Predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: Molecular imaging, systemic biomarkers and the cancer metabolome (review)

Oncology Reports

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 699-703

  Chuthapisith, Suebwong ^a,b   Eremin, Jennifer M ^c   Eremin, Oleg ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b MAHIDOL UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

^c LINCOLN COUNTY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Cancer metabolome; Molecular imaging; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Systemic biomarkers

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; BIOLOGICAL MARKER; CA 15-3 ANTIGEN; CARCINOEMBRYONIC ANTIGEN; CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; DOCETAXEL; DOXORUBICIN; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; GLYCOPROTEIN P; KI 67 ANTIGEN; METHOXY ISOBUTYL ISONITRILE TECHNETIUM TC 99M; PROTEIN BCL 2; PROTEIN P21; PROTEIN P53; TAXANE DERIVATIVE; TISSUE POLYPEPTIDE ANTIGEN; UVOMORULIN; VASCULOTROPIN;

ACCURACY; ADJUVANT THERAPY; ADVANCED CANCER; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SURGERY; CANCER GENETICS; CANCER SURVIVAL; COST CONTROL; DIFFUSE REFLECTANCE SPECTROSCOPY; DRUG COST; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MATRIX ASSISTED LASER DESORPTION IONIZATION TIME OF FLIGHT MASS SPECTROMETRY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; METABOLOMICS; MOLECULAR IMAGING; MORBIDITY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEOMICS; RELIABILITY; SCINTIMAMMOGRAPHY; SURFACE ENHANCED LASER DESORPTION IONIZATION TIME OF FLIGHT MASS SPECTROMETRY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR VOLUME;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CHEMOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; FEMALE; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 54949099986     PISSN: 1021335X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3892/or_00000062     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al: Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol 15: 2483-2493, 1997.
2. Kaufmann P, Dauphine CE, Vargas MP, et al: Success of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in conversion of mastectomy to breast conservation surgery. Am Surg 72: 935-938, 2006.
3. Jones RL and Smith IE: Neoadjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: opportunities to assess tumour response. Lancet Oncol 7: 869-874, 2006.
4. Chollet P, Amat S, Cure H, et al: Prognostic significance of a complete pathological response after induction chemotherapy in operable breast cancer. Br J Cancer 86: 1041-1046, 2002.
5. Smith IC, Heys SD, Hutcheon AW, et al: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: significantly enhanced response with docetaxel. J Clin Oncol 20: 1456-1466, 2002.
6. Vinnicombe SJ, MacVicar AD, Guy RL, et al: Primary breast cancer: mammographic changes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, wtih pathologic correlation. Radiology 198: 333-340, 1996.
7. Seymour MT, Moskovic EC, Walsh G, et al: Ultrasound assessment of residual abnormalities following primary chemotherapy for breast cancer. Br J Cancer 76: 371-376, 1997.
8. Peintinger F, Kuerer HM, Anderson K, et al: Accuracy of the combination of mammography and sonography in predicting tumor response in breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 13: 1443-1449, 2006.
9. Chagpar AB, Middleton LP, Sahin AA, et al: Accuracy of physical examination, ultrasonography, and mammography in predicting residual pathologic tumor size in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg 243: 257-264, 2006.
10. Van Goethem M, Tjalma W, Schelfout K, et al: Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 32: 901-910, 2006.
11. Belli P, Costantini M, Malaspina C, et al: MRI accuracy in residual disease evaluation in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Radiol 61: 946-953, 2006.
12. Gilles R, Guinebretiere JM, Toussaint C, et al: Locally advanced breast cancer: contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging of response to preoperative chemotherapy. Radiology 191: 633-638, 1994.
13. Warren RML, Bobrow LG, Earl HM, et al: Can breast MRI help in the management of women with breast cancer treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy? Br J Cancer 90: 1349-1360, 2004.
14. Martincich L, Montemurro F, De Rosa G, et al: Monitoring response to primary chemotherapy in breast cancer using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 83: 67-76, 2004.
15. Padhani AR, Hayes C, Assersohn L, et al: Prediction of clinicopathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy at contrast-enhanced MR imaging: initial clinical results. Radiology 239: 361-374, 2006.
16. Khalkhali I, Villanueva-Meyer J, Edell SL, et al: Diagnostic accuracy of 99mTc-Sestamibi breast imaging: multicentre trial results. J Nucl Med 41: 1973-1979, 2000.
17. Loe DW, Deeley RG and Cole SPC: Biology of the multidrug resistance-associated protein, MRP. Eur J Cancer 32A: 945-957, 1996.
