Top

Published in:

01-10-2009 | Preclinical Study

Validation of 70-gene prognosis signature in node-negative breast cancer

Authors: J. M. Bueno-de-Mesquita, S. C. Linn, R. Keijzer, J. Wesseling, D. S. A. Nuyten, C. van Krimpen, C. Meijers, P. W. de Graaf, M. M. E. M. Bos, A. A. M. Hart, E. J. T. Rutgers, J. L. Peterse, H. Halfwerk, R. de Groot, A. Pronk, A. N. Floore, A. M. Glas, L. J. van’t Veer, M. J. van de Vijver

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 3/2009

Abstract

Purpose The 70-gene prognosis signature (van’t Veer et al., Nature 415(6871):530–536, 2002) may improve the selection of lymph node-negative breast cancer patients for adjuvant systemic therapy. Optimal validation of prognostic classifiers is of great importance and we therefore wished to evaluate the prognostic value of the 70-gene prognosis signature in a series of relatively recently diagnosed lymph node negative breast cancer patients. Methods We evaluated the 70-gene prognosis signature in an independent representative series of patients with invasive breast cancer (N = 123; <55 years; pT1-2N0; diagnosed between 1996 and 1999; median follow-up 5.8 years) by classifying these patients as having a good or poor prognosis signature. In addition, we updated the follow-up of the node-negative patients of the previously published validation-series (Van de Vijver et al., N Engl J Med 347(25):1999–2009, 2002; N = 151; median follow-up 10.2 years). The prognostic value of the 70-gene prognosis signature was compared with that of four commonly used clinicopathological risk indexes. The endpoints were distant metastasis (as first event) free percentage (DMFP) and overall survival (OS). Results The 5-year OS was 82 ± 5% in poor (48%) and 97 ± 2% in good prognosis signature (52%) patients (HR 3.4; 95% CI 1.2–9.6; P = 0.021). The 5-years DMFP was 78 ± 6% in poor and 98 ± 2% in good prognosis signature patients (HR 5.7; 95% CI 1.6–20; P = 0.007). In the updated series (N = 151; 60% poor vs. 40% good), the 10-year OS was 51 ± 5% and 94 ± 3% (HR 10.7; 95% CI 3.9–30; P < 0.01), respectively. The DMFP was 50 ± 6% in poor and 86 ± 5% in good prognosis signature patients (HR 5.5; 95% CI 2.5–12; P < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, the prognosis signature was a strong independent prognostic factor in both series, outperforming the clinicopathological risk indexes. Conclusion The 70-gene prognosis signature is also an independent prognostic factor in node-negative breast cancer patients for women diagnosed in recent years.

Available only for authorised users

Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (2005) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 365:1687–1717. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66544-0 CrossRef

Eifel P (2001) National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: adjuvant therapy for breast cancer, November 1–3, 2000. J Natl Cancer Inst 93(13):979–989. doi:10.1093/jnci/93.13.979 PubMedCrossRef

Cleator S, Ashworth A (2004) Molecular profiling of breast cancer: clinical implications. Br J Cancer 90(6):1120–1124. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6601667 PubMedCrossRef

Harris JR (2004) Staging of breast cancer. In: Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Osborne CK (eds) Disease of the breast, 3rd edn. Lippincott Williams & Wlkins, Philadelphia, pp 653–667

Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (1998) Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 351(9114):1451–1467. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11423-4 CrossRef

Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (1998) Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 352(9132):930–942. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(98)03301-7 CrossRef

Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA et al (2000) Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406(6797):747–752. doi:10.1038/35021093 PubMedCrossRef

West M, Blanchette C, Dressman H, Huang E, Ishida S, Spang R et al (2001) Predicting the clinical status of human breast cancer by using gene expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98(20):11462–11467. doi:10.1073/pnas.201162998 PubMedCrossRef

Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, Aas T, Geisler S, Johnsen H et al (2001) Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98(19):10869–10874. doi:10.1073/p006Eas.191367098 PubMedCrossRef

10.

van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Hart AAM, Mao M et al (2002) Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 415(6871):530–536. doi:10.1038/415530a CrossRef

11.

van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, Hart AAM, Voskuil DW et al (2002) A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347(25):1999–2009. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa021967 PubMedCrossRef

12.

