Genomic differences between pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast and that associated with invasive disease: A calibrated aCGH study

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 14, Issue 14, 2008, Pages 4446-4454

  Iakovlev, Vladimir V ^a   Arneson, Nona C R ^a   Wong, Vietty ^a   Wang, Chunjie ^a   Leung, Stephanie ^c,e   Lakovleva, Gaiane ^f   Warren, Keisha ^a   Pintilie, Melania ^b   Done, Susan J ^a,c,d,e  

^a Division of Medical Oncology   (Canada)

^b PRINCESS MARGARET HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology ^*  (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER GRADING; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER INVASION; CANCER RISK; CANCER SIZE; CHROMOSOME 17Q; COMPARATIVE GENOMIC HYBRIDIZATION; DNA EXTRACTION; GENE AMPLIFICATION; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; INVASIVE CARCINOMA; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MOLECULAR CLONING; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; SELF EXAMINATION; VASCULAR TUMOR; BREAST TUMOR; CHROMOSOME 17; DNA MICROARRAY; FEMALE; GENETICS; MIDDLE AGED; PAGET NIPPLE DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; REVERSE TRANSCRIPTION POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; CHROMOSOMES, HUMAN, PAIR 17; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; OLIGONUCLEOTIDE ARRAY SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION;

