Mattias Aine1, Ceren Boyaci2, Johan Hartman3, Jari Häkkinen1, Shamik Mitra4, Ana Bosch Campos1, Emma Nimeus1,5, Anna Ehinger1,6, Johan Vallon-Christersson1, Åke Borg1, Johan Staaf7. 1. Division of Oncology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE-22381, Lund, Sweden. 2. Department of Clinical Pathology and Cytology, Karolinska University Laboratory, Stockholm, Sweden. 3. Department of Oncology and Pathology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Division of Clinical Genetics, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 5. Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 6. Department of Genetics and Pathology, Laboratory Medicine, Region Skåne, Lund, Sweden. 7. Division of Oncology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Medicon Village, SE-22381, Lund, Sweden. Johan.staaf@med.lu.se.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer in young adults has been implicated with a worse outcome. Analyses of genomic traits associated with age have been heterogenous, likely because of an incomplete accounting for underlying molecular subtypes. We aimed to resolve whether triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in younger versus older patients represent similar or different molecular diseases in the context of genetic and transcriptional subtypes and immune cell infiltration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 237 patients from a reported population-based south Swedish TNBC cohort profiled by RNA sequencing and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) were included. Patients were binned in 10-year intervals. Complimentary PD-L1 and CD20 immunohistochemistry and estimation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were performed. Cases were analyzed for differences in patient outcome, genomic, transcriptional, and immune landscape features versus age at diagnosis. Additionally, 560 public WGS breast cancer profiles were used for validation. RESULTS: Median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range 26-91). Age was not associated with invasive disease-free survival or overall survival after adjuvant chemotherapy. Among the BRCA1-deficient cases (82/237), 90% were diagnosed before the age of 70 and were predominantly of the basal-like subtype. In the full TNBC cohort, reported associations of patient age with changes in Ki67 expression, PIK3CA mutations, and a luminal androgen receptor subtype were confirmed. Within DNA repair deficiency or gene expression defined molecular subgroups, age-related alterations in, e.g., overall gene expression, immune cell marker gene expression, genetic mutational and rearrangement signatures, amount of copy number alterations, and tumor mutational burden did, however, not appear distinct. Similar non-significant associations for genetic alterations with age were obtained for other breast cancer subgroups in public WGS data. Consistent with age-related immunosenescence, TIL counts decreased linearly with patient age across different genetic TNBC subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: Age-related alterations in TNBC, as well as breast cancer in general, need to be viewed in the context of underlying genomic phenotypes. Based on this notion, age at diagnosis alone does not appear to provide an additional layer of biological complexity above that of proposed genetic and transcriptional phenotypes of TNBC. Consequently, treatment decisions should be less influenced by age and more driven by tumor biology.
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer in young adults has been implicated with a worse outcome. Analyses of genomic traits associated with age have been heterogenous, likely because of an incomplete accounting for underlying molecular subtypes. We aimed to resolve whether triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in younger versus older patients represent similar or different molecular diseases in the context of genetic and transcriptional subtypes and immune cell infiltration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 237 patients from a reported population-based south Swedish TNBC cohort profiled by RNA sequencing and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) were included. Patients were binned in 10-year intervals. Complimentary PD-L1 and CD20 immunohistochemistry and estimation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were performed. Cases were analyzed for differences in patient outcome, genomic, transcriptional, and immune landscape features versus age at diagnosis. Additionally, 560 public WGS breast cancer profiles were used for validation. RESULTS: Median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range 26-91). Age was not associated with invasive disease-free survival or overall survival after adjuvant chemotherapy. Among the BRCA1-deficient cases (82/237), 90% were diagnosed before the age of 70 and were predominantly of the basal-like subtype. In the full TNBC cohort, reported associations of patient age with changes in Ki67 expression, PIK3CA mutations, and a luminal androgen receptor subtype were confirmed. Within DNA repair deficiency or gene expression defined molecular subgroups, age-related alterations in, e.g., overall gene expression, immune cell marker gene expression, genetic mutational and rearrangement signatures, amount of copy number alterations, and tumor mutational burden did, however, not appear distinct. Similar non-significant associations for genetic alterations with age were obtained for other breast cancer subgroups in public WGS data. Consistent with age-related immunosenescence, TIL counts decreased linearly with patient age across different genetic TNBC subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: Age-related alterations in TNBC, as well as breast cancer in general, need to be viewed in the context of underlying genomic phenotypes. Based on this notion, age at diagnosis alone does not appear to provide an additional layer of biological complexity above that of proposed genetic and transcriptional phenotypes of TNBC. Consequently, treatment decisions should be less influenced by age and more driven by tumor biology.
Entities:
Keywords:
Age at diagnosis; Gene expression; Mutational signatures; Mutations; PD-L1; Patient outcome; TILs; Triple-negative breast cancer
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: Julia C Radosa; Anne Eaton; Michelle Stempel; Amrin Khander; Cornelia Liedtke; Erich-Franz Solomayer; Maria Karsten; Melissa Pilewskie; Monica Morrow; Tari A King Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2016-10-25 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Johan Staaf; Dominik Glodzik; Åke Borg; Serena Nik-Zainal; Ana Bosch; Johan Vallon-Christersson; Christel Reuterswärd; Jari Häkkinen; Andrea Degasperi; Tauanne Dias Amarante; Lao H Saal; Cecilia Hegardt; Hilary Stobart; Anna Ehinger; Christer Larsson; Lisa Rydén; Niklas Loman; Martin Malmberg; Anders Kvist; Hans Ehrencrona; Helen R Davies Journal: Nat Med Date: 2019-09-30 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Serena Nik-Zainal; Helen Davies; Johan Staaf; Manasa Ramakrishna; Dominik Glodzik; Xueqing Zou; Inigo Martincorena; Ludmil B Alexandrov; Sancha Martin; David C Wedge; Peter Van Loo; Young Seok Ju; Marcel Smid; Arie B Brinkman; Sandro Morganella; Miriam R Aure; Ole Christian Lingjærde; Anita Langerød; Markus Ringnér; Sung-Min Ahn; Sandrine Boyault; Jane E Brock; Annegien Broeks; Adam Butler; Christine Desmedt; Luc Dirix; Serge Dronov; Aquila Fatima; John A Foekens; Moritz Gerstung; Gerrit K J Hooijer; Se Jin Jang; David R Jones; Hyung-Yong Kim; Tari A King; Savitri Krishnamurthy; Hee Jin Lee; Jeong-Yeon Lee; Yilong Li; Stuart McLaren; Andrew Menzies; Ville Mustonen; Sarah O'Meara; Iris Pauporté; Xavier Pivot; Colin A Purdie; Keiran Raine; Kamna Ramakrishnan; F Germán Rodríguez-González; Gilles Romieu; Anieta M Sieuwerts; Peter T Simpson; Rebecca Shepherd; Lucy Stebbings; Olafur A Stefansson; Jon Teague; Stefania Tommasi; Isabelle Treilleux; Gert G Van den Eynden; Peter Vermeulen; Anne Vincent-Salomon; Lucy Yates; Carlos Caldas; Laura van't Veer; Andrew Tutt; Stian Knappskog; Benita Kiat Tee Tan; Jos Jonkers; Åke Borg; Naoto T Ueno; Christos Sotiriou; Alain Viari; P Andrew Futreal; Peter J Campbell; Paul N Span; Steven Van Laere; Sunil R Lakhani; Jorunn E Eyfjord; Alastair M Thompson; Ewan Birney; Hendrik G Stunnenberg; Marc J van de Vijver; John W M Martens; Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale; Andrea L Richardson; Gu Kong; Gilles Thomas; Michael R Stratton Journal: Nature Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Vincent M T de Jong; Yuwei Wang; Natalie D Ter Hoeve; Mark Opdam; Nikolas Stathonikos; Katarzyna Jóźwiak; Michael Hauptmann; Sten Cornelissen; Willem Vreuls; Efraim H Rosenberg; Esther A Koop; Zsuzsanna Varga; Carolien H M van Deurzen; Antien L Mooyaart; Alicia Córdoba; Emma J Groen; Joost Bart; Stefan M Willems; Vasiliki Zolota; Jelle Wesseling; Anna Sapino; Ewa Chmielik; Ales Ryska; Annegien Broeks; Adri C Voogd; Sherene Loi; Stefan Michiels; Gabe S Sonke; Elsken van der Wall; Sabine Siesling; Paul J van Diest; Marjanka K Schmidt; Marleen Kok; Gwen M H E Dackus; Roberto Salgado; Sabine C Linn Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-03-30 Impact factor: 50.717