Sotiriou C, Neo SY, McShane LM, Korn EL, Long PM, Jazaeri A et al (2003) Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(18):10393–10398. doi:10.1073/pnas.1732912100 PubMedCrossRef

13.

Huang E, Cheng SH, Dressman H, Pittman J, Tsou MH, Horng CF et al (2003) Gene expression predictors of breast cancer outcomes. Lancet 361(9369):1590–1596. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13308-9 PubMedCrossRef

14.

Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, Kim C, Baker J, Cronin M et al (2004) A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 351(27):2817–2826. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa041588 PubMedCrossRef

15.

Habel LA, Shak S, Jacobs MK, Capra A, Alexander C, Pho M (2006) A population-based study of tumor gene expression and risk of breast cancer death among lymph node-negative patients. Breast Cancer Res 8(3):R25. doi:10.1186/bcr1412 PubMedCrossRef

16.

Pawitan Y, Bjohle J, Amler L, Borg AL, Egyhazi S, Hall P et al (2005) Gene expression profiling spares early breast cancer patients from adjuvant therapy: derived and validated in two population-based cohorts. Breast Cancer Res 7(6):R953–R964. doi:10.1186/bcr1325 PubMedCrossRef

17.

Wang Y, Klijn JG, Zhang Y, Sieuwerts AM, Look MP, Yang F et al (2005) Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer. Lancet 365(9460):671–679PubMed

18.

Foekens JA, Atkins D, Zhang Y, Sweep FCGJ, Harbeck N, Paradiso A et al (2006) Multicenter validation of a gene expression-based prognostic signature in lymph node-negative primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24(11):1665–1671. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.03.9115 PubMedCrossRef

19.

Buyse M, Loi S, van’t Veer L, Viale G, Delorenzi M, Glas AM et al (2006) Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 98(17):1183–1192PubMedCrossRef

20.

Wang Y, Klijn JGM, Zhang Y, Atkins D, Foekens JA (2005) A 76-gene signature to predict distant metastasis in lymph-node negative breast cancer. Am J Oncol Rev 4:448–454

21.

Esteva FJ, Sahin AA, Cristofanilli M, Coombes K, Lee SJ, Baker J et al (2005) Prognostic role of a multigene reverse transcriptase-PCR assay in patients with node-negative breast cancer not receiving adjuvant systemic therapy. Clin Cancer Res 11(9):3315–3319. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-1707 PubMedCrossRef

22.

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(5):403–410. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2559.1991.tb00229.x PubMedCrossRef

23.

Glas AM, Floore A, Delahaye LJ, Witteveen AT, Pover RC, Bakx N et al (2006) Converting a breast cancer microarray signature into a high-throughput diagnostic test. BMC Genomics 7:278. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-7-278 PubMedCrossRef

24.

Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD, Senn HJ (1998) International Consensus Panel on the treatment of primary breast cancer. V: Update 1998. Recent Results Cancer Res 152:481–497PubMed

25.

Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD, Senn HJ (1998) Meeting highlights: International Consensus Panel on the treatment of primary breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 90(21):1601–1608. doi:10.1093/jnci/90.21.1601 PubMedCrossRef

26.

Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Senn HJ (2001) Meeting highlights: International Consensus Panel on the treatment of primary breast cancer. Seventh International Conference on adjuvant therapy of primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 19(18):3817–3827PubMed

27.

Colomer R, Vinas G, Beltran M, Izquierdo A, Lluch A, Llombart-Cussac A et al (2004) Validation of the 2001 St Gallen risk categories for node-negative breast cancer using a database from the Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group (GEICAM). J Clin Oncol 22(5):961–962. doi:10.1200/JCO.2004.99.143 PubMedCrossRef

28.

Senn HJ, Thurlimann B, Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD, Coates AS (2003) Comments on the St. Gallen Consensus 2003 on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. Breast 12(6):569–582. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2003.09.007 PubMedCrossRef

29.

