Literature DB >> 21597921

Biologic markers determine both the risk and the timing of recurrence in breast cancer.

Laura J Esserman1, Dan H Moore, Pamela J Tsing, Philip W Chu, Christina Yau, Elissa Ozanne, Robert E Chung, Vickram J Tandon, John W Park, Frederick L Baehner, Stig Kreps, Andrew N J Tutt, Cheryl E Gillett, Christopher C Benz.   

Abstract

Breast cancer has a long natural history. Established and emerging biologic markers address overall risk but not necessarily timing of recurrence. 346 adjuvant naïve breast cancer cases from Guy's Hospital with 23 years minimum follow-up and archival blocks were recut and reassessed for hormone-receptors (HR), HER2-receptor and grade. Disease-specific survival (DSS) was analyzed by recursive partitioning. To validate insights from this analysis, gene-signatures (proliferative and HR-negative) were evaluated for their ability to predict early versus late metastatic risk in 683 node-negative, adjuvant naïve breast cancers annotated with expression microarray data. Risk partitioning showed that adjuvant naïve node-negative outcome risk was primarily partitioned by tumor receptor status and grade but not tumor size. HR-positive and HER2-negative (HRpos) risk was partitioned by tumor grade; low grade cases have very low early risk but a 20% fall-off in DSS 10 or more years after diagnosis. Higher grade HRpos cases have risk over >20 years. Triple-negative (Tneg) and HER2-positive (HER2pos) cases DSS events occurred primarily within the first 5 years. Among node-positive cases, only low grade conferred late risk, suggesting that proliferative gene signatures that identify proliferation would be important for predicting early but not late recurrence. Using pooled data from four publicly available data sets for node-negative tumors annotated with gene expression and outcome data, we evaluated four prognostic gene signatures: two proliferation-based and two immune function-based. Tumor proliferative capacity predicted early but not late metastatic risk for HRpos cases. The immune function or HRneg specific signatures predicted only early metastatic risk in Tneg and HER2pos cases. Breast cancer prognostic signatures need to inform both risk and timing of metastatic events and may best be applied within subsets. Current signatures predict for outcome risk within 5 years of diagnosis. Predictors of late risk for HR positive disease are needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21597921      PMCID: PMC4324750          DOI: 10.1007/s10549-011-1564-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  37 in total

1.  Strong time dependence of the 76-gene prognostic signature for node-negative breast cancer patients in the TRANSBIG multicenter independent validation series.

Authors:  Christine Desmedt; Fanny Piette; Sherene Loi; Yixin Wang; Françoise Lallemand; Benjamin Haibe-Kains; Giuseppe Viale; Mauro Delorenzi; Yi Zhang; Mahasti Saghatchian d'Assignies; Jonas Bergh; Rosette Lidereau; Paul Ellis; Adrian L Harris; Jan G M Klijn; John A Foekens; Fatima Cardoso; Martine J Piccart; Marc Buyse; Christos Sotiriou
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2007-06-01       Impact factor: 12.531

2.  Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer.

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

3.  An expression signature for p53 status in human breast cancer predicts mutation status, transcriptional effects, and patient survival.

Authors:  Lance D Miller; Johanna Smeds; Joshy George; Vinsensius B Vega; Liza Vergara; Alexander Ploner; Yudi Pawitan; Per Hall; Sigrid Klaar; Edison T Liu; Jonas Bergh
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-09-02       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer.

Authors:  J M Harvey; G M Clark; C K Osborne; D C Allred
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Molecular portraits of human breast tumours.

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

6.  Robustness, scalability, and integration of a wound-response gene expression signature in predicting breast cancer survival.

Authors:  Howard Y Chang; Dimitry S A Nuyten; Julie B Sneddon; Trevor Hastie; Robert Tibshirani; Therese Sørlie; Hongyue Dai; Yudong D He; Laura J van't Veer; Harry Bartelink; Matt van de Rijn; Patrick O Brown; Marc J van de Vijver
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-02-08       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  Commercialized multigene predictors of clinical outcome for breast cancer.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Ross; Christos Hatzis; W Fraser Symmans; Lajos Pusztai; Gabriel N Hortobágyi
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2008-05

8.  Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Marc Buyse; Sherene Loi; Laura van't Veer; Giuseppe Viale; Mauro Delorenzi; Annuska M Glas; Mahasti Saghatchian d'Assignies; Jonas Bergh; Rosette Lidereau; Paul Ellis; Adrian Harris; Jan Bogaerts; Patrick Therasse; Arno Floore; Mohamed Amakrane; Fanny Piette; Emiel Rutgers; Christos Sotiriou; Fatima Cardoso; Martine J Piccart
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  The molecular portraits of breast tumors are conserved across microarray platforms.

