Molecular profiling of breast cancer

Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 59-63

  Paik, Soonmyung ^a  

^a NSABP Foundation Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Gene expression; Microarray; Prognosis

Indexed keywords

FORMALDEHYDE; PARAFFIN;

BREAST CANCER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; DNA MICROARRAY; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENOMICS; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; REVERSE TRANSCRIPTION POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; REVIEW;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; HUMANS; NEOADJUVANT THERAPY; OLIGONUCLEOTIDE ARRAY SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; PROGNOSIS;

EID: 33646478714     PISSN: 1040872X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.gco.0000192970.52320.29     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Fisher B, Jeong JH, Bryant J, et al. Treatment of lymph-node-negative, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer: long-term findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project randomized clinical trials. Lancet 2004; 364:858-868.
2. Carlson RW, Edge SB, Theriault RL. NCCN: Breast cancer. Cancer Control 2001; 8 (Suppl. 2):54-61.
3. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD, et al. Meeting highlights: updated international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21:3357-3365.
4. Volpi A, Bacci F, Paradiso A, et al. Prognostic relevance of histological grade and its components in node-negative breast cancer patients. Mod Pathol 2004; 17:1038-1044. In this study, of 372 patients with node-negative breast cancer within the Italian Network for Quality Assessment of Tumor Biomarkers programme, the authors continued to find problems in reproducibility in histological grade.
5. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351:2817-2826. This study is the first to use fragmented RNA extracted from a paraffin block to construct a prognostic gene-expression panel. The statistical approach, using a completely independent cohort as a validation set after committing to a single prognostic model, is important.
6. Simon R, Radmacher MD, Dobbin K, McShane LM. Pitfalls in the use of DNA microarray data for diagnostic and prognostic classification. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95:14-18.
7. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000; 406:747-752.
8. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001; 98:10869-10874.
9. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100:8418-8423.
10. Rouzier R, Perou CM, Symmans WF, et al. Breast cancer molecular subtypes respond differently to preoperative chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11:5678-5685. Despite its small sample size, this study demonstrates the differential pCR rate in molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Conventional markers (such as estrogen receptor), however, perform better than molecular markers in multivariate analysis.
11. Harbeck N, Kates RE, Schmitt M, et al. Urokinase-type plasminogen activator and its inhibitor type 1 predict disease outcome and therapy response in primary breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2004; 5:348-352. While not used in the USA, uPA/PA-1 is an extremely well validated prognostic and predictive marker. This marker requires frozen tumor tissue, however, and whether its results can be influenced by previous diagnostic-core needle-biopsy procedure is not clear.
12. van 't Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 2002; 415:530-536.
13. van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van't Veer LJ, et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 347 (25):1999-2009.
14. Wang Y, Klijn JG, Zhang Y, et al. Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer. Lancet 2005; 365:671-679. A well conducted study using two independent cohorts for discovery and validation of prognostic signature.
15. Shen R, Ghosh D, Chinnaiyan AM. Prognostic meta-signature of breast cancer developed by two-stage mixture modeling of microarray data. BMC Genomics 2004; 5:94. This meta-analysis shows that prognostic signatures developed from one cohort perform differently in other cohorts.
16. Ein-Dor L, Kela I, Getz G, et al. Outcome signature genes in breast cancer: is there a unique set? Bioinformatics 2005; 21:171-178. The van't Veer dataset was used to demonstrate that many different prognostic signatures with similar performance could be derived from the same microarray dataset.
17. Miller DV, Leontovich AA, Lingle WL, et al. Utilizing Nottingham Prognostic Index in microarray gene expression profiling of breast carcinomas. Mod Pathol 2004; 17:756-764. A gene signature could be found that corresponded to the Nottingham Prognostic Index. I do not believe this is a very useful approach because the resulting signature is not expected to add much to existing markers.
18. Eden P, Ritz C, Rose C, et al. "Good Old" clinical markers have similar power in breast cancer prognosis as microarray gene expression profilers. Eur J Cancer 2004; 40:1837-1841. Using the van't Veer dataset, a prognostic model based on classical markers was compared with a 70-gene prognostic gene set and found to be comparable in clinical performance. The authors, however, did not ask if they could complement each other.
19. Pittman J, Huang E, Dressman H, et al. Integrated modeling of clinical and gene expression information for personalized prediction of disease outcomes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2004; 101:8431-8436. An approach to integrate clinical and gene-expression information is described.
20. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2672-2685.
21. Paik S. Incorporating genomics into the cancer clinical trial process. Semin Oncol 2001; 28:305-309.
22. Chang JC, Wooten EC, Tsimelzon A, et al. Gene expression profiling for the prediction of therapeutic response to docetaxel in patients with breast cancer. Lancet 2003; 362:362-369.
23. Chang JC, Wooten EC, Tsimelzon A, et al. Patterns of resistance and incomplete response to docetaxel by gene expression profiling in breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:1169-1177. Residual tumor cells after neoadjuvant chemotherapy expressed same genes, irrespective of initial response, suggesting that they might be involved in resistance to chemotherapy.
24. Ayers M, Symmans WF, Stec J, et al. Gene expression profiles predict complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22:2284-2293. The first study to use microarray in an attempt to develop a predictive model for pCR to neoadjuvant paclitaxel-based therapy.
25. Iwao-Koizumi K, Matoba R, Ueno N, et al. Prediction of docetaxel response in human breast cancer by gene expression profiling. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:422-431. QRT-PCR of 2453 genes was performed to develop a predictor of response to neoadjuvant docetaxel.
26. Peterson B, George SL. Sample size requirements and length of study for testing interaction in a 2 x k factorial design when time-to-failure is the outcome [corrected]. Control Clin Trials 1993; 14:511-522.
27. Cronin M, Pho M, Dutta D, et al. Measurement of gene expression in archival paraffin-embedded tissues: development and performance of a 92-gene reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay. Am J Pathol 2004; 164:35-42. The first demonstration of the feasibility of high-throughput QRT-PCR assays using fragmented RNA extractable from formalin-fixed paraffin blocks.