EID: 51649118175     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4960     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. O'Connell P. Genetic and cytogenetic analyses of breast cancer yield different perspectives of a complex disease. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2003;78:347-57
2. Loo LW, Grove Dl, Williams EM, et al. Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis of genomic alterations in breast cancer subtypes. Cancer Res 2004; 64:8541-9
3. Stange DE, Radlwimmer B, Schubert F, et al. Highresolution genomic profiling reveals association of chromosomal aberrations on 1q and 16p with histologic and genetic subgroups of invasive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2006;12:345-52
4. Jonsson G, Naylor TL, Vallon-Christersson J, et al. Distinct genomic profiles in hereditary breast tumors identified by array-based comparative genomic hybridization. Cancer Res 2005;65:7612-21.
5. Aubele M, Mattis A, Zitzelsberger H, et al. Extensive ductal carcinoma in situ with small foci of invasive ductal carcinoma: evidence of genetic resemblance by CGH. Int J Cancer 2000;85:82-6.
6. Hwang ES, DeVries S, Chew KL, et al. Patterns of chromosomal alterations in breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:5160-7.
7. Baxter NN. Virnig BA, Durham SB, Tuttte TM. Trends in the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:443-8.
8. Ghazani AA, Arneson NC, Warren K, Done SJ. Limited tissue fixation times and whole genomic amplification do not impact array CGH profiles. J Clin Pathol 2006; 59:311-5.
9. Olshen AB, Venkatraman ES, Lucito R. Wigler M. Circular binary segmentation for the analysis of array-based DNA copy number data. Biostatistics 2004;5:557-72.
10. Stoecklein NH, Erbersdobler A, Schmidt-Kittler O, et al. SCOMP is superior to degenerated oligonucleotide primed-polymerase chain reaction for global amplification of minute amounts of DNA from microdissected archival tissue samples. Am J Pathol 2002;161:43-51.
11. OWillenbrock H, Fridlyand J. A comparison study: applying segmentation to array CGH data for downstream analyses. Bioinformatics 2005;21:4084-91.
12. Chen W, Houldsworth J, Olshen AB, et al. Array comparative genomic hybridization reveals genomic copy number changes associated with outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphomas. Blood 2006;107:2477-85
13. Yao J, Weremowicz S, Feng B, et al. Combined cDNA array comparative genomic hybridization and serial analysis of gene expression analysis of breast tumor progression. Cancer Res 2006;66:4065-78.
14. Aguirre AJ, Brennan C, Bailey G, et al. High-resolution characterization of the pancreatic adenocarcinoma genome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004;101:9067-72
15. Radford DM, Phillips NJ, Fair KL, Ritter JH, Holt M, Donis-Keller H. Allelic loss and the progression of breast cancer. Cancer Res 1995;55:5180-3.
16. Fujii H, Marsh C, Cairns P. Sidransky D, Gabrielson E. Genetic divergence in the clonal evolution of breast cancer. Cancer Res 1996;56:1493-7.
17. Chin K, de Solorzano CO, Knowles D, et al. In situ analyses of genome instability in breast cancer. Nat Genet 2004; 36:984-8.
18. Gatenby RA, Vincent TL. An evolutionary model of carcinogenesis. Cancer Res 2003;63:6212-20.
19. Waldman FM, DeVries S, Chew KL, Moore DH II, Kerlikowske K, Ljung BM. Chromosomal alterations in ductal carcinomas in situ and their in situ recurrences J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:313-20.
20. Latta EK, Tjan S, Parkes RK, O'Malley FP. The role of HER2/neu overexpression/amplification in the progression of ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive carcinoma of the breast. Mod Pathol 2002;15:1318-25.
21. Park K, Han S, Kim HJ, Kim J, Shin E. HER2 status in pure ductal carcinoma in situ and in the intraductal and invasive components of invasive ductal carcinoma determined by fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. Histopathology 2006;48:702-7
22. Kasahara K, Taguchi T, Yamasaki I, Kamada M. Yuri K, Shuin T. Detection of genetic alterations in advanced prostate cancer by comparative genomic hybridization. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 2002;137:59-63.
23. Loukopoulos P. Shibata T, Katoh H, et al. Genome-wide array-based comparative genomic hybridization analysis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: identification of genetic indicators that predict patient outcome. Cancer Sci 2007;98: 392-400.
24. Koo SH, Kwon KC, Ihm CH, Jeon YM, Park JW, Sul CK. Detection of genetic alterations in bladder tumors by comparative genomic hybridization and cytogenetic analysis. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 1999;11087-93.
25. Wong N. Lai P, Lee SW, et al. Assessment of genetic changes in hepatocellular carcinoma by comparative genomic hybridization analysis: relationship to disease stage, tumor size, and cirrhosis. Am J Pathol 1999;154: 37-43.
26. Ehrbrecht A, Muller U, Wolter M, et al. Comprehensive genomic analysis of desmoplastic meduloblastomas: identification of novel amplified genes and separate evaluation of the different histological components. J Pathol 2006; 208:554-63.
27. Weber-Hall S, Anderson J, McManus A, et al. Gains, losses, and amplification of genomic material in rhabdomyosarcoma analyzed by comparative genomic hybridization. Cancer Res 1996;56:3220-4.
28. Mosse YP, Greshock J, Margolin A, et al. High-resolution detection and mapping of genomic DNA alterations in neuroblastoma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2005;43:390-403.
29. Hirasawa A, Saito-Ohara F, Inoue J, et al. Association of 17q21-24 gain in ovarian clear cell adenocarcinomas with poor prognosis and identification of PPM1D and APPBP2 as likely amplification targets. Clin Cancer Res 2003;9:1995-2004.
30. Weber RG, Bostrom J, Wolter M, et al. Analysis of genomic alterations in benign, atypical, and anaplastic meningiomas: toward a genetic model of meningioma progression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997;94: 14719-24.
31. Nishio J, Iwasaki H, Ohjimi Y, et al. Overrepresentation of 17q22-qter and 22q13 in dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans but not in dermatofibroma: a comparative genomic hybridization study. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 2002;132:102-8.
32. Rennstam K, Ahlstedt-Soini M, Baldetorp B, et al. Patterns of chromosomal imbalances defines subgroups of breast cancer with distinct clinical features and prognosis. A study of 305 tumors by comparative genomic hybridization. Cancer Res 2003;63:8861-8
33. Kallioniemi A, Kallioniemi OP, Piper J, et al. Detection and mapping of amplified DNA sequences in breast cancer by comparative genomic hybridization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1994;91:2156-60
34. Isola J J, Kallioniemi OP, Chu LW, et al. Genetic aberrations detected by comparative genomic hybridization predict outcome in node-negative breast cancer Am J Pathol 1995;147:905-11.
35. Ried T, Just KE, Holtgreve-Grez H. et al. Comparative genomic hybridization of formalin-fixed, paraffinembedded breast tumors reveals different patterns of chromosomal gains and losses in fibroadenomas and diploid and aneuploid carcinomas. Cancer Res 1995; 55:5415-23.
36. OAndersen CL, Monni O, Wagner U, et al. Highthroughput copy number analysis of 17q23 in 3520 tissue specimens by fluorescence in situ hybridization to tissue microarrays. Am J Pathol 2002;161:73-9
37. Chu LW, Pettaway CA, Liang JC Genetic abnormalities specifically associated with varying metastatic potential of prostate cancer cell lines as detected by comparative genomic hybridization. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 2001;127:161-7.
38. Naylor TL, Greshock J, Wang Y et al High resolution genomic analysis of sporadic breast cancer using array-based comparative genomic hybridization Breast Cancer Res 2005;7:R1186-98
39. Jonsson G, Staaf J, Olsson E, et al. High-resolution genomic profiles of breast cancer cell lines assessed by tiling BAC array comparative genomic hybridization Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2007;46:543-58
40. Hyman E, Kauraniemi P, Hautaniemi S, et al. Impact of DNA amplification on gene expression patterns in breast cancer. Cancer Res 2002;62:6240-5.
41. Barlund M, Monni O, Kononen J, et al. Multiple genes at 17q23 undergo amplification and overexpression in breast cancer. Cancer Res 2000;60:5340-4
42. Parssinen J, Kuukasjarvi T, Karhu R, Kallioniemi A High-level amplification at 17q23 leads to coordinated overexpression of multiple adjacent genes in breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2007;96:1258-64
43. Courjal F. Theillet C. Comparative genomic hybridyzation analysis of breast tumors with predetermined profiles of DNA amplification. Cancer Res 1997;57:4368-77
44. Latham C, Zhang A, Nalbanti A, et al. Frequent coamplification of two different regions on 17q in aneuploid breast carcinomas. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 2001;127:16-23.
45. Kauraniemi P, Barlund M, Monni O, Kallioniemi A New amplified and highly expressed genes discovered in the ERBB2 amplicon in breast cancer by c DNA microarrays. Cancer Res 2001;61:8235-40
46. Luoh SW. Venkatesan N. Tripathi R Overexpression of the amplified Pip4k2β gene from 17q11-12 in breast cancer cells confers proliferation advantage Oncogene 2004;23:1354-63
47. Rashid-Kolvear F. Pintilie M, Done SJ. Telomere length on chromosome 17q shortens more than global telomere length in the development of breast cancer Neoplasia 2007;9:265-70.
48. Viale G. Histopathology of primary breast cancer 2005. Breast 2005;14:487-92.