Immunohistochemical versus molecular (BluePrint and MammaPrint) subtyping of breast carcinoma. Outcome results from the EORTC 10041/BIG 3-04 MINDACT trial.

PURPOSE: This study compares immunohistochemical (IHC) versus molecular subtyping (BluePrint and MammaPrint) in the population of patients enrolled in MINDACT and outcome based on molecular subtyping (MS) versus surrogate pathological subtyping (PS) as defined by the 2013 St. Gallen guidelines. METHODS: MS classified patients in the following subtypes: Luminal A, Luminal B, HER-2-, and Basal-type. IHC/FISH for pathological subtyping (ER, PgR, HER-2, and Ki67) was centrally assessed in the European Institute of Oncology (n = 5806). Hazard ratios for distant-metastasis-free survival (DMFS) by subtype were adjusted for chemotherapy and endocrine therapy administration and thus independent of adjuvant treatment allocation. RESULTS: PS Luminal cancers classified as HER-2+ or Basal-type by MS did not have a significantly lower DMFS than the Luminal-type cancers by MS (95.9%): HR = 1.40, 95% CI 0.75-2.60 (p = 0.294). More patients were identified with Luminal A disease by MS (63%) as compared with PS (47%) with comparable 5-year DMFS (≥96.0%). Among the 500 patients with PS TN cancers, MS identified 24 (5%) patients as Luminal-type with 5-year DMFS estimated at 100% versus 71.4% for MS HER-2+ or 90.1% for MS Basal-type. CONCLUSIONS: MS was able to re-stratify 54% of patients with a Luminal-B PS subtype to a low-risk Luminal A-type group with comparable outcome. Among TN EBC, 5% were classified as Luminal by MS with Luminal-like outcome. Molecular classification can help to identify a larger group of patients with low risk of recurrence compared with the more contemporarily used classification methodology including high-quality assessed Ki67.

Characterization of male breast cancer: results of the EORTC 10085/TBCRC/BIG/NABCG International Male Breast Cancer Program.

Background: Male breast cancer (BC) is rare, managed by extrapolation from female BC. The International Male BC Program aims to better characterize and manage this disease. We report the results of part I, a retrospective joint analysis of cases diagnosed during a 20-year period. Methods: Patients with follow-up and tumor samples, treated between 1990 and 2010, in 93 centers/9 countries. Samples were centrally analyzed in three laboratories (the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and the United States). Results: Of 1822 patients enrolled, 1483 were analyzed; 63.5% were diagnosed between 2001 and 2010, 57 (5.1%) had metastatic disease (M1). Median age at diagnosis: 68.4 years. Of 1054 M0 cases, 56.2% were node-negative (N0) and 48.5% had T1 tumors; 4% had breast conserving surgery (BCS), 18% sentinel lymph-node biopsy; half received adjuvant radiotherapy; 29.8% (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and 76.8% adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET), mostly tamoxifen (88.4%). Per central pathology, for M0 tumors: 84.8% ductal invasive carcinomas, 51.5% grade 2; 99.3% estrogen receptor (ER)-positive; 81.9% progesterone receptor (PR)-positive; 96.9% androgen receptor (AR)-positive [ER, PR or AR Allred score ≥3]; 61.1% Ki67 expression low (<14% positive cells); using immunohistochemistry (IHC) surrogates, 41.9% were Luminal-A-like, 48.6% Luminal-B-like/HER-2-negative, 8.7% HER-2-positive, 0.3% triple negative. Median follow-up: 8.2 years (0.0-23.8) for all, 7.2 years (0.0-23.2), for M0, 2.6 years (0.0-12.7) for M1 patients. A significant improvement over time was observed in age-corrected BC mortality. BC-specific-mortality was higher for men younger than 50 years. Better overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were observed for highly ER+ (P = 0.001), highly PR+ (P = 0.002), highly AR+ disease (P = 0.019). There was no association between OS/RFS and HER-2 status, Ki67, IHC subtypes nor grade. Conclusions: Male BC is usually ER, PR and AR-positive, Luminal B-like/HER2-negative. Of note, 56% patients had T1 tumors but only 4% had BCS. ER was highly positive in >90% of cases but only 77% received adjuvant ET. ER, PR and AR were associated with OS and RFS, whereas grade, Ki67 and IHC surrogates were not. Significant improvement in survival over time was observed.

Characterisation of multifocal breast cancer using the 70-gene signature in clinical low-risk patients enrolled in the EORTC 10041/BIG 03-04 MINDACT trial.

