Expression of Cyclin D1 protein in residual tumor after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer (BC) shows a poor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). New treatment targets like the Cyclin D1-CDK4/CDK6 complex are promising adjuvant/post-neoadjuvant therapeutic strategies. Evaluating Cyclin D1 overexpression in residual tumor could recognize those patients that benefit most from such post-neoadjuvant treatment. In this study, we determined Cyclin D1 expression in residual BC after NACT. Secondary aims were to correlate Cyclin D1 expression levels with clinicopathological parameters and to assess its prognostic value after NACT. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed the nuclear expression of Cyclin D1 on tissue microarrays with residual tumor from 284 patients treated in the neoadjuvant GeparTrio (n = 186) and GeparQuattro (n = 98) trials. Evaluation was performed with a standardized immunoreactive score (IRS) after selecting a cut-off value. RESULTS: A high expression level (IRS ≥ 6) of Cyclin D1 was found in 37.3% of the assessed specimens. An increased Cyclin D1 expression was observed in HR-positive tumors, compared to HR-negative tumors (p = 0.02). Low Cyclin D1 levels correlated with clinical tumor stage 1-3 (p = 0.03). Among patients with HR-positive/Her2-negative tumors and high Cyclin D1 expression, a better disease-free survival (DFS) was graphically suggested, but not significant (p = 0.21). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates a measurable nuclear expression of Cyclin D1 in post-neoadjuvant residual tumor tissue of HR-positive BC. Cyclin D1 expression was not prognostic for DFS after NACT. Our results and defined cut-off suggest that the marker can be used to stratify tumors according to protein expression levels. Based on this, a prospective evaluation is currently performed in the ongoing Penelope-B trial.

A primary intravascular synovial sarcoma causing deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in a 20-year-old woman.

Primary intravascular synovial sarcoma is a rare malignancy with only a few cases documented in the literature. On presentation, this tumour usually resembles a deep venous thrombosis (dvt) or pulmonary embolism (pe). Here, we report the case of a 20-year-old woman complaining of shortness of breath who had a history of dvt 6 weeks before presentation at our institution. Vascular ultrasound detected a suspicious mass in the right groin, which was identified as a monophasic synovial sarcoma by surgical biopsy. The tumour extended from the right superficial femoral vein into the common iliac vein, profound femoral vein, and great saphenous vein. It caused pe with near-total occlusion of the right pulmonary artery. After initial treatment on the cardiac intensive care unit, the patient was referred to the oncology department for neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy with doxorubicin-ifosfamide according to the Interdisziplinäre Arbeitsgemeinschaft Weichteilsarkome [Interdisciplinary AG Sarcomas] protocol and surgical resection of the tumour. No signs of tumour recurrence were found during the subsequent course of the disease, but the patient died from treatment complications approximately 15 months after initial presentation. This case underlines the importance of screening for malignancies even in young patients presenting with dvt or pe. We also recommend whole-leg compression ultrasonography in patients with suspected dvt or pe (as opposed to venography or simple four-point ultrasound examination in the groin and popliteal fossa) to detect possible underlying causes for thrombosis.

A 2015 update on predictive molecular pathology and its role in targeted cancer therapy: a review focussing on clinical relevance.

