Kristen E Muller1, Jonathan D Marotti1, Francine B de Abreu1, Jason D Peterson1, Todd W Miller2, Mary D Chamberlin3, Gregory J Tsongalis1, Laura J Tafe4. 1. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03766, United States. 2. Department of Pharmacology & Toxicology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03766, United States. 3. Department of Hematology-Oncology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03766, United States. 4. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03766, United States. Electronic address: Laura.J.Tafe@hitchcock.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Metastatic breast cancer is a genetically heterogeneous disease and effective therapies for advanced stage disease are limited. METHODS: In this study, distant metastases of 22 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) breast cancer samples were sequenced using the Ion Torrent PGM and the 50 gene AmpliSeq Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 from 10ng of extracted DNA using 318 chips. Data analysis was performed with the Ion Torrent Variant Caller Plugin (hg19) and Golden Helix's SVS software for annotation and prediction of the significance of the variants. RESULTS: All patients were female with a median age of 61years (range 37-85years). Metastatic sites included liver (n=6, 27%), skin (n=5, 23%), brain (n=4, 18%), lymph node (n=3, 14%), lung (n=2, 9%), retroperitoneum (n=1, 4.5%), and colon (n=1, 4.5%). Overall, 28 variants in 11 genes were observed. Five (23%) samples showed no alterations and 17 (77%) showed at least one potentially biologically significant variant (BSV) defined as having FDA-approved drugs or clinical trials evaluating their significance. BSVs included mutations in the following genes: TP53 (n=8), APC (n=4), PIK3CA (n=5), MET (n=2), ERBB2 (n=2), AKT1 (n=1), CDKN2A (n=1), KRAS (n=1), and FGFR3 (n=1). CONCLUSIONS: Potentially actionable mutations were identified in the majority of breast cancer metastases. Evaluating metastatic breast tumors using a NGS approach provides a better understanding of the mechanisms behind tumor progression and evolution and also identifies additional potentially beneficial therapeutic targets for patient management or eligibility for clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: Metastatic breast cancer is a genetically heterogeneous disease and effective therapies for advanced stage disease are limited. METHODS: In this study, distant metastases of 22 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) breast cancer samples were sequenced using the Ion Torrent PGM and the 50 gene AmpliSeq Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 from 10ng of extracted DNA using 318 chips. Data analysis was performed with the Ion Torrent Variant Caller Plugin (hg19) and Golden Helix's SVS software for annotation and prediction of the significance of the variants. RESULTS: All patients were female with a median age of 61years (range 37-85years). Metastatic sites included liver (n=6, 27%), skin (n=5, 23%), brain (n=4, 18%), lymph node (n=3, 14%), lung (n=2, 9%), retroperitoneum (n=1, 4.5%), and colon (n=1, 4.5%). Overall, 28 variants in 11 genes were observed. Five (23%) samples showed no alterations and 17 (77%) showed at least one potentially biologically significant variant (BSV) defined as having FDA-approved drugs or clinical trials evaluating their significance. BSVs included mutations in the following genes: TP53 (n=8), APC (n=4), PIK3CA (n=5), MET (n=2), ERBB2 (n=2), AKT1 (n=1), CDKN2A (n=1), KRAS (n=1), and FGFR3 (n=1). CONCLUSIONS: Potentially actionable mutations were identified in the majority of breast cancer metastases. Evaluating metastatic breast tumors using a NGS approach provides a better understanding of the mechanisms behind tumor progression and evolution and also identifies additional potentially beneficial therapeutic targets for patient management or eligibility for clinical trials.
Authors: Willemijne A M E Schrijver; Pier Selenica; Ju Youn Lee; Charlotte K Y Ng; Kathleen A Burke; Salvatore Piscuoglio; Samuel H Berman; Jorge S Reis-Filho; Britta Weigelt; Paul J van Diest; Cathy B Moelans Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2018-04-03 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: S Balendran; S Liebmann-Reindl; A S Berghoff; T Reischer; N Popitsch; C B Geier; L Kenner; P Birner; B Streubel; M Preusser Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2017-05-11 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Rossanna C Pezo; Tom W Chen; Hal K Berman; Anna M Mulligan; Albiruni A Razak; Lillian L Siu; David W Cescon; Eitan Amir; Christine Elser; David G Warr; Srikala S Sridhar; Celeste Yu; Lisa Wang; Tracy L Stockley; Suzanne Kamel-Reid; Philippe L Bedard Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-11-24 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Athina Giannoudis; Alexander Sartori; Lee Eastoe; Rasheed Zakaria; Christopher Charlton; Nicholas Hickson; Angela Platt-Higgins; Philip S Rudland; Darryl Irwin; Michael D Jenkinson; Carlo Palmieri Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-09-09 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Silvia González-Martínez; David Pizarro; Belén Pérez-Mies; Tamara Caniego-Casas; José Luis Rodríguez-Peralto; Giuseppe Curigliano; Alfonso Cortés; María Gión; Javier Cortés; José Palacios Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Anna Thulin; Carola Andersson; Elisabeth Werner Rönnerman; Shahin De Lara; Chaido Chamalidou; Arnd Schoenfeld; Anikó Kovács; Henrik Fagman; Fredrik Enlund; Barbro K Linderholm Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 4.379