BACKGROUND: In multifocal breast cancer, guidelines recommend basing adjuvant systemic treatment decisions on characteristics of the largest lesion, disregarding multifocality as an independent prognosticator. We assessed the association between multifocal disease and both the 70-gene signature (70-GS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in clinical low-risk breast cancer patients enrolled in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10041/BIG 03-04 Microarray In Node-negative and 1 to 3 positive lymph node Disease may Avoid ChemoTherapy (MINDACT) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The analysed population consisted of enrolled patients in the MINDACT trial with clinical low-risk disease, defined by a modified Adjuvant! Online cut-off for the 10-year risk of recurrent disease or death. Eligibility criteria of MINDACT dictate that patients with multifocal disease could be included if the different lesions had similar pathological characteristics. The presence of multifocal disease was deducted from the case report form (CRF)-question for sum of diameter for all invasive tumour foci. Clinicopathological characteristics and gene expression of patients with unifocal and multifocal (largest lesion) disease were compared. Subsequently, the association between multifocal disease and the 70-GS was evaluated as well as the association between multifocality and 5-year DMFS. RESULTS: The study included 3090 clinical low-risk patients with unifocal and 238 patients with multifocal disease. Apart from a higher prevalence of lobular tumours (21.8% versus 10.8%, by local pathology), we did not observe differences in baseline characteristics between multifocal and unifocal tumours. Patients with multifocal tumours were more likely to be at high genomic risk as compared to patients with unifocal tumours (22.7% versus 17.3%, odds ratio [OR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.07, P = 0.038). We did not find a significant association between tumour focality and DMFS (97.1% for unifocal versus 96.9% for multifocal, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.55, 95% CI 0.68-3.46, P = 0.172), nor a signal for a potential interaction between the prognostic effect of the 70-GS and focality of the tumour regarding DMFS. CONCLUSION: In the group of clinical low-risk MINDACT patients, multifocal tumours were more likely to have a high-risk 70-GS profile compared to unifocal tumours. We did not observe a significant interaction between multifocality and the 70-GS with respect to survival without distant metastasis in these patients.

An association study of established breast cancer reproductive and lifestyle risk factors with tumour subtype defined by the prognostic 70-gene expression signature (MammaPrint®).

BACKGROUND: Reproductive and lifestyle factors influence both breast cancer risk and prognosis; this might be through breast cancer subtype. Subtypes defined by immunohistochemical hormone receptor markers and gene expression signatures are used to predict prognosis of breast cancer patients based on their tumour biology. We investigated the association between established breast cancer risk factors and the 70-gene prognostication signature in breast cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Standardised questionnaires were used to obtain information on established risk factors of breast cancer from the Dutch patients of the MINDACT trial. Clinical-pathological and genomic information were obtained from the trial database. Logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the associations between lifestyle risk factors and tumour prognostic subtypes, measured by the 70-gene MammaPrint® signature (i.e. low-risk or high-risk tumours). RESULTS: Of the 1555 breast cancer patients included, 910 had low-risk and 645 had high-risk tumours. Current body mass index (BMI), age at menarche, age at first birth, age at menopause, hormonal contraceptive use and hormone replacement therapy use were not associated with MammaPrint®. In parous women, higher parity was associated with a lower risk (OR: 0.75, [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.59-0.95] P = 0.018) and longer breastfeeding duration with a higher risk (OR: 1.03, [95% CI: 1.01-1.05] P = 0.005) of developing high-risk tumours; risk estimates were similar within oestrogen receptor-positive disease. After stratifying by menopausal status, the associations remained present in post-menopausal women. CONCLUSION: Using prognostic gene expression profiles, we have indications that specific reproductive factors may be associated with prognostic tumour subtypes beyond hormone receptor status.

Tumour size is the only predictive factor of distant recurrence after pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with large operable or locally advanced breast cancers: a sub-study of EORTC 10994/BIG 1-00 phase III trial.

PURPOSE: Although achieving a pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in breast cancer predicts a better outcome, some patients still relapse. The objectives of this study were to describe the types of events in this group of patients and to identify predictive factors for relapse. METHODS: Patients with large operable or locally advanced breast cancers (T4d tumours were excluded) were randomised to receive either six cycles of anthracycline-based chemotherapy or three cycles of docetaxel followed by three cycles of eprirubicin/docetaxel. pCR was defined as no evidence of residual invasive cancer (or very few scattered tumour cells) in the primary tumour and axillary lymph nodes at surgery. Two Cox regression analyses were performed to identify predictive factors of relapse: one for recurrence-free interval (RFI) and one for distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI). RESULTS: Out of 283 eligible patients who achieved a pCR, 40 (14.1%) and 28 (9.9%) presented an event of interest for the RFI and DRFI analyses, respectively. Five-year RFI, DRFI and overall survival (OS) were 85.3% (95% confidence interval (CI), 80.1-89.3), 89.6% (95% CI, 85.0-92.9) and 91.9% (95% CI, 87.2-94.9), respectively. No predictors for RFI after pCR were identified. For DRFI, tumour size was the only predictor: Hazard ratio (HR) T3 versus T1-2=3.62 (95% CI, 1.66-7.89); HR T4 versus T1-2: HR, 2.80 (95% CI, 0.62-12.64) p=0.0048. CONCLUSION: In this study, clinical tumour size emerged as the only predictor for DRFI after pCR, with T3 and T4 tumours having an increased risk for distant recurrence compared to T1-2 tumours.

