Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Virchows Archiv
Published in: Virchows Archiv 3/2014

01-03-2014 | Invited Review

Molecular tests as prognostic factors in breast cancer

Author: Marc J. van de Vijver

Published in: Virchows Archiv | Issue 3/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

In early breast cancer, prognostic tests are used to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic hormonal therapy, chemotherapy and targeted therapy treatment. This has led to large research efforts to identify novel prognostic markers in breast cancer. At present, the tissue factors used to guide treatment of breast cancer patients are tumor size, lymph node status, histologic grade, ER status, PR status, and HER2 status; in addition, multigene-expression-based prognostic tests are rapidly emerging. While identification of prognostic gene expression profiles has been successful, it has not been possible yet to identify robust clinically useful predictors of response to systemic treatment. As a result of rapid advances in technology and bioinformatics, it has become possible to analyze large series of breast carcinomas using high-throughput genetic techniques, including whole genome sequence analysis and gene expression profiling. These genomic studies will lead to the development of additional prognostic and predictive tissue-based tests. The most important aspects of the currently used tissue-based prognostic and predictive tests and the research in this area are reviewed.
Literature
1.
Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS et al (2011) Strategies for subtypes—dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 22:1736–1747PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
2.
Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG et al (2013) Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 31:3997–4013PubMedCrossRef
3.
Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M et al (2010) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 28:2784–2795PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
4.
Elston CW, Ellis IO (1991) Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 19:403–410
5.
Lende TH, Janssen EA, Gudlaugsson E et al (2011) In patients younger than age 55 years with lymph node-negative breast cancer, proliferation by mitotic activity index is prognostically superior to adjuvant! J Clin Oncol 29:852–858PubMedCrossRef
6.
Cuzick J, Dowsett M, Pineda S et al (2011) Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the Genomic Health recurrence score in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 29:4273–4278PubMedCrossRef
7.
Curtis C, Shah SP, Chin SF et al (2012) The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups. Nature 486:346–352PubMedCentralPubMed
8.
Paik S, Shak S, Tang G et al (2004) A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 351:2817–2826PubMedCrossRef
9.
Simpson JF, Quan DE, O’Malley F et al (1997) Amplification of CCND1 and expression of its protein product, cyclin D1, in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Pathol 151:161–168PubMedCentralPubMed
10.
Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S et al (2010) Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 11:55–65PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
11.
Dowsett M, Cuzick J, Wale C et al (2010) Prediction of risk of distant recurrence using the 21-gene recurrence score in node-negative and node-positive postmenopausal patients with breast cancer treated with anastrozole or tamoxifen: a TransATAC study. J Clin Oncol 28:1829–1834PubMedCrossRef
12.
van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van’t Veer LJ et al (2002) A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1999–2009PubMedCrossRef
13.
Mook S, Schmidt MK, Viale G et al (2009) The 70-gene prognosis-signature predicts disease outcome in breast cancer patients with 1–3 positive lymph nodes in an independent validation study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 116:295–302PubMedCrossRef
14.
Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, van Harten WH, Retel VP et al (2007) Use of 70-gene signature to predict prognosis of patients with node-negative breast cancer: a prospective community-based feasibility study (RASTER). Lancet Oncol 8:1079–1087PubMedCrossRef
15.
Drukker CA, Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, Retel VP et al (2013) A prospective evaluation of a breast cancer prognosis signature in the observational RASTER study. Int J Cancer 133:929–936PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
16.
Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB et al (2000) Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406:747–752PubMedCrossRef
17.
Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J et al (2003) Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:8418–8423PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
18.
Prat A, Parker JS, Karginova O et al (2010) Phenotypic and molecular characterization of the claudin-low intrinsic subtype of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 12:R68PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
19.
Weigelt B, Mackay A, A’Hern R et al (2010) Breast cancer molecular profiling with single sample predictors: a retrospective analysis. Lancet Oncol 11:339–349PubMedCrossRef
20.
21.
Dowsett M, Sestak I, Lopez-Knowles E et al (2013) Comparison of PAM50 risk of recurrence score with oncotype DX and IHC4 for predicting risk of distant recurrence after endocrine therapy. J Clin Oncol 31:2783–2790PubMedCrossRef
22.
Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Loi S et al (2006) Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 98:262–272PubMedCrossRef
23.
Toussaint J, Sieuwerts AM, Haibe-Kains B et al (2009) Improvement of the clinical applicability of the genomic grade index through a qRT-PCR test performed on frozen and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues. BMC Genomics 10:424PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
24.
Filipits M, Rudas M, Jakesz R et al (2011) A new molecular predictor of distant recurrence in ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer adds independent information to conventional clinical risk factors. Clin Cancer Res 17:6012–6020PubMedCrossRef
25.
Dubsky P, Filipits M, Jakesz R et al (2013) EndoPredict improves the prognostic classification derived from common clinical guidelines in ER-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. Ann Oncol 24:640–647PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
