Molecular classification of infiltrating breast cancer: Toward personalized therapy

Radiographics

Volumn 34, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 1178-1195

  Trop, Isabelle ^a   Leblanc, Sophie M ^a   David, Julie ^a   Lalonde, Lucie ^a   Tran Thanh, Danh ^b   Labelle, Maude ^a   El Khoury, Mona M ^a  

^a Breast Imaging Centre   (Canada)

^b CENTRE HOSPITALIER DE L UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CLASSIFICATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MIDDLE AGED; MOLECULAR DIAGNOSIS; PATHOLOGY; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE;

ADULT; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; FEMALE; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALIZED MEDICINE; MIDDLE AGED; MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES;

EID: 84907044377     PISSN: 02715333     EISSN: 15271323     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/rg.345130049     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. American Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts & figures 2011-2012. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society, 2011. American Cancer Society Web site. http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@epidemiologysurveilance/documents/document/acspc-030975. Accessed June 11, 2013.
2. National Cancer Institute. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER Web site. http://www.seer.cancer.gov/. Accessed June 11, 2013.
3. Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353(17): 1784-1792.
4. DeVita VT Jr, Rosenberg SA. Two hundred years of cancer research. N Engl J Med 2012;366(23): 2207-2214.
5. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A, eds. AJCC cancer staging manual. 7th ed. New York, NY: Springer, 2009; 347-376.
6. van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 2002;415(6871):530-536.
7. Feero WG, Guttmacher AE, Collins FS. Genomic medicine: an updated primer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362(21):2001-2011.
8. Sotiriou C, Pusztai L. Gene-expression signatures in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2009;360(8):790-800.
9. Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000; 406(6797):747-752.
10. Sørlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001;98(19):10869-10874.
11. Sotiriou C, Neo SY, McShane LM, et al. Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003;100(18):10393-10398.
12. Curtis C, Shah SP, Chin SF, et al. The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups. Nature 2012;486(7403): 346-352.
13. Prat A, Parker JS, Karginova O, et al. Phenotypic and molecular characterization of the claudin-low intrinsic subtype of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2010;12(5):R68. http://breast-cancer-research.com/content/12/5/R68. Published September 2, 2010. Accessed June 2013.
14. Perou CM. Molecular stratification of triple-negative breast cancers. Oncologist 2011;16(SUPPL 1): 61-70.
15. Dublin E, Hanby A, Patel NK, Liebman R, Barnes D. Immunohistochemical expression of uPA, uPAR, and PAI-1 in breast carcinoma: fibroblastic expression has strong associations with tumor pathology. Am J Pathol 2000;157(4):1219-1227.
16. Pusztai L, Mazouni C, Anderson K, Wu Y, Symmans WF. Molecular classification of breast cancer: limitations and potential. Oncologist 2006;11(8):868-877.
17. Prat A, Perou CM. Deconstructing the molecular portraits of breast cancer. Mol Oncol 2011;5(1): 5-23.
18. Sørlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003;100(14):8418-8423.
19. Martincich L, Deantoni V, Bertotto I, et al. Correlations between diffusion-weighted imaging and breast cancer biomarkers. Eur Radiol 2012;22(7): 1519-1528.
20. Vincent MD, Kuruvilla MS, Leighl NB, Kamel- Reid S. Biomarkers that currently affect clinical practice: EGFR, ALK, MET, KRAS. Curr Oncol 2012;19(SUPPL 1):S33-S44.
21. Chow A, Arteaga CL, Wang SE. When tumor suppressor TGFb meets the HER2 (ERBB2) oncogene. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 2011; 16(2): 81-88.
22. Bertos NR, Park M. Breast cancer: one term, many entities? J Clin Invest 2011;121(10):3789-3796.
23. Wang Y, Ikeda DM, Narasimhan B, et al. Estrogen receptor-negative invasive breast cancer: imaging features of tumors with and without human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 overexpression. Radiology 2008;246(2):367-375.
24. Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2- positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353(16): 1673-1684.
25. Onitilo AA, Engel JM, Greenlee RT, Mukesh BN. Breast cancer subtypes based on ER/PR and Her2 expression: comparison of clinicopathologic features and survival. Clin Med Res 2009;7(1-2):4-13.
26. Dunnwald LK, Rossing MA, Li CI. Hormone receptor status, tumor characteristics, and prognosis: a prospective cohort of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res 2007;9(1):R6. http://breast-cancer -research.com/content/9/1/R6. Published January 17, 2007. Accessed June 2013.
27. Alvarez RH, Valero V, Hortobagyi GN. Emerging targeted therapies for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28(20):3366-3379.
28. Foulkes WD, Smith IE, Reis-Filho JS. Triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2010;363(20): 1938-1948.
29. Dent R, Trudeau M, Pritchard KI, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer: clinical features and patterns of recurrence. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13(15 PART 1): 4429-4434.
30. Foulkes WD, Metcalfe K, Sun P, et al. Estrogen receptor status in BRCA1- and BRCA2-related breast cancer: the influence of age, grade, and histological type. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10(6):2029-2034.
31. Uematsu T, Kasami M, Yuen S. Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between MR imaging and pathologic findings. Radiology 2009;250 (3): 638-647.
32. Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, et al. Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA 2006;295(21):2492-2502.
33. Cadoo KA, McArdle O, O’Shea AM, Power CP, Hennessy BT. Management of unusual histological types of breast cancer. Oncologist 2012;17(9): 1135-1145.
34. Foulkes WD, Metcalfe K, Hanna W, et al. Disruption of the expected positive correlation between breast tumor size and lymph node status in BRCA1- related breast carcinoma. Cancer 2003;98(8): 1569-1577.
35. Cheang MC, Voduc D, Bajdik C, et al. Basal-like breast cancer defined by five biomarkers has superior prognostic value than triple-negative phenotype. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14(5):1368-1376.
36. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB, et al. MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet 2007;370 (9586):485-492.
37. Clark SE, Warwick J, Carpenter R, Bowen RL, Duffy SW, Jones JL. Molecular subtyping of DCIS: heterogeneity of breast cancer reflected in pre-invasive disease. Br J Cancer 2011;104(1):120-127.
38. Balleine RL, Webster LR, Davis S, et al. Molecular grading of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14(24):8244-8252.
39. Esserman LJ, Kumar AS, Herrera AF, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging captures the biology of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 2006;24(28): 4603-4610.
40. 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(6):702-707.
41. Livasy CA, Perou CM, Karaca G, et al. Identification of a basal-like subtype of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Hum Pathol 2007;38(2):197-204.
42. Bryan BB, Schnitt SJ, Collins LC. Ductal carcinoma in situ with basal-like phenotype: a possible precursor to invasive basal-like breast cancer. Mod Pathol 2006;19(5):617-621.
43. Ko ES, Lee BH, Kim HA, Noh WC, Kim MS, Lee SA. Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between imaging and pathological findings. Eur Radiol 2010;20(5):1111-1117.
44. Loo CE, Straver ME, Rodenhuis S, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging response monitoring of breast cancer during neoadjuvant chemotherapy: relevance of breast cancer subtype. J Clin Oncol 2011;29(6): 660-666.
45. Youk JH, Son EJ, Chung J, Kim JA, Kim EK. Triple-negative invasive breast cancer on dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging: comparison with other breast cancer subtypes. Eur Radiol 2012;22(8):1724-1734.
46. Dogan BE, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Gilcrease M, Dryden MJ, Yang WT. Multimodality imaging of triple receptor-negative tumors with mammography, ultrasound, and MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194(4):1160-1166.
47. Krizmanich-Conniff KM, Paramagul C, Patterson SK, et al. Triple receptor-negative breast cancer: imaging and clinical characteristics. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199(2):458-464.
48. Lazarus E, Mainiero MB, Schepps B, Koelliker SL, Livingston LS. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value. Radiology 2006;239(2):385-391.
49. Collett K, Stefansson IM, Eide J, et al. A basal epithelial phenotype is more frequent in interval breast cancers compared with screen detected tumors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14(5): 1108-1112.
50. Schrading S, Kuhl CK. Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. Radiology 2008;246(1):58-70.
51. Kim SJ, Morris EA, Liberman L, et al. Observer variability and applicability of BI-RADS terminology for breast MR imaging: invasive carcinomas as focal masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177(3): 551-557.
52. Hess KR, Anderson K, Symmans WF, et al. Pharmacogenomic predictor of sensitivity to preoperative chemotherapy with paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24(26):4236-4244.
53. Seo BK, Pisano ED, Kuzimak CM, et al. Correlation of HER-2/neu overexpression with mammography and age distribution in primary breast carcinomas. Acad Radiol 2006;13(10):1211-1218.
54. Kim SH, Cha ES, Kim HS, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast cancer: correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficient value with prognostic factors. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;30(3):615-620.
55. Jeh SK, Kim SH, Kim HS, et al. Correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficient value and dynamic magnetic resonance imaging findings with prognostic factors in invasive ductal carcinoma. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;33(1):102-109.
56. Fisher ER, Wang J, Bryant J, Fisher B, Mamounas E, Wolmark N. Pathobiology of preoperative chemotherapy: findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel (NSABP) protocol B-18. Cancer 2002;95(4):681-695.
57. Hayashi Y, Takei H, Nozu S, et al. Analysis of complete response by MRI following neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicts pathological tumor responses differently for molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Oncol Lett 2013;5(1):83-89.
58. von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU, et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol 2012;30(15):1796-1804.
59. De Los Santos JF, Cantor A, Amos KD, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of pathologic response in patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic treatment for operable breast cancer: Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium trial 017. Cancer 2013;119(10):1776-1783.
60. McGuire KP, Toro-Burguete J, Dang H, et al. MRI staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: does tumor biology affect accuracy? Ann Surg Oncol 2011;18(11):3149-3154.
61. Partridge SC, DeMartini WB, Kurland BF, Eby PR, White SW, Lehman CD. Quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging as an adjunct to conventional breast MRI for improved positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193(6): 1716-1722.
62. Nessim C, Trop I, Robidoux A, Boileau JF. Can MRI accurately identify which patients with operable breast cancer will have a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant therapy? [abstract 616]. Presented at the 48th annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Chicago, Ill, June 1-5, 2012.
63. Li SP, Makris A, Beresford MJ, et al. Use of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging to predict survival in patients with primary breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Radiology 2011;260(1):68-78.
64. Yeh E, Slanetz P, Kopans DB, et al. Prospective comparison of mammography, sonography, and MRI in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for palpable breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184(3):868-877.
65. Hamstra DA, Rehemtulla A, Ross BD. Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: a biomarker for treatment response in oncology. J Clin Oncol 2007;25 (26):4104-4109.
66. Li SP, Padhani AR. Tumor response assessments with diffusion and perfusion MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;35(4):745-763.
67. Woodhams R, Kakita S, Hata H, et al. Identification of residual breast carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: diffusion-weighted imaging—comparison with contrast-enhanced MR imaging and pathologic findings. Radiology 2010; 254(2): 357-366.
68. King V, Kaplan J, Pike MC, et al. Impact of tamoxifen on amount of fibroglandular tissue, background parenchymal enhancement, and cysts on breast magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2012;18(6): 527-534.
69. King V, Goldfarb SB, Brooks JD, et al. Effect of aromatase inhibitors on background parenchymal enhancement and amount of fibroglandular tissue at breast MR imaging. Radiology 2012;264 (3): 670-678.