M Di Salvatore1, L Lo Giudice2, E Rossi2, C Santonocito3, G Nazzicone2, M G Rodriquenz2, S Cappuccio2, A Inno2,4, P Fuso2, A Orlandi2, A Strippoli2, E Capoluongo3, A Astone2, A Cassano2, C Barone2. 1. Unit of Clinical Oncology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, L.go F. Vito 1, 00168, Rome, Italy. disalvatore.mariantonietta@gmail.com. 2. Unit of Clinical Oncology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, L.go F. Vito 1, 00168, Rome, Italy. 3. Laboratory of Clinical Molecular Biology, Institute of Biochemistry and Clinical Biochemistry, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, L.go F. Vito 1, 00168, Rome, Italy. 4. Medical Oncology, Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Via Don A. Sempreboni 5, 37024, Negrar, VR, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer is controversial. Identification of predictive biomarkers could help to select patients who really benefit from it. We evaluated the association of angiogenesis-related gene polymorphisms with the treatment outcome of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: eNOS-786T/C and -894G/T, IL-8-251T/A genomic polymorphisms were assessed in 31 metastatic breast cancer patients treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in the first-line setting. Testing for association between each polymorphism and treatment outcome was performed. RESULTS: Patients with IL-8 251 AA genotype showed a significantly lower progression-free survival in each combination comparison: "TT" vs "AA" (13 vs 8 months; p = 0.008); TT vs TA vs AA (13 vs 11 vs 8 months; p = 0.02); TT vs TA +AA (13 vs 11 months; p = 0.01); TT + TA vs AA (12 vs 8 months; p = 0.01) and a lower overall survival when compared with TT +TA genotype (26 vs 51 months, p = 0.04). Patients carrying eNOS 894 TT genotype showed a statistically significant lower progression-free survival than patients with GG genotype (11.5 vs 26.5 months; p = 0.04) with no differences in the overall survival. No association with response rate was found with any of the polymorphisms analyzed. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that IL-8 251T/A and eNOS-894 G/T polymorphisms might have a role in predicting treatment outcome of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer. Our results are hypothesis generating and need to be confirmed in larger clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: The role of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer is controversial. Identification of predictive biomarkers could help to select patients who really benefit from it. We evaluated the association of angiogenesis-related gene polymorphisms with the treatment outcome of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancerpatients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: eNOS-786T/C and -894G/T, IL-8-251T/A genomic polymorphisms were assessed in 31 metastatic breast cancerpatients treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in the first-line setting. Testing for association between each polymorphism and treatment outcome was performed. RESULTS:Patients with IL-8 251 AA genotype showed a significantly lower progression-free survival in each combination comparison: "TT" vs "AA" (13 vs 8 months; p = 0.008); TT vs TA vs AA (13 vs 11 vs 8 months; p = 0.02); TT vs TA +AA (13 vs 11 months; p = 0.01); TT + TA vs AA (12 vs 8 months; p = 0.01) and a lower overall survival when compared with TT +TA genotype (26 vs 51 months, p = 0.04). Patients carrying eNOS 894 TT genotype showed a statistically significant lower progression-free survival than patients with GG genotype (11.5 vs 26.5 months; p = 0.04) with no differences in the overall survival. No association with response rate was found with any of the polymorphisms analyzed. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that IL-8251T/A and eNOS-894 G/T polymorphisms might have a role in predicting treatment outcome of bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer. Our results are hypothesis generating and need to be confirmed in larger clinical trials.
Authors: Timothy J Perren; Ann Marie Swart; Jacobus Pfisterer; Jonathan A Ledermann; Eric Pujade-Lauraine; Gunnar Kristensen; Mark S Carey; Philip Beale; Andrés Cervantes; Christian Kurzeder; Andreas du Bois; Jalid Sehouli; Rainer Kimmig; Anne Stähle; Fiona Collinson; Sharadah Essapen; Charlie Gourley; Alain Lortholary; Frédéric Selle; Mansoor R Mirza; Arto Leminen; Marie Plante; Dan Stark; Wendi Qian; Mahesh K B Parmar; Amit M Oza Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rekha Gyanchandani; Daisuke Sano; Marcus V Ortega Alves; Jonah D Klein; Beth A Knapick; Sanders Oh; Jeffrey N Myers; Seungwon Kim Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2013-04-24 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: David W Miles; Arlene Chan; Luc Y Dirix; Javier Cortés; Xavier Pivot; Piotr Tomczak; Thierry Delozier; Joo Hyuk Sohn; Louise Provencher; Fabio Puglisi; Nadia Harbeck; Guenther G Steger; Andreas Schneeweiss; Andrew M Wardley; Andreas Chlistalla; Gilles Romieu Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-05-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Scott Kopetz; Paulo M Hoff; Jeffrey S Morris; Robert A Wolff; Cathy Eng; Katrina Y Glover; Rosie Adinin; Michael J Overman; Vincete Valero; Sijin Wen; Christopher Lieu; Shaoyu Yan; Hai T Tran; Lee M Ellis; James L Abbruzzese; John V Heymach Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-12-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: A E Koch; P J Polverini; S L Kunkel; L A Harlow; L A DiPietro; V M Elner; S G Elner; R M Strieter Journal: Science Date: 1992-12-11 Impact factor: 47.728