26.
27.
Ma XJ, Wang Z, Ryan PD et al (2004) A two-gene expression ratio predicts clinical outcome in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen. Cancer Cell 5:607–616PubMedCrossRef
28.
Jansen MP, Sieuwerts AM, Look MP et al (2007) HOXB13 to IL17BR expression ratio is related with tumor aggressiveness and response to tamoxifen of recurrent breast cancer: a retrospective study. J Clin Oncol 25:662–668PubMedCrossRef
29.
Ma XJ, Salunga R, Dahiya S et al (2008) A five-gene molecular grade index and HOXB13:IL17BR are complementary prognostic factors in early stage breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 14:2601–2608PubMedCrossRef
30.
de Ronde JJ, Hannemann J, Halfwerk H et al (2010) Concordance of clinical and molecular breast cancer subtyping in the context of preoperative chemotherapy response. Breast Cancer Res Treat 119:119–126PubMedCrossRef
31.
Robinson DR, Wu YM, Vats P et al (2013) Activating ESR1 mutations in hormone-resistant metastatic breast cancer. Nat Genet. doi:10.​1038/​ng.​2823
32.
Toy W, Shen Y, Won H, Green B, Sakr RA, Will M, Li Z, Gala K, Fanning S, King TA, Hudis C, Chen D, Taran T, Hortobagyi G, Greene G, Berger M, Baselga J, Chandarlapaty S et al (2013) ESR1 ligand-binding domain mutations in hormone-resistant breast cancer. Nat Genet 45:1439–1445PubMedCrossRef
33.
34.
Dvinge H, Git A, Graf S et al (2013) The shaping and functional consequences of the microRNA landscape in breast cancer. Nature 497:378–382PubMedCrossRef
35.
Shah SP, Morin RD, Khattra J et al (2009) Mutational evolution in a lobular breast tumour profiled at single nucleotide resolution. Nature 461:809–813PubMedCrossRef
36.
37.
Hudson TJ, Anderson W, Artez A et al (2010) International network of cancer genome projects. Nature 464:993–998PubMedCrossRef
38.
Banerji S, Cibulskis K, Rangel-Escareno C et al (2012) Sequence analysis of mutations and translocations across breast cancer subtypes. Nature 486:405–409PubMedCrossRef
39.
Ellis MJ, Ding L, Shen D et al (2012) Whole-genome analysis informs breast cancer response to aromatase inhibition. Nature 486:353–360PubMedCentralPubMed
40.
Stephens PJ, Tarpey PS, Davies H et al (2012) The landscape of cancer genes and mutational processes in breast cancer. Nature 486:400–404PubMedCentralPubMed
41.
Shah SP, Roth A, Goya R et al (2012) The clonal and mutational evolution spectrum of primary triple-negative breast cancers. Nature 486:395–399PubMed
42.
43.
44.
Chang JC, Wooten EC, Tsimelzon A et al (2003) Gene expression profiling for the prediction of therapeutic response to docetaxel in patients with breast cancer. Lancet 362:362–369PubMedCrossRef
45.
Ayers M, Symmans WF, Stec J et al (2004) Gene expression profiles predict complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 22:2284–2293PubMedCrossRef
46.
Iwao-Koizumi K, Matoba R, Ueno N et al (2005) Prediction of docetaxel response in human breast cancer by gene expression profiling. J Clin Oncol 23:422–431PubMedCrossRef
47.
Hannemann J, Oosterkamp HM, Bosch CA et al (2005) Changes in gene expression associated with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:3331–3342PubMedCrossRef
48.
Gianni L, Zambetti M, Clark K et al (2005) Gene expression profiles in paraffin-embedded core biopsy tissue predict response to chemotherapy in women with locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:7265–7277PubMedCrossRef
49.
Hess KR, Anderson K, Symmans WF et al (2006) Pharmacogenomic predictor of sensitivity to preoperative chemotherapy with paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24:4236–4244PubMedCrossRef
50.
Thuerigen O, Schneeweiss A, Toedt G et al (2006) Gene expression signature predicting pathologic complete response with gemcitabine, epirubicin, and docetaxel in primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24:1839–1845PubMedCrossRef
51.
Cleator S, Tsimelzon A, Ashworth A et al (2006) Gene expression patterns for doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (cytoxan) (AC) response and resistance. Breast Cancer Res Treat 95:229–233PubMedCrossRef
52.
Chang JC, Makris A, Gutierrez MC et al (2008) Gene expression patterns in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded core biopsies predict docetaxel chemosensitivity in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 108:233–240PubMedCrossRef
53.
Farmer P, Bonnefoi H, Anderle P et al (2009) A stroma-related gene signature predicts resistance to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Nat Med 15:68–74PubMedCrossRef
54.
Tabchy A, Valero V, Vidaurre T et al (2010) Evaluation of a 30-gene paclitaxel, fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy response predictor in a multicenter randomized trial in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 16:5351–5361PubMedCrossRef
55.
Lin Y, Lin S, Watson M et al (2010) A gene expression signature that predicts the therapeutic response of the basal-like breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 123:691–699PubMedCrossRef
56.
Lee JK, Coutant C, Kim YC et al (2010) Prospective comparison of clinical and genomic multivariate predictors of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 16:711–718PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
57.
Bonnefoi H, Underhill C, Iggo R et al (2009) Predictive signatures for chemotherapy sensitivity in breast cancer: are they ready for use in the clinic? Eur J Cancer 45:1733–1743PubMedCrossRef
58.
Cancer Genome Atlas Network (2012) Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 490:61–70CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Molecular tests as prognostic factors in breast cancer
Author
Marc J. van de Vijver
Publication date
01-03-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Virchows Archiv / Issue 3/2014
Print ISSN: 0945-6317
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2307
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-014-1539-0

Other articles of this Issue 3/2014

Virchows Archiv 3/2014 Go to the issue

Invited Review

Prognostic biomarkers: an introduction

Invited Review

Biomarkers for gastric cancer: prognostic, predictive or targets of therapy?

Invited Review

Tissue prognostic biomarkers in primary cutaneous melanoma

Invited Review

Prognostic biomarkers in endometrial and ovarian carcinoma

Invited Review

Biomarkers in renal cancer

Review and Perspectives

Prognostic and predictive biomarkers in lung cancer. A review