Todd JH, Dowle C, Williams MR, Elston CW, Ellis IO, Hinton CP et al (1987) Confirmation of a prognostic index in primary breast cancer. Br J Cancer 56(4):489–492PubMed

30.

D’Eredita’ G, Giardina C, Martellotta M, Natale T, Ferrarese F (2001) Prognostic factors in breast cancer: the predictive value of the Nottingham Prognostic Index in patients with a long-term follow-up that were treated in a single institution. Eur J Cancer 37(5):591–596. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00435-4 PubMedCrossRef

31.

Kattan MW, Giri D, Panageas KS, Hummer A, Cranor M, Van Zee KJ et al (2004) A tool for predicting breast carcinoma mortality in women who do not receive adjuvant therapy. Cancer 101(11):2509–2515. doi:10.1002/cncr.20635 PubMedCrossRef

32.

Nationaal Borstkanker Overleg Nederland (2005) Richtlijn Behandeling van het Mammacarcinoom 2005 doi:www.oncoline.nl

33.

Kwaliteitsinstituut voor de Gezondheidszorg CBO Vereniging voor Integrale Kankercentra. Adjuvante Systemische Therapie voor het Operabel Mammacarcinoom. Richtlijn Behandeling van het Mammacarcinoom 2005. 2005, pp 46–70

34.

(2008) Adjuvant! Online Software (version 8.0) doi:www.adjuvantonline.com

35.

Olivotto IA, Bajdik CD, Ravdin PM, Speers CH, Coldman AJ, Norris BD et al (2005) Population-based validation of the prognostic model ADJUVANT! for early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23(12):2716–2725. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.06.178 PubMedCrossRef

36.

Ravdin PM, Siminoff LA, Davis GJ, Mercer MB, Hewlett J, Gerson N et al (2001) Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 19(4):980–991PubMed

37.

Kaplan EL, Meier P (1958) Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53:457–481. doi:10.2307/2281868 CrossRef

38.

Cox DR (1972) Regression models and lifetables. J R Stat Soc B 34:187–220

39.

Klein JP (1991) Small sample moments of the estimators of the variance of the Kaplan–Meier and Nelson-Aalen estimators. Scand J Stat 18:333–340

40.

Fan C, Oh DS, Wessels L, Weigelt B, Nuyten DS, Nobel AB et al (2006) Concordance among gene-expression-based predictors for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 355(6):560–569. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa052933 PubMedCrossRef

41.

Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, van Harten W, Retel V, van’t Veer L, van Dam F, Karsenberg K 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(12):1079–1087. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70346-7 PubMedCrossRef

42.

Bogaerts J, Cardoso F, Buyse M, Braga S, Loi S, Harrison JA et al (2006) Gene signature evaluation as a prognostic tool: challenges in the design of the MINDACT trial. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 3(10):540–551. doi:10.1038/ncponc0591 PubMedCrossRef

Title: Validation of 70-gene prognosis signature in node-negative breast cancer
Authors: J. M. Bueno-de-Mesquita
S. C. Linn
R. Keijzer
J. Wesseling
D. S. A. Nuyten
C. van Krimpen
C. Meijers
P. W. de Graaf
M. M. E. M. Bos
A. A. M. Hart
E. J. T. Rutgers
J. L. Peterse
H. Halfwerk
R. de Groot
A. Pronk
A. N. Floore
A. M. Glas
L. J. van’t Veer
M. J. van de Vijver
Publication date: 01-10-2009
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 3/2009
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-008-0191-2

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2009

Lymphatic drainage in the muscle and subcutis of the arm after breast cancer treatment

Haplotypes of XRCC1 and survival outcome in patients with metastatic breast cancer

Lysis of cancer cells by autologous T cells in breast cancer pleural effusates treated with anti-EpCAM BiTE antibody MT110

A comprehensive evaluation of outcomes for inflammatory breast cancer

Measuring lymphedema in patients with breast cancer: go with the flow?

Do GnRH analogs protect against ovarian toxicity of chemotherapy?

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer