; Bruce E Johnson; Michael J Eck; Daniel G Tenen; Balázs Halmos Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-02-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jong Woo Lee; Young Hwa Soung; Su Young Kim; Hyo Kyung Nam; Won Sang Park; Suk Woo Nam; Min Sik Kim; Dong Il Sun; Youn Soo Lee; Ja June Jang; Jung Young Lee; Nam Jin Yoo; Sug Hyung Lee Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2005-04-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Joseph Amann; Shailaja Kalyankrishna; Pierre P Massion; Joyce E Ohm; Luc Girard; Hisayuki Shigematsu; Michael Peyton; Denise Juroske; Yuhui Huang; J Stuart Salmon; Young H Kim; Jonathan R Pollack; Kiyoshi Yanagisawa; Adi Gazdar; John D Minna; Jonathan M Kurie; David P Carbone Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-01-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Torsten O Nielsen; Forrest D Hsu; Kristin Jensen; Maggie Cheang; Gamze Karaca; Zhiyuan Hu; Tina Hernandez-Boussard; Chad Livasy; Dave Cowan; Lynn Dressler; Lars A Akslen; Joseph Ragaz; Allen M Gown; C Blake Gilks; Matt van de Rijn; Charles M Perou Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2004-08-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: William Pao; Vincent Miller; Maureen Zakowski; Jennifer Doherty; Katerina Politi; Inderpal Sarkaria; Bhuvanesh Singh; Robert Heelan; Valerie Rusch; Lucinda Fulton; Elaine Mardis; Doris Kupfer; Richard Wilson; Mark Kris; Harold Varmus Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-08-25 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: J Guillermo Paez; Pasi A Jänne; Jeffrey C Lee; Sean Tracy; Heidi Greulich; Stacey Gabriel; Paula Herman; Frederic J Kaye; Neal Lindeman; Titus J Boggon; Katsuhiko Naoki; Hidefumi Sasaki; Yoshitaka Fujii; Michael J Eck; William R Sellers; Bruce E Johnson; Matthew Meyerson Journal: Science Date: 2004-04-29 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Thomas J Lynch; Daphne W Bell; Raffaella Sordella; Sarada Gurubhagavatula; Ross A Okimoto; Brian W Brannigan; Patricia L Harris; Sara M Haserlat; Jeffrey G Supko; Frank G Haluska; David N Louis; David C Christiani; Jeff Settleman; Daniel A Haber Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-04-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: William D Foulkes; Jean-Sébastien Brunet; Ingunn M Stefansson; Oddbjørn Straume; Pierre O Chappuis; Louis R Bégin; Nancy Hamel; John R Goffin; Nora Wong; Michel Trudel; Linda Kapusta; Peggy Porter; Lars A Akslen Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-02-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Kathleen Fenn; Matthew Maurer; Shing M Lee; Katherine D Crew; Meghna S Trivedi; Melissa K Accordino; Dawn L Hershman; Kevin Kalinsky Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2019-08-29 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Avonne E Connor; Richard N Baumgartner; Kathy B Baumgartner; Christina M Pinkston; Esther M John; Gabriela Torres-Mejía; Lisa M Hines; Anna R Giuliano; Roger K Wolff; Martha L Slattery Journal: Int J Mol Epidemiol Genet Date: 2013-11-28
Authors: Stephanie A Fisher; Roger Y Tam; Ana Fokina; M Mohsen Mahmoodi; Mark D Distefano; Molly S Shoichet Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2018-02-13 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Nicole M Davis; Melissa Sokolosky; Kristin Stadelman; Steve L Abrams; Massimo Libra; Saverio Candido; Ferdinando Nicoletti; Jerry Polesel; Roberta Maestro; Antonino D'Assoro; Lyudmyla Drobot; Dariusz Rakus; Agnieszka Gizak; Piotr Laidler; Joanna Dulińska-Litewka; Joerg Basecke; Sanja Mijatovic; Danijela Maksimovic-Ivanic; Giuseppe Montalto; Melchiorre Cervello; Timothy L Fitzgerald; Zoya Demidenko; Alberto M Martelli; Lucio Cocco; Linda S Steelman; James A McCubrey Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2014-07-15