M Sureda1,2, J Rebollo3, E Mª Martínez-Navarro4,5, F J Fernández-Morejón4,5, J Farré4,5, V Muñoz4,5, P Bretcha-Boix4,5, M Duarte4,5, R G Manzano4,5, A Crespo4,5, M Del Carmen Redal4,5, B Valenzuela4,5, A Brugarolas4,5. 1. Plataforma de Oncología-Fundación TEDECA, Hospital Quironsalud Torrevieja, Partida de la Loma s/n, 03184, Torrevieja, Alicante, Spain. manuel.sureda@quironsalud.es. 2. Cátedra de Oncología Multidisciplinar, Universidad Católica de Murcia (UCAM), Murcia, Spain. manuel.sureda@quironsalud.es. 3. Servicio Oncología Médica, Hospital General de Villalba, Collado Villalba, Madrid, Spain. 4. Plataforma de Oncología-Fundación TEDECA, Hospital Quironsalud Torrevieja, Partida de la Loma s/n, 03184, Torrevieja, Alicante, Spain. 5. Cátedra de Oncología Multidisciplinar, Universidad Católica de Murcia (UCAM), Murcia, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The present study evaluates the massive study of gene expression in metastatic breast carcinoma (MBC) patients using microarray gene expression profiling (MAGE) complemented with conventional sequencing, immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent "in situ" hybridization (FISH), seeking to optimize the treatment in a subset of heavily pretreated patients and with limited life expectancy. PATIENTS, MATERIAL AND METHODS: MBC patients in hormone therapy progression with survival expectancy of at least 3 months (m) have been included. The MAGE contains gene probes representing genes known to potentially interact with available drugs as cited in the literature. RESULTS: Thirty-nine procedures were performed from October 2010 to April 2016. Within the 30 evaluable procedures, considering all hormonal manipulations as a single line, the patients had received a median of 4 treatment lines prior to MAGE (range 1-7). Progression was observed in 6 cases, stable disease (SD) in 7 cases and partial response (PR) in 16 cases, which implies a clinical benefit rate (SD + PR) of 76%. Actuarial median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6 m (95% CI 2.5-9.5) in patients with clinical benefit. The median overall survival (OS) for the entire series was 11 m (95% CI 2.2-19.8). CONCLUSION: Data presented here indicate that the use of MAGE provides relevant information to establish personalized treatment in frail patients with limited life expectancy in which therapeutic futility is a particularly difficult burden to assume.
PURPOSE: The present study evaluates the massive study of gene expression in metastatic breast carcinoma (MBC) patients using microarray gene expression profiling (MAGE) complemented with conventional sequencing, immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent "in situ" hybridization (FISH), seeking to optimize the treatment in a subset of heavily pretreated patients and with limited life expectancy. PATIENTS, MATERIAL AND METHODS:MBCpatients in hormone therapy progression with survival expectancy of at least 3 months (m) have been included. The MAGE contains gene probes representing genes known to potentially interact with available drugs as cited in the literature. RESULTS: Thirty-nine procedures were performed from October 2010 to April 2016. Within the 30 evaluable procedures, considering all hormonal manipulations as a single line, the patients had received a median of 4 treatment lines prior to MAGE (range 1-7). Progression was observed in 6 cases, stable disease (SD) in 7 cases and partial response (PR) in 16 cases, which implies a clinical benefit rate (SD + PR) of 76%. Actuarial median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6 m (95% CI 2.5-9.5) in patients with clinical benefit. The median overall survival (OS) for the entire series was 11 m (95% CI 2.2-19.8). CONCLUSION: Data presented here indicate that the use of MAGE provides relevant information to establish personalized treatment in frail patients with limited life expectancy in which therapeutic futility is a particularly difficult burden to assume.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Microarrays of genetic expression; Personalized treatment
Authors: Daniel D Von Hoff; Joseph J Stephenson; Peter Rosen; David M Loesch; Mitesh J Borad; Stephen Anthony; Gayle Jameson; Susan Brown; Nina Cantafio; Donald A Richards; Tom R Fitch; Ernesto Wasserman; Cristian Fernandez; Sylvan Green; William Sutherland; Michael Bittner; Arlet Alarcon; David Mallery; Robert Penny Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-10-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Brian D Lehmann; Joshua A Bauer; Xi Chen; Melinda E Sanders; A Bapsi Chakravarthy; Yu Shyr; Jennifer A Pietenpol Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Joseba Rebollo; Manuel Sureda; Elena M Martinez; Francisco J Fernández-Morejón; José Farré; Vicente Muñoz; Francisco Fernández-Latorre; Ramón G Manzano; Antonio Brugarolas Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Min Yuen Teo; Richard M Bambury; Emily C Zabor; Emmet Jordan; Hikmat Al-Ahmadie; Mariel E Boyd; Nancy Bouvier; Stephanie A Mullane; Eugene K Cha; Nitin Roper; Irina Ostrovnaya; David M Hyman; Bernard H Bochner; Maria E Arcila; David B Solit; Michael F Berger; Dean F Bajorin; Joaquim Bellmunt; Gopakumar Iyer; Jonathan E Rosenberg Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2017-01-30 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Hiroko Masuda; Keith A Baggerly; Ying Wang; Ya Zhang; Ana Maria Gonzalez-Angulo; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Vicente Valero; Brian D Lehmann; Jennifer A Pietenpol; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; W Fraser Symmans; Naoto T Ueno Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 12.531