Microenvironmental Heterogeneity Parallels Breast Cancer Progression: A Histology–Genomic Integration Analysis

PLoS Medicine

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2016, Pages

  Natrajan, Rachael ^a   Sailem, Heba ^a   Mardakheh, Faraz K ^a   Arias Garcia, Mar ^a   Tape, Christopher J ^a   Dowsett, Mitch ^a,b   Bakal, Chris ^a   Yuan, Yinyin ^a,b  

^a INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL MARSDEN HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER GRADING; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CELLS BY BODY ANATOMY; DISEASE SPECIFIC SURVIVAL; FEMALE; GENE DOSAGE; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE MUTATION; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCORING SYSTEM; TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT; TUMOR VOLUME; ADULT; AGED; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL TRIAL; DISEASE COURSE; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENETICS; GENOMICS; METABOLISM; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROGNOSIS; VERY ELDERLY; YOUNG ADULT;

DNA; TUMOR MARKER;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOMARKERS, TUMOR; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DISEASE PROGRESSION; DNA, NEOPLASM; FEMALE; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENOMICS; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84959512487     PISSN: 15491277     EISSN: 15491676     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001961     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Kenny PA, Bissell MJ, Tumor reversion: correction of malignant behavior by microenvironmental cues. Int J Cancer. 2003;107:688–695. doi: 10.1002/ijc.1149114566816
2. Anderson AR, Weaver AM, Cummings PT, Quaranta V, Tumor morphology and phenotypic evolution driven by selective pressure from the microenvironment. Cell. 2006;127:905–915. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.09.04217129778
3. Polyak K, Haviv I, Campbell IG, Co-evolution of tumor cells and their microenvironment. Trends Genet. 2009;25:30–38. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2008.10.01219054589
4. Calon A, Lonardo E, Berenguer-Llergo A, Espinet E, Hernando-Momblona X, Iglesias M, et al. Stromal gene expression defines poor-prognosis subtypes in colorectal cancer. Nat Genet. 2015;47:320–329. doi: 10.1038/ng.322525706628
5. Finak G, Bertos N, Pepin F, Sadekova S, Souleimanova M, Zhao H, et al. Stromal gene expression predicts clinical outcome in breast cancer. Nat Med. 2008;14:518–527. doi: 10.1038/nm176418438415
6. Isella C, Terrasi A, Bellomo SE, Petti C, Galatola G, Muratore A, et al. Stromal contribution to the colorectal cancer transcriptome. Nat Genet. 201547:312–319. doi: 10.1038/ng.3224
7. Beck AH, Sangoi AR, Leung S, Marinelli RJ, Nielsen TO, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Systematic analysis of breast cancer morphology uncovers stromal features associated with survival. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3:108ra13. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3002564
8. Loi S, Michiels S, Salgado R, Sirtaine N, Jose V, Fumagalli D, et al. Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes are prognostic in triple negative breast cancer and predictive for trastuzumab benefit in early breast cancer: results from the FinHER trial. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:1544–1550. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu11224608200
9. Issa-Nummer Y, Darb-Esfahani S, Loibl S, Kunz G, Nekljudova V, Schrader I, et al. Prospective validation of immunological infiltrate for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-negative breast cancer—a substudy of the neoadjuvant GeparQuinto trial. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e79775. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.007977524312450
10. Denkert C, Diagnostic and therapeutic implications of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:836–837. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.47.169823341523
11. Downey CL, Simpkins SA, White J, Holliday DL, Jones JL, Jordan LB, et al. The prognostic significance of tumour-stroma ratio in oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2014;110:1744–1747. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.6924548861
12. Dekker TJ, van de Velde CJ, van Pelt GW, Kroep JR, Julien JP, Smit VT, et al. Prognostic significance of the tumor-stroma ratio: validation study in node-negative premenopausal breast cancer patients from the EORTC perioperative chemotherapy (POP) trial (10854). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;139:371–379. doi: 10.1007/s10549-013-2571-523709090
13. Jiao Y, Torquato S, Emergent behaviors from a cellular automaton model for invasive tumor growth in heterogeneous microenvironments. PLoS Comput Biol. 2011;7:e1002314. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.100231422215996
14. Chen J, Sprouffske K, Huang Q, Maley CC, Solving the puzzle of metastasis: the evolution of cell migration in neoplasms. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e17933. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.001793321556134
15. Curtis C, Shah SP, Chin SF, Turashvili G, Rueda OM, Dunning MJ, et al. The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups. Nature. 2012;486:346–352. doi: 10.1038/nature1098322522925
16. Yuan Y, Failmezger H, Rueda OM, Ali HR, Graf S, Chin SF, et al. Quantitative image analysis of cellular heterogeneity in breast tumors complements genomic profiling. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4:157ra43. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3004330
17. McPherson GR, DeStephano S, Applied Ecology and natural resource management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003.
18. Fraley C, Raftery AE, Model-based clustering, discriminant analysis, and density estimation. J Am Stat Assoc. 2002;97:611–631. doi: 10.1198/016214502760047131
19. Strimmer K, A unified approach to false discovery rate estimation. BMC Bioinformatics. 2008;9:303. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-9-30318613966
20. Shannon CE, The mathematical theory of communication. 1963. MD Comput. 1997;14:306–317. 9230594
21. McLachlan G, Peel D, Finite mixture models. New York: Wiley; 2000.
22. Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Loi S, Harris A, Fox S, Smeds J, et al. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:262–272. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj05216478745
23. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, Leung S, Voduc D, Vickery T, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1160–1167. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.137019204204
24. Burns MB, Lackey L, Carpenter MA, Rathore A, Land AM, Leonard B, et al. APOBEC3B is an enzymatic source of mutation in breast cancer. Nature. 2013;494:366–370. doi: 10.1038/nature1188123389445
25. Negrini S, Gorgoulis VG, Halazonetis TD, Genomic instability—an evolving hallmark of cancer. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2010;11:220–228. doi: 10.1038/nrm285820177397
26. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA, Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011;144:646–674. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.01321376230
27. Alexandrov LB, Stratton MR, Mutational signatures: the patterns of somatic mutations hidden in cancer genomes. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2014;24:52–60. doi: 10.1016/j.gde.2013.11.01424657537
28. Hanel W, Moll UM, Links between mutant p53 and genomic instability. J Cell Biochem. 2012;113:433–439. doi: 10.1002/jcb.2340022006292
29. Maley CC, Galipeau PC, Finley JC, Wongsurawat VJ, Li X, Sanchez CA, et al. Genetic clonal diversity predicts progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma. Nat Genet. 2006;38:468–473. doi: 10.1038/ng176816565718
30. Pienta KJ, McGregor N, Axelrod R, Axelrod DE, Ecological therapy for cancer: defining tumors using an ecosystem paradigm suggests new opportunities for novel cancer treatments. Transl Oncol. 2008;1:158–164. 19043526
31. Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Lee AH, Elston CW, Grainge MJ, Hodi Z, et al. Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3153–3158. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.598618490649
32. Elston CW, Ellis IO, Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 1991;19:403–410. 1757079
33. Park JH, McMillan DC, Powell AG, Richards CH, Horgan PG, Edwards J, et al. Evaluation of a tumor microenvironment-based prognostic score in primary operable colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:882–888. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-168625473000
34. Galon J, Pages F, Marincola FM, Thurin M, Trinchieri G, Fox BA, et al. The immune score as a new possible approach for the classification of cancer. J Transl Med. 2012;10:1. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-10-122214470
35. Yates LR, Gerstung M, Knappskog S, Desmedt C, Gundem G, Van Loo P, et al. Subclonal diversification of primary breast cancer revealed by multiregion sequencing. Nat Med. 2015;21:751–759. doi: 10.1038/nm.388626099045
36. Marusyk A, Tabassum DP, Altrock PM, Almendro V, Michor F, Polyak K, Non-cell-autonomous driving of tumour growth supports sub-clonal heterogeneity. Nature. 2014;514:54–58. doi: 10.1038/nature1355625079331
37. Mazzone M, Dettori D, Leite de Oliveira R, Loges S, Schmidt T, Jonckx B, et al. Heterozygous deficiency of PHD2 restores tumor oxygenation and inhibits metastasis via endothelial normalization. Cell. 2009;136:839–851. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2009.01.02019217150
38. Gardner RH, Milne BT, Turnei MG, O’Neill RV, Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern. Landsc Ecol. 1987;1:19–28.
39. Turner M, O’Neill R, Gardner R, Milne B, Effects of changing spatial scale on the analysis of landscape pattern. Landsc Ecol. 1989;3:153–162. doi: 10.1007/BF00131534