Top

Published in:

01-02-2011 | Preclinical Study

Tumor–stroma ratio in the primary tumor is a prognostic factor in early breast cancer patients, especially in triple-negative carcinoma patients

Authors: Esther M. de Kruijf, Johanna G. H. van Nes, Cornelis J. H. van de Velde, Hein Putter, Vincent T. H. B. M. Smit, Gerrit Jan Liefers, Peter J. K. Kuppen, Rob A. E. M. Tollenaar, Wilma E. Mesker

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 3/2011

Abstract

Stroma tissue surrounding cancer cells plays an important role in tumor development and behavior. In colorectal cancer, it has been found that the amount of stroma within the primary tumor is of prognostic value. We therefore have evaluated the prognostic value of this tumor–stroma ratio for breast cancer. A cohort of 574 early breast cancer patients, primarily treated with surgery between 1985 and 1994 was analyzed for the tumor–stroma ratio. The percentage of stroma was visually estimated on Haematoxylin-Eosin (H&E) stained histological sections. Patients with more than 50% intra-tumor stroma were quantified as stroma rich and patients with less than 50% as stroma poor. For the total group of patients, stroma-rich tumors had a shorter relapse-free period (RFP) (P = 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (P = 0.025) compared to stroma-poor tumors. Tumor–stroma ratio was an independent prognostic parameter for the total group of patients (P < 0.001) and also in stratified analysis based on systemic treatment. Importantly, in the triple-negative cancer subpopulation, patients with stroma-rich tumors had a 2.92 times higher risk of relapse (P = 0.006) compared to those with stroma-poor tumors, independently of other clinico-pathological parameters. Five-year RFP-rates for triple-negative cancer patients with stroma-rich compared to stroma-poor tumors were 56 and 81%, respectively. Tumor–stroma ratio has proven to be an independent prognostic factor for RFP in breast cancer patients and especially in the triple-negative cancer subpopulation. Tumor–stroma ratio could be easily implemented in routine daily pathology diagnostics, as it is simple to determine, reproducible, and performed in quick time.

Available only for authorised users

Sotiriou C, Pusztai L (2009) Gene-expression signatures in breast cancer. N Engl J 360:790–800CrossRef

Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB et al (2000) Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406:747–752CrossRefPubMed

Nielsen TO, Hsu FD, Jensen K et al (2004) Immunohistochemical and clinical characterization of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 10:5367–5374CrossRefPubMed

Bauer KR, Brown M, Cress RD, Parise CA, Caggiano V (2007) Descriptive analysis of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, and HER2-negative invasive breast cancer, the so-called triple-negative phenotype: a population-based study from the California cancer registry. Cancer 109:1721–1728CrossRefPubMed

Reis-Filho JS, Tutt AN (2008) Triple negative tumours: a critical review. Histopathology 52:108–118CrossRefPubMed

Fan C, Oh DS, Wessels L et al (2006) Concordance among gene-expression-based predictors for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 355:560–569CrossRefPubMed

Fulford LG, Reis-Filho JS, Ryder K et al (2007) Basal-like grade III invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: patterns of metastasis and long-term survival. Breast Cancer Res 9:R4CrossRefPubMed

Kryj M, Maciejewski B, Withers HR, Taylor JM (1997) Incidence and kinetics of distant metastases in patients with operable breast cancer. Neoplasma 44:3–11PubMed

Yokota J (2000) Tumor progression and metastasis. Carcinogenesis 21:497–503CrossRefPubMed

10.

Chang HY, Nuyten DS, Sneddon JB et al (2005) Robustness, scalability, and integration of a wound-response gene expression signature in predicting breast cancer survival. Proc Natl Acad Sci 102:3738–3743CrossRefPubMed

11.

Dvorak HF (1986) Tumors: wounds that do not heal, similarities between tumor stroma generation and wound healing. N Engl J Med 315:1650–1659CrossRefPubMed

12.

Beck AH, Espinosa I, Gilks CB, van de Rijn M, West RB (2008) The fibromatosis signature defines a robust stromal response in breast carcinoma. Lab Invest 88:591–601CrossRefPubMed

13.

Finak G, Bertos N, Pepin F et al (2008) Stromal gene expression predicts clinical outcome in breast cancer. Nat Med 14:518–527CrossRefPubMed

14.

Mesker WE, Junggeburt JM, Szuhai K et al (2007) The carcinoma-stromal ratio of colon carcinoma is an independent factor for survival compared to lymph node status and tumor stage. Cell Oncol 29:387–398PubMed

15.

Mesker WE, Liefers G, Junggeburt JMC et al (2009) Presence of a high amount of stroma and downregulation of smad-4 predict a worse survival for stage I-II colon cancer patients. Cell Oncol 31:169–178PubMed

16.

McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE, Gion M, Clark GM (2006) REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK). Breast Cancer Res Treat 100:229–235CrossRefPubMed

17.

