Literature DB >> 21784954

Relationship of extreme chromosomal instability with long-term survival in a retrospective analysis of primary breast cancer.

Rebecca Roylance1, David Endesfelder, Patricia Gorman, Rebecca A Burrell, Jil Sander, Ian Tomlinson, Andrew M Hanby, Valerie Speirs, Andrea L Richardson, Nicolai J Birkbak, Aron C Eklund, Julian Downward, Maik Kschischo, Zoltan Szallasi, Charles Swanton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chromosomal instability (CIN) is thought to be associated with poor prognosis in solid tumors; however, evidence from preclinical and mouse tumor models suggest that CIN may paradoxically enhance or impair cancer cell fitness. Breast cancer prognostic expression signature sets, which reflect tumor CIN status, efficiently delineate outcome in estrogen receptor ER-positive breast cancer in contrast to ER-negative breast cancer, suggesting that the relationship of CIN with prognosis differs in these two breast cancer subtypes.
METHODS: Direct assessment of CIN requires single-cell analysis methods, such as centromeric FISH, aimed at determining the variation around the modal number of two or more chromosomes within individual tumor nuclei. Here, we document the frequency of tumor CIN by dual centromeric FISH analysis in a retrospective primary breast cancer cohort of 246 patients with survival outcome.
RESULTS: There was increased CIN and clonal heterogeneity in ER-negative compared with ER-positive breast cancer. Consistent with a negative impact of CIN on cellular fitness, extreme CIN in ER-negative breast cancer was an independent variable associated with improved long-term survival in multivariate analysis. In contrast, a linear relationship of increasing CIN with poorer prognosis in ER-positive breast cancer was observed, using three independent measures of CIN.
CONCLUSIONS: The paradoxical relationship between extreme CIN and cancer outcome in the ER-negative cohorts may explain why prognostic expression signatures, reflecting tumor CIN status, fail to predict outcome in this subgroup. IMPACT: Assessment of tumor CIN status may support risk stratification in ER-negative breast cancer and requires prospective validation. ©2011 AACR

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21784954      PMCID: PMC3199437          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0343

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  48 in total

1.  Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer.

Authors:  Yixin Wang; Jan G M Klijn; Yi Zhang; Anieta M Sieuwerts; Maxime P Look; Fei Yang; Dmitri Talantov; Mieke Timmermans; Marion E Meijer-van Gelder; Jack Yu; Tim Jatkoe; Els M J J Berns; David Atkins; John A Foekens
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Feb 19-25       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Oncogenic pathway signatures in human cancers as a guide to targeted therapies.

Authors:  Andrea H Bild; Guang Yao; Jeffrey T Chang; Quanli Wang; Anil Potti; Dawn Chasse; Mary-Beth Joshi; David Harpole; Johnathan M Lancaster; Andrew Berchuck; John A Olson; Jeffrey R Marks; Holly K Dressman; Mike West; Joseph R Nevins
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-11-06       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Gene expression signatures for predicting prognosis of squamous cell and adenocarcinomas of the lung.

Authors:  Mitch Raponi; Yi Zhang; Jack Yu; Guoan Chen; Grace Lee; Jeremy M G Taylor; James Macdonald; Dafydd Thomas; Christopher Moskaluk; Yixin Wang; David G Beer
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 12.701

4.  Aneuploidy confers quantitative proteome changes and phenotypic variation in budding yeast.

Authors:  Norman Pavelka; Giulia Rancati; Jin Zhu; William D Bradford; Anita Saraf; Laurence Florens; Brian W Sanderson; Gaye L Hattem; Rong Li
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2010-10-20       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  The gene expression signature of genomic instability in breast cancer is an independent predictor of clinical outcome.

Authors:  Jens K Habermann; Jana Doering; Sampsa Hautaniemi; Uwe J Roblick; Nana K Bündgen; Daniel Nicorici; Ulrike Kronenwett; Shruti Rathnagiriswaran; Rama K R Mettu; Yan Ma; Stefan Krüger; Hans-Peter Bruch; Gert Auer; Nancy L Guo; Thomas Ried
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 7.396

6.  Lethality to human cancer cells through massive chromosome loss by inhibition of the mitotic checkpoint.

Authors:  Geert J P L Kops; Daniel R Foltz; Don W Cleveland
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-05-24       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Use of 70-gene signature to predict prognosis of patients with node-negative breast cancer: a prospective community-based feasibility study (RASTER).

Authors:  Jolien M Bueno-de-Mesquita; Wim H van Harten; Valesca P Retel; Laura J van 't Veer; Frits Sam van Dam; Kim Karsenberg; Kirsten Fl Douma; Harm van Tinteren; Johannes L Peterse; Jelle Wesseling; Tin S Wu; Douwe Atsma; Emiel Jt Rutgers; Guido Brink; Arno N Floore; Annuska M Glas; Rudi Mh Roumen; Frank E Bellot; Cees van Krimpen; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; Marc J van de Vijver; Sabine C Linn
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2007-11-26       Impact factor: 41.316

8.  Gene expression profiling spares early breast cancer patients from adjuvant therapy: derived and validated in two population-based cohorts.

Authors:  Yudi Pawitan; Judith Bjöhle; Lukas Amler; Anna-Lena Borg; Suzanne Egyhazi; Per Hall; Xia Han; Lars Holmberg; Fei Huang; Sigrid Klaar; Edison T Liu; Lance Miller; Hans Nordgren; Alexander Ploner; Kerstin Sandelin; Peter M Shaw; Johanna Smeds; Lambert Skoog; Sara Wedrén; Jonas Bergh
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2005-10-03       Impact factor: 6.466

9.  Oncogenic pathway combinations predict clinical prognosis in gastric cancer.

Authors:  Chia Huey Ooi; Tatiana Ivanova; Jeanie Wu; Minghui Lee; Iain Beehuat Tan; Jiong Tao; Lindsay Ward; Jun Hao Koo; Veena Gopalakrishnan; Yansong Zhu; Lai Ling Cheng; Julian Lee; Sun Young Rha; Hyun Cheol Chung; Kumaresan Ganesan; Jimmy So; Khee Chee Soo; Dennis Lim; Weng Hoong Chan; Wai Keong Wong; David Bowtell; Khay Guan Yeoh; Heike Grabsch; Alex Boussioutas; Patrick Tan
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2009-10-02       Impact factor: 5.917

10.  Aneuploidy affects proliferation and spontaneous immortalization in mammalian cells.

Authors:  Bret R Williams; Vineet R Prabhu; Karen E Hunter; Christina M Glazier; Charles A Whittaker; David E Housman; Angelika Amon
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  78 in total

1.  Chromosomal instability upregulates interferon in acute myeloid leukemia.

Authors:  Ning Jin; Robert F Lera; Rachel E Yan; Fen Guo; Kim Oxendine; Vanessa L Horner; Yang Hu; Jun Wan; Ryan J Mattison; Beth A Weaver; Mark E Burkard
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  2020-07-18       Impact factor: 5.006

Review 2.  Cancer chromosomal instability: therapeutic and diagnostic challenges.

Authors:  Nicholas McGranahan; Rebecca A Burrell; David Endesfelder; Marco R Novelli; Charles Swanton
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 8.807

Review 3.  Mitotic DNA Damage Response: At the Crossroads of Structural and Numerical Cancer Chromosome Instabilities.

Authors:  Samuel F Bakhoum; Lilian Kabeche; Duane A Compton; Simon N Powell; Holger Bastians
Journal:  Trends Cancer       Date:  2017-02-28

Review 4.  Can oncology recapitulate paleontology? Lessons from species extinctions.

Authors:  Viola Walther; Crispin T Hiley; Darryl Shibata; Charles Swanton; Paul E Turner; Carlo C Maley
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-02-17       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Prognostic value of proliferation markers expression in breast cancer.

Authors:  Natalija Dedić Plavetić; Jasminka Jakić-Razumović; Ana Kulić; Damir Vrbanec
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 3.064

Review 6.  The Multifaceted Role of Chromosomal Instability in Cancer and Its Microenvironment.

Authors:  Samuel F Bakhoum; Lewis C Cantley
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 41.582

Review 7.  Epigenetic regulation in RCC: opportunities for therapeutic intervention?

Authors:  James Larkin; Xin Yi Goh; Marcus Vetter; Lisa Pickering; Charles Swanton
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2012-01-17       Impact factor: 14.432

8.  Chromosomal heterogeneity and instability characterize pediatric medulloblastoma cell lines and affect neoplastic phenotype.

Authors:  Angel Mauricio Castro-Gamero; Kleiton Silva Borges; Regia Caroline Lira; Augusto Faria Andrade; Paola Fernanda Fedatto; Gustavo Alencastro Veiga Cruzeiro; Ricardo Bonfim Silva; Aparecida Maria Fontes; Elvis Terci Valera; Michael Bobola; Carlos Alberto Scrideli; Luiz Gonzaga Tone
Journal:  Cytotechnology       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 2.058

Review 9.  Genomic Instability in Cancer: Teetering on the Limit of Tolerance.

Authors:  Noemi Andor; Carlo C Maley; Hanlee P Ji
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 12.701

10.  Pan-cancer analysis of the extent and consequences of intratumor heterogeneity.

Authors:  Noemi Andor; Trevor A Graham; Marnix Jansen; Li C Xia; C Athena Aktipis; Claudia Petritsch; Hanlee P Ji; Carlo C Maley
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 53.440

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.