Assessment of structural chromosomal instability phenotypes as biomarkers of carboplatin response in triple negative breast cancer: the TNT trial.

BACKGROUND: In the TNT trial of triple negative breast cancer (NCT00532727), germline BRCA1/2 mutations were present in 28% of carboplatin responders. We assessed quantitative measures of structural chromosomal instability (CIN) to identify a wider patient subgroup within TNT with preferential benefit from carboplatin over docetaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Copy number aberrations (CNAs) were established from 135 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded primary carcinomas using Illumina OmniExpress SNP-arrays. Seven published [allelic imbalanced CNA (AiCNA); allelic balanced CNA (AbCNA); copy number neutral loss of heterozygosity (CnLOH); number of telomeric allelic imbalances (NtAI); BRCA1-like status; percentage of genome altered (PGA); homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) scores] and two novel [Shannon diversity index (SI); high-level amplifications (HLAMP)] CIN-measurements were derived. HLAMP was defined based on the presence of at least one of the top 5% amplified cytobands located on 1q, 8q and 10p. Continuous CIN-measurements were divided into tertiles. All nine CIN-measurements were used to analyse objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Patients with tumours without HLAMP had a numerically higher ORR and significantly longer PFS in the carboplatin (C) than in the docetaxel (D) arm [56% (C) versus 29% (D), PHLAMP,quiet = 0.085; PFS 6.1 months (C) versus 4.1 months (D), Pinteraction/HLAMP = 0.047]. In the carboplatin arm, patients with tumours showing intermediate telomeric NtAI and AiCNA had higher ORR [54% (C) versus 20% (D), PNtAI,intermediate = 0.03; 62% (C) versus 33% (D), PAiCNA,intermediate = 0.076]. Patients with high AiCNA and PGA had shorter PFS in the carboplatin arm [3.4 months (high) versus 5.7 months (low/intermediate); and 3.8 months (high) versus 5.6 months (low/intermediate), respectively; Pinteraction/AiCNA = 0.027, Padj.interaction/AiCNA = 0.125 and Pinteraction/PGA = 0.053, Padj.interaction/PGA = 0.176], whilst no difference was observed in the docetaxel arm. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with tumours lacking HLAMP and demonstrating intermediate CIN-measurements formed a subgroup benefitting from carboplatin relative to docetaxel treatment within the TNT trial. This suggests a complex and paradoxical relationship between the extent of genomic instability in primary tumours and treatment response in the metastatic setting.

Evaluation of applying IHC4 as a prognostic model in the translational study of Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES): PathIES.

BACKGROUND: Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES) was a randomised study that showed a survival benefit of switching adjuvant endocrine therapy after 2-3 years from tamoxifen to exemestane. This PathIES aimed to assess the role of immunohistochemical (IHC)4 score in determining the relative sensitivity to either tamoxifen or sequential treatment with tamoxifen and exemestane. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Primary tumour samples were available for 1274 patients (27% of IES population). Only patients for whom the IHC4 score could be calculated (based on oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER2 and Ki67) were included in this analysis (N = 430 patients). The clinical score (C) was based on age, grade, tumour size and nodal status. The association of clinicopathological parameters, IHC4(+C) scores and treatment effect with time to distant recurrence-free survival (TTDR) was assessed in univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses. A modified clinical score (PathIEscore) (N = 350) was also estimated. RESULTS: Our results confirm the prognostic importance of the original IHC4, alone and in conjunction with clinical scores, but no significant difference with treatment effects was observed. The combined IHC4 + Clinical PathIES score was prognostic for TTDR (P < 0.001) with a hazard ratio (HR) of 5.54 (95% CI 1.29-23.70) for a change from 1st quartile (Q1) to Q1-Q3 and HR of 15.54 (95% CI 3.70-65.24) for a change from Q1 to Q4. CONCLUSION: In the PathIES population, the IHC4 score is useful in predicting long-term relapse in patients who remain disease-free after 2-3 years. This is a first trial to suggest the extending use of IHC4+C score for prognostic indication for patients who have switched endocrine therapies at 2-3 years and who remain disease-free after 2-3 years.

Chemotherapy benefit for 'ER-positive' breast cancer and contamination of nonluminal subtypes­waiting for TAILORx and RxPONDER.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective analyses of NSABP B20 and SWOG 8814 showed a large benefit of chemotherapy in patients with ER-positive tumors and high OncotypeDX Recurrence Score (RS≥31). However, it might be possible that both studies may be contaminated by non-luminal tumors, especially in high-risk RS group. METHODS: We conducted simulations in order to obtain a better understanding of how the NSABP B20 and SWOG 8814 results would have been if non-luminal breast cancer would have been excluded. Simulations were done separately for the node-negative and node-positive cohorts. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The results of the simulations suggest that the non-luminal tumors are augmenting the apparent benefit of chemotherapy, but do not appear to be responsible for the entire effect. These simulations could provide information about the potential influence of contamination by unexpected tumor subtypes on the future results of TAILORx and RxPONDER clinical trials.