In April 2013 our group published a review on predictive molecular pathology in this journal. Although only 2 years have passed many new facts and stimulating developments have happened in diagnostic molecular pathology rendering it worthwhile to present an up-date on this topic. A major technical improvement is certainly given by the introduction of next-generation sequencing (NGS; amplicon, whole exome, whole genome) and its application to formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue in routine diagnostics. Based on this 'revolution' the analyses of numerous genetic alterations in parallel has become a routine approach opening the chance to characterize patients' malignant tumors much more deeply without increasing turn-around time and costs. In the near future this will open new strategies to apply 'off-label' targeted therapies, e.g. for rare tumors, otherwise resistant tumors etc. The clinically relevant genetic aberrations described in this review include mutation analyses of RAS (KRAS and NRAS), BRAF and PI3K in colorectal cancer, KIT or PDGFR alpha as well as BRAF, NRAS and KIT in malignant melanoma. Moreover, we present several recent advances in the molecular characterization of malignant lymphoma. Beside the well-known mutations in NSCLC (EGFR, ALK) a number of chromosomal aberrations (KRAS, ROS1, MET) have become relevant. Only very recently has the clinical need for analysis of BRCA1/2 come up and proven as a true challenge for routine diagnostics because of the genes' special structure and hot-spot-free mutational distribution. The genetic alterations are discussed in connection with their increasingly important role in companion diagnostics to apply targeted drugs as efficient as possible. As another aspect of the increasing number of druggable mutations, we discuss the challenges personalized therapies pose for the design of clinical studies to prove optimal efficacy particularly with respect to combination therapies of multiple targeted drugs and conventional chemotherapy. Such combinations would lead to an extremely high complexity that would hardly be manageable by applying conventional study designs for approval, e.g. by the FDA or EMA. Up-coming challenges such as the application of methylation assays and proteomic analyses on FFPE tissue will also be discussed briefly to open the door towards the ultimate goal of reading a patients' tissue as 'deeply' as possible. Although it is yet to be shown, which levels of biological information are most informative for predictive pathology, an integrated molecular characterization of tumors will likely offer the most comprehensive view for individualized therapy approaches. To optimize cancer treatment we need to understand tumor biology in much more detail on morphological, genetic, proteomic as well as epigenetic grounds. Finally, the complex challenges on the level of drug design, molecular diagnostics, and clinical trials make necessary a close collaboration among academic institutions, regulatory authorities and pharmaceutical companies.

[Molecular pathology for breast cancer: Importance of the gene expression profile]. / Molekulare Pathologie beim Mammakarzinom: Wertigkeit der Genexpressionsprofile.

Gene expression arrays are currently used to guide therapy decisions in breast cancer. The indications for gene expression tests are especially important in the group of hormone receptor negative, HER2 positive tumors to decide whether endocrine therapy alone is sufficient or additional chemotherapy is necessary. In this group of luminal tumors conventional clinicopathological parameters are often not suitable to select patients who would benefit from an endocrine therapy alone. Gene expression tests can provide additional information and, therefore, support decision-making and avoid unnecessary chemotherapy. There are a variety of test systems available which poses the questions of which tests should be selected for which patients and how the test results should be evaluated in a direct comparison. This report provides information about three currently available gene expression tests (i.e. OncotypeDx®, Endopredict® and PAM50/Prosigna®), comments on similarities and differences and discusses the impact on therapy decisions. The focus of this article is on a discussion of clinical studies that have compared the different molecular tests in the same clinical study cohort. These investigations allow a first comparative evaluation of the various assays for breast cancer.

Expression of secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine (SPARC) in breast cancer and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine (SPARC) has been suggested as a new biomarker and therapeutic target in breast cancer, as well as other tumor types. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated the frequency of SPARC expression among different molecular breast cancer subtypes and its role for therapy response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In this study, pretherapeutic core biopsies of 667 patients from the neoadjuvant GeparTrio trial were evaluated for SPARC expression by immunohistochemistry using a standardized immunoreactive score (IRS). RESULTS: An increased SPARC expression (IRS ≥6) was observed in 26% of all tumors. In triple-negative tumors, SPARC expression was increased in 37% of tumors, compared with other molecular subtypes (23% HR+/HER2-, 29% HR+/HER2+ and 22% HR-/HER2+; P = 0.038). Increased SPARC expression was associated with an increased pathological complete response (pCR) rate of 27%, compared with 15% in tumors with low SPARC expression (P < 0.001). In the triple-negative subgroup, pCR rates were 47% in tumors with high SPARC expression, compared with 26% in tumors with low SPARC expression (P = 0.032). In multivariable analysis, SPARC was independently predictive in the overall population (P = 0.010) as well as the triple-negative subgroup (P = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: SPARC is frequently expressed in breast cancer with triple-negative breast cancer revealing the highest expression rate. High SPARC expression of the primary tumor is associated with a higher chance of achieving a pathological complete remission after TAC or TAC-NX chemotherapy. As SPARC is an albumin-binding protein and might mediate intratumoral accumulation of albumin bound drugs, SPARC should be further evaluated as a predictive marker especially for response to albumin-bound drugs like nab-paclitaxel. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00544765.