PURPOSE: Gene expression profiling classifies breast cancer into intrinsic subtypes based on the biology of the underlying disease pathways. We have used material from a prospective randomized trial of tamoxifen versus placebo in premenopausal women with primary breast cancer (NCIC CTG MA.12) to evaluate the prognostic and predictive significance of intrinsic subtypes identified by both the PAM50 gene set and by immunohistochemistry. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:Total RNA from 398 of 672 (59%) patients was available for intrinsic subtyping with a quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR) 50-gene predictor (PAM50) for luminal A, luminal B, HER-2-enriched, and basal-like subtypes. A tissue microarray was also constructed from 492 of 672 (73%) of the study population to assess a panel of six immunohistochemical IHC antibodies to define the same intrinsic subtypes. RESULTS: Classification into intrinsic subtypes by the PAM50 assay was prognostic for both disease-free survival (DFS; P = 0.0003) and overall survival (OS; P = 0.0002), whereas classification by the IHC panel was not. Luminal subtype by PAM50 was predictive of tamoxifen benefit [DFS: HR, 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.32-0.86 vs. HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.50-1.29 for nonluminal subtypes], although the interaction test was not significant (P = 0.24), whereas neither subtyping by central immunohistochemistry nor by local estrogen receptor (ER) or progesterone receptor (PR) status were predictive. Risk of relapse (ROR) modeling with the PAM50 assay produced a continuous risk score in both node-negative and node-positive disease. CONCLUSIONS: In the MA.12 study, intrinsic subtype classification by qRT-PCR with the PAM50 assay was superior to IHC profiling for both prognosis and prediction of benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Gene expression profiling classifies breast cancer into intrinsic subtypes based on the biology of the underlying disease pathways. We have used material from a prospective randomized trial of tamoxifen versus placebo in premenopausal women with primary breast cancer (NCIC CTG MA.12) to evaluate the prognostic and predictive significance of intrinsic subtypes identified by both the PAM50 gene set and by immunohistochemistry. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Total RNA from 398 of 672 (59%) patients was available for intrinsic subtyping with a quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR) 50-gene predictor (PAM50) for luminal A, luminal B, HER-2-enriched, and basal-like subtypes. A tissue microarray was also constructed from 492 of 672 (73%) of the study population to assess a panel of six immunohistochemical IHC antibodies to define the same intrinsic subtypes. RESULTS: Classification into intrinsic subtypes by the PAM50 assay was prognostic for both disease-free survival (DFS; P = 0.0003) and overall survival (OS; P = 0.0002), whereas classification by the IHC panel was not. Luminal subtype by PAM50 was predictive of tamoxifen benefit [DFS: HR, 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.32-0.86 vs. HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.50-1.29 for nonluminal subtypes], although the interaction test was not significant (P = 0.24), whereas neither subtyping by central immunohistochemistry nor by local estrogen receptor (ER) or progesterone receptor (PR) status were predictive. Risk of relapse (ROR) modeling with the PAM50 assay produced a continuous risk score in both node-negative and node-positive disease. CONCLUSIONS: In the MA.12 study, intrinsic subtype classification by qRT-PCR with the PAM50 assay was superior to IHC profiling for both prognosis and prediction of benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen.