Predicting response and survival in chemotherapy-treated triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we evaluated the ability of gene expression profiles to predict chemotherapy response and survival in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). METHODS: Gene expression and clinical-pathological data were evaluated in five independent cohorts, including three randomised clinical trials for a total of 1055 patients with TNBC, basal-like disease (BLBC) or both. Previously defined intrinsic molecular subtype and a proliferation signature were determined and tested. Each signature was tested using multivariable logistic regression models (for pCR (pathological complete response)) and Cox models (for survival). Within TNBC, interactions between each signature and the basal-like subtype (vs other subtypes) for predicting either pCR or survival were investigated. RESULTS: Within TNBC, all intrinsic subtypes were identified but BLBC predominated (55-81%). Significant associations between genomic signatures and response and survival after chemotherapy were only identified within BLBC and not within TNBC as a whole. In particular, high expression of a previously identified proliferation signature, or low expression of the luminal A signature, was found independently associated with pCR and improved survival following chemotherapy across different cohorts. Significant interaction tests were only obtained between each signature and the BLBC subtype for prediction of chemotherapy response or survival. CONCLUSIONS: The proliferation signature predicts response and improved survival after chemotherapy, but only within BLBC. This highlights the clinical implications of TNBC heterogeneity, and suggests that future clinical trials focused on this phenotypic subtype should consider stratifying patients as having BLBC or not.

Concordance among gene expression-based predictors for ER-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant tamoxifen.

BACKGROUND: ER-positive (ER+) breast cancer includes all of the intrinsic molecular subtypes, although the luminal A and B subtypes predominate. In this study, we evaluated the ability of six clinically relevant genomic signatures to predict relapse in patients with ER+ tumors treated with adjuvant tamoxifen only. METHODS: Four microarray datasets were combined and research-based versions of PAM50 intrinsic subtyping and risk of relapse (PAM50-ROR) score, 21-gene recurrence score (OncotypeDX), Mammaprint, Rotterdam 76 gene, index of sensitivity to endocrine therapy (SET) and an estrogen-induced gene set were evaluated. Distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) was estimated by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests, and multivariable analyses were done using Cox regression analysis. Harrell's C-index was also used to estimate performance. RESULTS: All signatures were prognostic in patients with ER+ node-negative tumors, whereas most were prognostic in ER+ node-positive disease. Among the signatures evaluated, PAM50-ROR, OncotypeDX, Mammaprint and SET were consistently found to be independent predictors of relapse. A combination of all signatures significantly increased the performance prediction. Importantly, low-risk tumors (>90% DRFS at 8.5 years) were identified by the majority of signatures only within node-negative disease, and these tumors were mostly luminal A (78%-100%). CONCLUSIONS: Most established genomic signatures were successful in outcome predictions in ER+ breast cancer and provided statistically independent information. From a clinical perspective, multiple signatures combined together most accurately predicted outcome, but a common finding was that each signature identified a subset of luminal A patients with node-negative disease who might be considered suitable candidates for adjuvant endocrine therapy alone.

Genomic predictors of response to doxorubicin versus docetaxel in primary breast cancer.

UNLABELLED: Taxanes and anthracyclines improve the outcome of early breast cancer, although the benefit is limited to a small proportion of patients and are toxic. We prospectively looked for predictors of response to these drugs. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Four cycles of doxorubicin (75 mg/m²) or docetaxel (100 mg/m²) were compared as presurgical chemotherapy for breast cancer. Biomarkers were determined by immunohistochemistry and fluorescent in situ hybridization using prechemotherapy core biopsies. Tumors were also classified into one of the molecular intrinsic subtypes using an immunohistochemical panel of five biomarkers and genomic profiles. Single genes and intrinsic subtypes were correlated with response to doxorubicin versus docetaxel. Among the 204 evaluable patients, significant predictors of sensitivity in multivariate analysis were low topo2a expression and ER-negative status for doxorubicin and small tumor size and ER-negative status for docetaxel. Predictors of resistance in multivariate analysis were triple-negative status (ER/PgR/HER2 negative by IHC/FISH) for doxorubicin, and high TNM stage for docetaxel. Triple-negative tumors were associated with topo2a overexpression more than the other subtypes. In 94 patients with gene expression profiles, docetaxel was superior to doxorubicin in the basal-like subtype (good pathological response rate - PCR + class I of 56 vs. 0%; P = 0.034); no significant differences were observed in the other subtypes when comparing these two drugs. Low topo2a expression and ER-negative status were predictors of response to doxorubicin, while small tumor size and ER-negative status predicted response to docetaxel. Docetaxel was superior to doxorubicin in triple-negative/basal-like tumors, while no significant differences were seen in the remaining intrinsic subtypes.