Authors:  Zhiyuan Hu; Cheng Fan; Daniel S Oh; J S Marron; Xiaping He; Bahjat F Qaqish; Chad Livasy; Lisa A Carey; Evangeline Reynolds; Lynn Dressler; Andrew Nobel; Joel Parker; Matthew G Ewend; Lynda R Sawyer; Junyuan Wu; Yudong Liu; Rita Nanda; Maria Tretiakova; Alejandra Ruiz Orrico; Donna Dreher; Juan P Palazzo; Laurent Perreard; Edward Nelson; Mary Mone; Heidi Hansen; Michael Mullins; John F Quackenbush; Matthew J Ellis; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Philip S Bernard; Charles M Perou
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2006-04-27       Impact factor: 3.969

10.  Risk estimation of distant metastasis in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients using an RT-PCR based prognostic expression signature.

Authors:  Andrew Tutt; Alice Wang; Charles Rowland; Cheryl Gillett; Kit Lau; Karen Chew; Hongyue Dai; Shirley Kwok; Kenneth Ryder; Henry Shu; Robert Springall; Paul Cane; Blair McCallie; Lauren Kam-Morgan; Steve Anderson; Horst Buerger; Joe Gray; James Bennington; Laura Esserman; Trevor Hastie; Samuel Broder; John Sninsky; Burkhard Brandt; Fred Waldman
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2008-11-21       Impact factor: 4.430

View more
  38 in total

1.  Simulation of Chemotherapy Effects in Older Breast Cancer Patients With High Recurrence Scores.

Authors:  Young Chandler; Jinani C Jayasekera; Clyde B Schechter; Claudine Isaacs; Christopher J Cadham; Jeanne S Mandelblatt
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Cost Effectiveness of Gene Expression Profile Testing in Community Practice.

Authors:  Young Chandler; Clyde B Schechter; Jinani Jayasekera; Aimee Near; Suzanne C O'Neill; Claudine Isaacs; Charles E Phelps; G Thomas Ray; Tracy A Lieu; Scott Ramsey; Jeanne S Mandelblatt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Kunal C Kadakia; N Lynn Henry
Journal:  Clin Adv Hematol Oncol       Date:  2015-10

Review 4.  Translating metastasis-related biomarkers to the clinic--progress and pitfalls.

Authors:  François-Clément Bidard; Jean-Yves Pierga; Jean-Charles Soria; Jean Paul Thiery
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 5.  The wisdom trial is based on faulty reasoning and has major design and execution problems.

Authors:  Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Local recurrence rates are low in high-risk neoadjuvant breast cancer in the I-SPY 1 Trial (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657).

Authors:  Elizabeth L Cureton; Christina Yau; Michael D Alvarado; Helen Krontiras; David W Ollila; Cheryl A Ewing; Sindy Monnier; Laura J Esserman
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 7.  Breast cancer screening: the questions answered.

Authors:  Philippe Autier; Laura J Esserman; Chris I Flowers; Nehmat Houssami
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 66.675

8.  Umbilical metastasis derived from breast cancer: report of a case.

Authors:  Hajime Abe; Keiichi Yamazaki; Tsuyoshi Mori; Yuki Kawai; Yoshihiro Kubota; Tomoko Umeda; Mitsuaki Ishida; Tohru Tani
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2014-07-24       Impact factor: 2.549

9.  A gene signature for late distant metastasis in breast cancer identifies a potential mechanism of late recurrences.

Authors:  Lorenza Mittempergher; Mahasti Saghatchian; Denise M Wolf; Stefan Michiels; Sander Canisius; Philippe Dessen; Suzette Delaloge; Vladimir Lazar; Stephen C Benz; Thomas Tursz; René Bernards; Laura J van't Veer
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 6.603

Review 10.  Mathematical models of breast and ovarian cancers.

Authors:  Dana-Adriana Botesteanu; Stanley Lipkowitz; Jung-Min Lee; Doron Levy
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med       Date:  2016-06-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.