Prognostic impact of genetic variants of CYP19A1 and UGT2B17 in a randomized trial for endocrine-responsive postmenopausal breast cancer.

Polymorphisms of genes involved in estrogen synthesis have been linked to breast cancer risk, prognosis, and treatment response. We investigated the prognostic impact of a deletion spanning the entire UGT2B17 gene (UGT2B17*2) and genetic variants of the aromatase CYP19A1 and estrogen receptor α (ESR1) in 125 postmenopausal women with ER-positive breast cancer enrolled in a randomized pre-surgical trial. The UGT2B17*2 was estimated by copy number variation assays and the CYP19A1 rs10046/rs4646 and ESR1 rs2077647/rs2234693/rs9340799 by TaqMan allelic discrimination assays. Serum exemestane/17-hydroxy exemestane were determined by MS and estrone (E1)/estradiol (E2)/ by GC-MS/MS. The association of genetic polymorphisms with "any event" was assessed by the Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for confounders. The UGT2B17*2 was associated with higher levels of 17-hydroxy exemestane (P = 0.04) and better prognosis (HR = 0.45; 95% CI: 0.20-1.01; P = 0.05) compared with homozygote UGT2B17 wt. The CYP19A1 rs10046 A and rs4646 C alleles were associated with higher estrogen levels: rs10046 AA vs. AG/GG genotypes had median E1 of 35.9 vs. 27.4 pg/mL (P = 0.05) and E2 of 7.57 vs. 3.9 pg/mL (P < 0.004). After a median follow-up of 7 years, women carrying the "low estrogen" alleles rs10046 G and rs4646 A had a better prognosis compared with homozygote wt for both polymorphisms (HR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.17-0.93; P = 0.03). Our analysis points to an impact of UGT2B17 and CYP19A1 in postmenopausal endocrine responsive breast cancer. Carriers of UGT2B17*2 and CYP19A1 low estrogen variants may have better prognosis, supporting studies addressing the role of these polymorphisms in optimizing endocrine therapy. Trial registration: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN86894592.

Twelve-Month Estrogen Levels in Premenopausal Women With Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Receiving Adjuvant Triptorelin Plus Exemestane or Tamoxifen in the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT): The SOFT-EST Substudy.

PURPOSE: To describe estradiol (E2), estrone (E1), and estrone sulfate (E1S) levels during the first year of monthly triptorelin plus exemestane or tamoxifen and to assess possible suboptimal suppression while receiving exemestane plus triptorelin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Premenopausal patients with early breast cancer on the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial who selected triptorelin as the ovarian suppression method and were randomly assigned to exemestane plus triptorelin or tamoxifen plus triptorelin were enrolled until the target population of 120 patients was reached. Blood sampling time points were 0, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, and 48 months. Serum estrogens were measured with a highly sensitive and specific assay. This preplanned 12-month analysis evaluated E2, E1, E1S, follicle-stimulating hormone, and luteinizing hormone levels in all patients and the proportion of patients with E2 levels greater than 2.72 pg/mL at any time point during treatment with exemestane plus triptorelin. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen patients (exemestane, n = 86; tamoxifen, n = 30; median age, 44 years; median E2, 51 pg/mL; 55% prior chemotherapy) started triptorelin and had one or more samples drawn. With exemestane plus triptorelin, median reductions from baseline E2, E1, and E1S levels were consistently ≥ 95%, resulting in significantly lower levels than with tamoxifen plus triptorelin at all time points. Among patients on exemestane plus triptorelin, 25%, 24%, and 17% had an E2 level greater than 2.72 pg/mL at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Baseline factors related to on-treatment E2 level greater than 2.72 pg/mL were no prior chemotherapy (P = .06), higher body mass index (P = .05), and lower follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone (each P < .01). CONCLUSION: During the first year, most patients on exemestane plus triptorelin had E2 levels below the defined threshold of 2.72 pg/mL, consistent with levels reported in postmenopausal patients on aromatase inhibitors, but at each time point, at least 17% of patients had levels greater than the threshold.

The importance of chromatographic resolution when analyzing steroid biomarkers.

The analyses of endogenous substances as biomarkers presents challenges that are distinctly different from the analyses of drugs or other xenobiotic substances. This is particularly true for estrogens. When no matrix is available which does not contain some level of the biomarker of interest, specificity cannot be demonstrated. Therefore it cannot be known whether the analyte signal includes a response from another substance. This uncertainty is increased by the fact that biomarkers are often created as part of a complex biosynthetic process that also creates a large number of substances with very similar structures and sometimes the same mass. Because of this, the two most powerful selectivity tools in the analysis of drugs, mass selective detection and MS/MS, are often rendered ineffective. The only remaining selectivity tool is chromatography and as will be demonstrated these separations can be very challenging. Failure to achieve specificity is perhaps the leading cause for inaccuracy of biomarker data and inter-laboratory variability.