Nuclear and cytoplasmic expressions of ERß1 and ERß2 are predictive of response to therapy and alters prognosis in familial breast cancers.

Estrogen receptor (ER) α has been studied extensively in familial breast cancers but there are limited data on ERß and its isoforms. This is an important issue since many BRCA1-associated tumours are "triple negative" and are resistant to conventional and targeted therapies. We performed an immunohistochemical study of pan-ERß, ERß1 and ERß2 in a cohort of 123 familial breast carcinomas (35 BRCA1, 33 BRCA2 and 55 BRCAX) using a cut-off for positivity at 20% (Shaaban et al. in Clin Cancer Res 14:5228-5235, 2008). BRCA1 cancers were more likely to be nuclear ERα negative and nuclear pan-ERß positive (21/32, 66%) when compared with BRCA2 (2/29, 7%) and BRCAX cancers (11/49, 22%) (both P < 0.001). For survival analysis, expression was also stratified using cut-offs defined by Bates et al. (Breast Cancer Res Treat 111:453-459, 2008) (score out of 7). Cytoplasmic ERß2 expression correlated with shorter overall survival at 15 years regardless of cut-off used (both P < 0.046) At a cut-off score of 6 out of 7, cytoplasmic ERß2 expression correlated with a poorer response to chemotherapy in both univariate (P = 0.011) and multivariate analyses including grade, lymph node status and chemotherapy as an interaction variable (P = 0.045, Hazard ratio 1.22, 95% CI 1.004-9.87). A similar trend was seen in a univariate analysis with a cut-off of 20% although this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.057). Expression of nuclear ERß1 was associated with a favourable response to endocrine therapy at 15 years regardless of cut-offs employed (both P < 0.025). However, this did not reach statistical significance in a multivariate analysis (P > 0.05). Since a significant proportion of ERα negative familial breast carcinomas are positive for nuclear ERß1 and cytoplasmic ERß2, the different ERß isoforms and their intracellular location may need to be assessed, to identify patients that may benefit from hormonal and chemotherapy.

Basal cell carcinoma of the vulva: a case series.

AIMS: To review the diagnostic features and characteristics of an uncommon tumour, basal cell carcinoma (BCC) of the vulva. METHODS: The clinical and pathological details of six vulvar BCCs were reviewed. Four of the BCCs arose in isolation, one was combined with vulvar Paget's disease and another was intimately associated with a poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma. RESULTS: The average age of the six patients was 76 years (75 years for 'isolated' BCC; 78 years for BCC 'mixed' with other lesions). The duration of symptoms averaged 13 months in 'isolated' BCC but 24 months in 'mixed' BCC. Vulvar pruritus was the most common presenting complaint in the four cases of 'isolated' BCC. The initial biopsies included shave (× 2) or punch biopsies (× 4). Definitive surgery included excisional biopsy (× 2) or a wide local excision (× 3). In the five assessable tumours, the maximum tumour diameter averaged 19.8 mm (range 11-36 mm). In the sixth patient the BCC was contiguous with a 70 mm, unresectable, poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma which was treated by radiotherapy alone. CONCLUSIONS: : Although the histological diagnosis of vulvar BCC was straightforward in some of our cases, others presented difficulties due to non-representative initial biopsies, insufficient clinical information or contiguity with lesions of greater clinical significance such as Paget's disease or squamous cell carcinoma.

The molecular characterisation of unusual subcutaneous spindle cell lesion of breast.

BACKGROUND: Spindle cell lesions of the breast represent an interesting diagnostic challenge as they comprise a wide range of tumours that are rare. Differentiating dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) from other dermatofibromas using CD34 immunohistochemistry alone is difficult; therefore, fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) analysis is often employed to identify typical COL1A1-PDGFB fusion or gene rearrangement. Although molecular confirmation of diagnosis is unnecessary in the majority of DFSP cases, the detection of chromosomal rearrangement is valuable in tumours that show unusual clinicopathological features as in this study the authors report a case of DFSP of breast that did not show any typical known molecular features. METHODS AND RESULTS: Morphological and immunohistochemical study was highly suggestive of the diagnosis of DFSP. To further investigate this case, DNA copy number alterations were investigated by the 250 K Affymetrix SNP Mapping array. DNA analysis did not show any of the known translocations reported in DFSP or any known solid tumour category. However, in addition to copy number changes on chromosome 1, amplification of chromosome 7p which contains the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene was observed. Results from EGFR FISH showed an increase in EGFR gene to chromosome 7 ratio (3:1) suggesting amplification of the EGFR gene. CONCLUSION: This case of an unusual DFSP demonstrates that genomic interrogation provides additional potential targets such as a therapeutic avenue with anti-EGFR therapies and shows the power of molecular characterisation of unusual tumours for a personalised medicine approach.