18. Krishnalah G, Sher-Ahmed A, Ugwu-Dike M, et al: Technetium-99m Sestamibi scintimammography complements mammography in the detection of breast cancer. Breast 9: 288-294, 2003.
19. Marshall C, Eremin J, El Sheemy M, et al: Monitoring the response of large (>3 cm) and locally advanced (T3-4, N0-2) breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using (99m)Tc-Sestamibi uptake. Nucl Med Commun 26: 9-15, 2005.
20. Mubashar M, Harrington KJ, Chaudhary KS, et al: 99mTc-Sestamibi imaging in the assessment of Toremifene as a modulator of multidrug resistance in patients with breast cancer. J Nucl Med 43: 519-525, 2001.
21. Sciuto R, Pasqualoni R, Bergomi S, et al: Prognostic value of 99mTc-Sestamibi washout in predicting response of locally advanced breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Nucl Med 43: 745-751, 2001.
22. Travaini LL, Baio SM, Cremonesi M, et al: Neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced breast cancer: 99mTc-MIBI mammoscintigraphy is nota reliable technique to predict therapy response. Breast 16: 262-270, 2007.
23. Brown RS and Wahl RL: Overexpression of Glut-1 glucose transporter in human breast cancer. An immunohistochemical study. Cancer 72: 2979-2985, 1993.
24. Gopalan D, Bomanji JB, Costa DC and Ell PJ: Nuclear medicine in primary breast cancer imaging. Clin Radiol 57: 565-574, 2002.
25. Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, et al: Positron emission tomography using [18F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 18: 1676-1688, 2000.
26. Kim SJ, Kim SK, Lee ES, et al: Predictive value of [18F]FDG PET for pathological response of breast cancer to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 15: 1352-1357, 2004.
27. Schelling M, Avril N, Nahrig J, et al: Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 18: 1689-1695, 2000.
28. Tiling R, Linke R, Untch M, et al: 18F-FDG PET and 99mTc-sestamibi scintimammography for monitoring breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med 28: 711-720, 2001.
29. Burcombe RJ, Makris A, Pittam M, et al: Evaluation of good clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in primary breast cancer using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Eur J Cancer 38: 375-379, 2002.
30. Cerussi A, Hsiang D, Shah N, et al: Predicting response to breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy using diffuse optical spectroscopy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 4014-4019, 2007.
31. Martinez-Trufero J, De Lobera AR, Lao J, et al: Serum markers and prognosis in locally advanced breast cancer. Tumori 91: 522-530, 2005.
32. D'Alessandro R, Roselli M, Ferroni P, et al: Serum tissue polypeptide specific antigen (TPS): a complementary tumor marker to CA 15-3 in the management of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 68: 9-19, 2001.
33. Al Azawi D, Kelly G, Myers E, et al: CA 15-3 is predictive of response and disease recurrence following treatment in locally advanced breast cancer. BMC Cancer 6: 220, 2006.
34. Kurebayashi J, Yamamoto Y, Tanaka K, et al: Significance of serum carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 15-3 in monitoring advanced breast cancer patients treated with systemic therapy: a large-scale retrospective study. Breast Cancer 10: 38-44, 2003.
35. Sjostrom J: Predictive factors for response to chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. Acta Oncol 41: 334-345, 2002.
36. Chuthapisith S, Eremin JM, El Sheemy M and Eremin O: Neoadjuvant hemotherapy in women with large and locally advanced breast cancer: chemoresistance and prediction of response to drug therapy. Surgeon 4: 211-219, 2006.
37. Ross JS, Symmans WF, Pusztai L and Hortobagyi GN: Breast cancer biomarkers. Adv Clin Chem 40: 99-125, 2005.
38. 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 22: 2284-2293, 2004.
39. Sotiriou C, Powles TJ, Dowsett M, et al: Gene expression profiles derived from tine needle aspiration correlate with response to systemic chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 4: R3, 2002.
40. 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 362: 362-369, 2003.
41. Cleator S, Tsimelzon A, Ashworth A, et al: Gene expression patterns for doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (cytoxan) (AC) response and resistance. Breast Cancer Res Treat 95: 229-233, 2006.
42. Folgueira MA, Carraro DM, Brentani H, et al: Gene expression profile associated with response to doxorubicin-based therapy in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 11: 7434-7443, 2005.
43. Li J, Orlandi R, White CN, et al: Independent validation of candidate breast cancer serum biomarkers identified by mass spectrometry. Clin Chem 51: 2229-2235, 2005.
44. Petricoin EF, Ardekani AM, Hitt BA, et al: Use of proteomic patterns in serum to identify ovarian cancer. Lancet 359: 572-577, 2002.
45. Chuthapisith S, Layfield R, Kerr ID, et al: Proteomic profiling of MCF-7 breast cancer cells with chemoresistance to different types of anti-cancer drugs. Int J Oncol 30: 1545-1551, 2007.