Authors: Sherene Loi; Benjamin Haibe-Kains; Christine Desmedt; Françoise Lallemand; Andrew M Tutt; Cheryl Gillet; Paul Ellis; Adrian Harris; Jonas Bergh; John A Foekens; Jan G M Klijn; Denis Larsimont; Marc Buyse; Gianluca Bontempi; Mauro Delorenzi; Martine J Piccart; Christos Sotiriou Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-04-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: V H C Bramwell; K I Pritchard; D Tu; K Tonkin; H Vachhrajani; T A Vandenberg; J Robert; A Arnold; S E O'Reilly; B Graham; L Shepherd Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2009-07-23 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Sunil S Badve; Frederick L Baehner; Robert P Gray; Barrett H Childs; Tara Maddala; Mei-Lan Liu; Steve C Rowley; Steven Shak; Edith A Perez; Edith D Perez; Lawrence J Shulman; Silvana Martino; Nancy E Davidson; George W Sledge; Lori J Goldstein; Joseph A Sparano Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joel S Parker; Michael Mullins; Maggie C U Cheang; Samuel Leung; David Voduc; Tammi Vickery; Sherri Davies; Christiane Fauron; Xiaping He; Zhiyuan Hu; John F Quackenbush; Inge J Stijleman; Juan Palazzo; J S Marron; Andrew B Nobel; Elaine Mardis; Torsten O Nielsen; Matthew J Ellis; Charles M Perou; Philip S Bernard Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-02-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Shuzhen Liu; Stephen K Chia; Erika Mehl; Samuel Leung; Ashish Rajput; Maggie C U Cheang; Torsten O Nielsen Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2009-02-10 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Maggie C U Cheang; David Voduc; Chris Bajdik; Samuel Leung; Steven McKinney; Stephen K Chia; Charles M Perou; Torsten O Nielsen Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-03-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: M Elizabeth H Hammond; Daniel F Hayes; Mitch Dowsett; D Craig Allred; Karen L Hagerty; Sunil Badve; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Glenn Francis; Neil S Goldstein; Malcolm Hayes; David G Hicks; Susan Lester; Richard Love; Pamela B Mangu; Lisa McShane; Keith Miller; C Kent Osborne; Soonmyung Paik; Jane Perlmutter; Anthony Rhodes; Hironobu Sasano; Jared N Schwartz; Fred C G Sweep; Sheila Taube; Emina Emilia Torlakovic; Paul Valenstein; Giuseppe Viale; Daniel Visscher; Thomas Wheeler; R Bruce Williams; James L Wittliff; Antonio C Wolff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-04-19 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Maggie C U Cheang; Stephen K Chia; David Voduc; Dongxia Gao; Samuel Leung; Jacqueline Snider; Mark Watson; Sherri Davies; Philip S Bernard; Joel S Parker; Charles M Perou; Matthew J Ellis; Torsten O Nielsen Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2009-05-12 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Maggie C U Cheang; Miguel Martin; Torsten O Nielsen; Aleix Prat; David Voduc; Alvaro Rodriguez-Lescure; Amparo Ruiz; Stephen Chia; Lois Shepherd; Manuel Ruiz-Borrego; Lourdes Calvo; Emilio Alba; Eva Carrasco; Rosalia Caballero; Dongsheng Tu; Kathleen I Pritchard; Mark N Levine; Vivien H Bramwell; Joel Parker; Philip S Bernard; Matthew J Ellis; Charles M Perou; Angelo Di Leo; Lisa A Carey Journal: Oncologist Date: 2015-04-23
Authors: Nicholas P Tobin; Linda S Lindström; Joseph W Carlson; Judith Bjöhle; Jonas Bergh; Kristian Wennmalm Journal: Mol Oncol Date: 2014-02-28 Impact factor: 6.603
Authors: Huimin Zhang; Haiquan Lu; Lisha Xiang; John W Bullen; Chuanzhao Zhang; Debangshu Samanta; Daniele M Gilkes; Jianjun He; Gregg L Semenza Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: P Sinn; S Aulmann; R Wirtz; S Schott; F Marmé; Z Varga; A Lebeau; H Kreipe; A Schneeweiss Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 2.915
Authors: Carol Sweeney; Philip S Bernard; Rachel E Factor; Marilyn L Kwan; Laurel A Habel; Charles P Quesenberry; Kaylynn Shakespear; Erin K Weltzien; Inge J Stijleman; Carole A Davis; Mark T W Ebbert; Adrienne Castillo; Lawrence H Kushi; Bette J Caan Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-02-12 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Heidi A Hanson; Claire L Leiser; Michael J Madsen; John Gardner; Stacey Knight; Melissa Cessna; Carol Sweeney; Jennifer A Doherty; Ken R Smith; Philip S Bernard; Nicola J Camp Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-02-25 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Zachary A Gurard-Levin; Laurence O W Wilson; Vera Pancaldi; Sophie Postel-Vinay; Fabricio G Sousa; Cecile Reyes; Elisabetta Marangoni; David Gentien; Alfonso Valencia; Yves Pommier; Paul Cottu; Geneviève Almouzni Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2016-05-16 Impact factor: 6.261