Putter H, Fiocco M, Geskus RB (2007) Tutorial in biostatistics: competing risks and multi-state models. Stat Med 26:2389–2430CrossRefPubMed

18.

Courrech Staal EF, Wouters MW, van Sandick JW, et al (2010) The stromal part of adenocarcinomas of the oesophagus: does it conceal targets for therapy? Eur J Cancer 46:720–728CrossRefPubMed

19.

Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R et al (2007) American society of clinical oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:5287–5312CrossRefPubMed

20.

Thomas J, Hanby A, Pinder S et al (2008) Implications of inconsistent measurement of ER status in non-invasive breast cancer: a study of 1, 684 cases from the Sloane project. Breast J 14:33–38CrossRefPubMed

21.

Nunes CB, Rocha RM, Reis-Filho JS et al (2008) Comparative analysis of six different antibodies against Her2 including the novel rabbit monoclonal antibody (SP3) and chromogenic in situ hybridisation in breast carcinomas. J Clin Pathol 61:934–938CrossRefPubMed

22.

Annecke K, Schmitt M, Euler U et al (2008) uPA and PAI-1 in breast cancer: review of their clinical utility and current validation in the prospective NNBC-3 trial. Adv Clin Chem 45:31–45CrossRefPubMed

23.

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 347:1999–2009CrossRefPubMed

24.

Ein-Dor L, Kela I, Getz G, Givol D, Domany E (2005) Outcome signature genes in breast cancer: is there a unique set? Bioinformatics 21:171–178CrossRefPubMed

25.

Michiels S, Koscielny S, Hill C (2005) Prediction of cancer outcome with microarrays: a multiple random validation strategy. Lancet 365:488–492CrossRefPubMed

26.

Haibe-Kains B, Desmedt C, Sotiriou C, Bontempi G (2008) A comparative study of survival models for breast cancer prognostication based on microarray data: does a single gene beat them all? Bioinformatics 24:2200–2208CrossRefPubMed

27.

Sotiriou C, Piccart MJ (2007) Taking gene-expression profiling to the clinic: when will molecular signatures become relevant to patient care? Nat Rev Cancer 7:545–553CrossRefPubMed

28.

Haibe-Kains B, Desmedt C, Piette F et al (2008) Comparison of prognostic gene expression signatures for breast cancer. BMC Genomics 9:394CrossRefPubMed

29.

Thomassen M, Tan Q, Eiriksdottir F, Bak M, Cold S, Kruse TA (2007) Comparison of gene sets for expression profiling: prediction of metastasis from low-malignant breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 13:5355–5360CrossRefPubMed

30.

Wirapati P, Sotiriou C, Kunkel S et al (2008) Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures. Breast Cancer Res 10:R65CrossRefPubMed

31.

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

32.

Polyak K, Weinberg RA (2009) Transitions between epithelial and mesenchymal states: acquisition of malignant and stem cell traits. Nat Rev Cancer 9:265–273CrossRefPubMed

33.

Egeblad M, Werb Z (2002) New functions for the matrix metalloproteinases in cancer progression. Nat Rev Cancer 2:161–174CrossRefPubMed

34.

Kalluri R, Zeisberg M (2006) Fibroblasts in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 6:392–401CrossRefPubMed

35.

Olumi AF, Grossfeld GD, Hayward SW, Carroll PR, Tlsty TD, Cunha GR (1999) Carcinoma-associated fibroblasts direct tumor progression of initiated human prostatic epithelium. Cancer Res 59:5002–5011PubMed

36.

Orimo A, Gupta PB, Sgroi DC et al (2005) Stromal fibroblasts present in invasive human breast carcinomas promote tumor growth and angiogenesis through elevated SDF-1/CXCL12 secretion. Cell 121:335–348CrossRefPubMed

Title: Tumor–stroma ratio in the primary tumor is a prognostic factor in early breast cancer patients, especially in triple-negative carcinoma patients
Authors: Esther M. de Kruijf
Johanna G. H. van Nes
Cornelis J. H. van de Velde
Hein Putter
Vincent T. H. B. M. Smit
Gerrit Jan Liefers
Peter J. K. Kuppen
Rob A. E. M. Tollenaar
Wilma E. Mesker
Publication date: 01-02-2011
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 3/2011
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-010-0855-6

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

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2011

Ep-CAM RNA expression predicts metastasis-free survival in three cohorts of untreated node-negative breast cancer

COX2 expression in prognosis and in prediction to endocrine therapy in early breast cancer patients

Evaluation of estrogen and progesterone receptors in non-neoplastic breast tissue of women of reproductive age exposed to tamoxifen and raloxifene: a randomized, double-blind study

Mutations and polymorphic BRCA variants transmission in breast cancer familial members

Outcomes following local therapy for early-stage breast cancer in non-trial populations

Breast cancer in the supraclavicular region: is the horse out of the barn?

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer