MacKay A.,Institute of Cancer Research |
Weigelt B.,Cancer Research UK Research Institute |
Grigoriadis A.,Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Unit |
Kreike B.,Institute for Radiation Oncology Arnhem |
And 6 more authors.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute | Year: 2011
BackgroundBreast cancers can be classified by hierarchical clustering using an "intrinsic" gene list into one of at least five molecular subtypes: basal-like, HER2, luminal A, luminal B, and normal breast-like. Five different intrinsic gene lists composed of varying numbers of genes have been used for molecular subtype identification and classification of breast cancers. The aim of this study was to determine the objectivity and interobserver reproducibility of the assignment of molecular subtype classes by hierarchical cluster analysis.MethodsThree publicly available breast cancer datasets (n = 779) were subjected to two-way average-linkage hierarchical cluster analysis using five distinct intrinsic gene lists. We used free-marginal Kappa statistics to analyze interobserver agreement among five breast cancer researchers for the whole classification and for each molecular subtype separately according to each intrinsic gene list for each breast cancer dataset.ResultsNone of the classification systems tested produced almost perfect agreement (Kappa ≥ 0.81) among observers. However, substantial interobserver agreement (70.8% to 76.1% of the samples and free-marginal Kappa scores from 0.635 to 0.701) was consistently observed in all datasets for four molecular subtypes (luminal, basal-like, HER2, and normal breast-like). When luminal cancers were subdivided (luminal A, B, and C), none of the classification systems produced substantial agreement (Kappa ≥ 0.61) in all the datasets analyzed. Analysis of each subtype separately revealed that only two (basal-like and HER2) could be reproducibly identified by independent observers (Kappa ≥ 0.81).ConclusionsAssignment of molecular subtype classes of breast cancer based on the analysis of dendrograms obtained with hierarchical cluster analysis is subjective and shows modest interobserver reproducibility. For the development of a molecular taxonomy, objective definitions for each molecular subtype and standardized methods for their identification are required. The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press.2011This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2011 The Author. Source
Zhang H.,Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute |
Zhang H.,Huaibei Normal University |
Meng F.,Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute |
Wu S.,Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
And 5 more authors.
Cancer Research | Year: 2011
In this study, we have showed that GCNT2, a gene-encoding glucosaminyl (N-acetyl) transferase 2, I-branching enzyme, is overexpressed in highly metastatic breast cancer cell lines of human and mouse origin and basal-like breast tumor samples. GCNT2 expression is also significantly correlated to the metastatic phenotype in breast tumor samples. Functional studies showed that ectopic expression of GCNT2 enhances cell detachment, adhesion to endothelial cells, cell migration and invasion in vitro, and lung metastasis of breast cancer cells in vivo. Knockdown of GCNT2 expression decreases cell migration and invasion in vitro and lung metastasis in vivo. We have further shown the involvement of GCNT2 in the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Specifically, the expression of E-cadherin is significantly changed upon GCNT2 expression at the protein level but not at the RNA level. Moreover, we have shown that GCNT2 is a direct target of the TGF-β-smad pathway and that change in GCNT2 expression modulates EMT induced by TGF-β1 treatment. Finally, we have shown that diminution of the glycosyltransferase activity of I-branching β-1, 6-N-acetylglucosaminyl transferase 2 (GCNT2) abrogates its cell migration and invasion-promoting function and synergistic effect with TGF-β to induce EMT. Our study for the first time showed that GCNT2 is a novel gene contributing to breast cancer metastasis with preferential expression in basal-like breast cancer. Moreover, we discovered that involvement of GCNT2 in EMT and TGF-β signaling, and further glycosylation modification of E-cadherin by GCNT2, are the underlying integrative mechanisms for breast cancer metastasis, implying that blocking TGF-β/GCNT2 signaling is a promising approach for targeting metastatic breast cancer. ©2011 AACR. Source
Chow E.,University of Toronto |
van der Linden Y.M.,Leiden University |
van der Linden Y.M.,Radiotherapy Institute Friesland |
Roos D.,University of Adelaide |
And 14 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2014
Background: Although repeat radiation treatment has been shown to palliate pain in patients with bone metastases from multiple primary origin sites, data for the best possible dose fractionation schedules are lacking. We aimed to assess two dose fractionation schedules in patients with painful bone metastases needing repeat radiation therapy. Methods: We did a multicentre, non-blinded, randomised, controlled trial in nine countries worldwide. We enrolled patients 18 years or older who had radiologically confirmed, painful (ie, pain measured as ≥2 points using the Brief Pain Inventory) bone metastases, had received previous radiation therapy, and were taking a stable dose and schedule of pain-relieving drugs (if prescribed). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either 8 Gy in a single fraction or 20 Gy in multiple fractions by a central computer-generated allocation sequence using dynamic minimisation to conceal assignment, stratified by previous radiation fraction schedule, response to initial radiation, and treatment centre. Patients, caregivers, and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall pain response at 2 months, which was defined as the sum of complete and partial pain responses to treatment, assessed using both Brief Pain Inventory scores and changes in analgesic consumption. Analysis was done by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00080912. Findings: Between Jan 7, 2004, and May 24, 2012, we randomly assigned 425 patients to each treatment group. 19 (4%) patients in the 8 Gy group and 12 (3%) in the 20 Gy group were found to be ineligible after randomisation, and 140 (33%) and 132 (31%) patients, respectively, were not assessable at 2 months and were counted as missing data in the intention-to-treat analysis. In the intention-to-treat population, 118 (28%) patients allocated to 8 Gy treatment and 135 (32%) allocated to 20 Gy treatment had an overall pain response to treatment (p=0·21; response difference of 4·00% [upper limit of the 95% CI 9·2, less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10%]). In the per-protocol population, 116 (45%) of 258 patients and 134 (51%) of 263 patients, respectively, had an overall pain response to treatment (p=0·17; response difference 6·00% [upper limit of the 95% CI 13·2, greater than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10%]). The most frequently reported acute radiation-related toxicities at 14 days were lack of appetite (201 [56%] of 358 assessable patients who received 8 Gy vs 229 [66%] of 349 assessable patients who received 20 Gy; p=0·011) and diarrhoea (81 [23%] of 357 vs 108 [31%] of 349; p=0·018). Pathological fractures occurred in 30 (7%) of 425 patients assigned to 8 Gy and 20 (5%) of 425 assigned to 20 Gy (odds ratio [OR] 1·54, 95% CI 0·85-2·75; p=0·15), and spinal cord or cauda equina compressions were reported in seven (2%) of 425 versus two (<1%) of 425, respectively (OR 3·54, 95% CI 0·73-17·15; p=0·094). Interpretation: In patients with painful bone metastases requiring repeat radiation therapy, treatment with 8 Gy in a single fraction seems to be non-inferior and less toxic than 20 Gy in multiple fractions; however, as findings were not robust in a per-protocol analysis, trade-offs between efficacy and toxicity might exist. Funding: Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, US National Cancer Institute, Cancer Council Australia, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Dutch Cancer Society, and Assistance Publique-HÔpitaux de Paris. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. Source
Lopez-Garcia M.A.,Institute of Cancer Research |
Lopez-Garcia M.A.,University of Seville |
Geyer F.C.,Institute of Cancer Research |
Natrajan R.,Institute of Cancer Research |
And 5 more authors.
Journal of Pathology | Year: 2010
Tubular carcinoma (TC) is an uncommon special type of breast cancer characterized by an indolent clinical course. Although described as part of a spectrum of related lesions named 'low-grade breast neoplasia family' due to immunophenotypical and genetic similarities, TCs, low-grade invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type (IDC-NSTs), and classic invasive lobular carcinomas (ILCs) significantly differ in terms of histological features and clinical outcome. The aim of this study was to investigate whether pure TCs constitute an entity distinct from low-grade IDC-NSTs and from classic ILCs. To define the transcriptomic differences between TCs and IDC-NSTs and ILCs whilst minimizing the impact of histological grade and molecular subtype on their profiles, we subjected a series of grade- and molecular subtype-matched TCs and IDC-NSTs and molecular subtype-matched TCs and classic ILCs to genome-wide gene expression profiling using oligonucleotide microarrays. Unsupervised and supervised analysis revealed that TCs are similar at the transcriptomic level to grade- and molecular subtype-matched IDC-NSTs. However, subtle yet significant differences were detected and validated by quantitative reverse transcriptase-PCR, which may in part explain the reported more favourable outcome of TCs. Transcriptomic differences between TCs and molecular subtype-matched classic ILCs were more overt, predominantly due to lower expression of proliferation and cell cycle genes in TCs and down-regulation of cell adhesion/extracellular matrix-related genes in classic ILCs. Our results support the existence of a 'low-grade breast neoplasia family'; however, the transcriptomes of these lesions display small, yet important differences, which, together with their distinct biological behaviour, warrant their separation as discrete entities. Copyright © 2010 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Source
Senkus E.,Medical University of Gdansk |
Gomez H.,Instituto Nacional Of Enfermedades Neoplasicas |
Dirix L.,AZ Sint Augustinus |
Jerusalem G.,CHU Sart Tilman |
And 7 more authors.
Psycho-Oncology | Year: 2014
Objective Infertility due to anticancer treatments is a major source of distress for young patients with cancer. A survey was performed among breast cancer patients younger than 35 years, to evaluate the acceptance of chemotherapy in the context of infertility risk. Methods After obtaining written informed consent, we asked 400 premenopausal, early stage breast cancer patients aged ≤35 years to complete a short, previously pilot-tested questionnaire. Three hundred and eighty-nine patients were evaluable. The association between the explanatory variables and the outcome variables was assessed using logistic regression. Results Two hundred and twenty-eight (59%) participants wanted to have (more) children in the future, whereas 158 (41%) did not. Fifty-seven (36%) of the latter did not want additional children because of fear of cancer recurrence. Thirty-two women (8%) stated they would not accept chemotherapy should it reduce their fertility. This was dependent upon already having children, the wish to have (further) children, geographical area, disease stage, and already planned chemotherapy. One hundred and seventy-one women who would agree to chemotherapy (48%) would accept a risk of infertility of 76-100%. This acceptance was dependent on already having children and the wish to have (more) children. Of the 355 participants (91%) accepting chemotherapy, 48 would accept it only for ≥20% gain in cure. Conclusion For the majority of young patients with breast cancer, cure remains their first priority; for this, they are willing to accept a considerable decrease in future fertility, and only less than 10% will forego chances of cure to preserve fertility. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Source