Neoadjuvant treatment with docetaxel plus lapatinib, trastuzumab, or both followed by an anthracycline-based chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer: results of the randomised phase II EORTC 10054 study.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant trials conducted using a double HER2 blockade with lapatinib and trastuzumab, combined with different paclitaxel-containing chemotherapy regimens, have shown high pathological complete response (pCR) rates, but at the cost of important toxicity. We hypothesised that this toxicity might be due to a specific interaction between paclitaxel and lapatinib. This trial assesses the toxicity and activity of the combination of docetaxel with lapatinib and trastuzumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIA to IIIC HER2-positive breast cancer received six cycles of chemotherapy (three cycles of docetaxel followed by three cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide). They were randomised 1 : 1 : 1 to receive during the first three cycles either lapatinib (1000 mg orally daily), trastuzumab (4 mg/kg loading dose followed by 2 mg/kg weekly), or trastuzumab + lapatinib at the same dose. The primary end point was pCR rate defined as ypT0/is. Secondary end points included safety and toxicity. pCR rate defined as ypT0/is ypN0 was assessed as an exploratory analysis. In June 2012, arm A was closed for futility based on the results from other studies. RESULTS: From October 2010 to January 2013, 128 patients were included in 14 centres. The percentage of the 122 assessable patients with pCR in the breast, and pCR in the breast and nodes, was numerically highest in the lapatinib + trastuzumab group (60% and 56%, respectively), intermediate in the trastuzumab group (52% and 52%), and lowest in the lapatinib group (46% and 36%). Frequency (%) of the most common grade 3-4 toxicities in the lapatinib /trastuzumab/lapatinib + trastuzumab arms were: febrile neutropenia 23/15/10, diarrhoea 9/2/18, infection (other) 9/4/8, and hepatic toxicity 0/2/8. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a numerically modest pCR rate increase with double anti-HER2 blockade plus chemotherapy, but suggests that the use of docetaxel rather than paclitaxel may not reduce toxicity. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT00450892.

High concordance of protein (by IHC), gene (by FISH; HER2 only), and microarray readout (by TargetPrint) of ER, PgR, and HER2: results from the EORTC 10041/BIG 03-04 MINDACT trial.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the correlation of TargetPrint with local and central immunohistochemistry/fluorescence in situ hybridization assessment of estrogen (ER), progesterone (PgR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in the first 800 patients enrolled in the MINDACT trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from local (N = 800) and central (N = 626) assessments of receptor status were collected and compared with TargetPrint results. RESULTS: For ER, the positive agreement (the percentage of central pathology positive assessments that were also TargetPrint/local laboratory positive) for TargetPrint in comparison to centralized assessment was 98% with a negative agreement (the percentage of central pathology negative assessments that were also TargetPrint/local laboratory negative) of 96%. For PgR, the positive agreement was 83% with a negative agreement of 92%. For HER2, the positive agreement was 75% with a negative agreement of 99%. Even though the local assessment showed higher positive agreement for PgR (89%) and higher positive agreement for HER2 (85%), the range of discordant local versus central assessments were as high as 6.7% for ER, 12.9% for PgR, and 4.3% for HER2. CONCLUSION: TargetPrint and local assessment of ER, PgR, and HER2 show high concordance with central assessment in the first 800 MINDACT patients. However, there are concerns about the higher discordance rates for some local sites. TargetPrint can improve the reliability of hormone receptor and HER2 testing for those centers with a lower rate of concordance with the reference laboratory, with the limitation of a positive agreement of 75% for HER2. TargetPrint consequently has important implications for treatment decisions in clinical practice and is a reliable alternative to local assessment for ER. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: NCT00433589.

Mammographic screening detects low-risk tumor biology breast cancers.

Overdiagnosis of breast cancer, i.e. the detection of slow-growing tumors that would never have caused symptoms or death, became more prevalent with the implementation of population-based screening. Only rough estimates have been made of the proportion of patients that are overdiagnosed and identification of those patients is difficult. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate whether tumor biology can help identify patients with screen-detected tumors at such a low risk of recurrence that they are likely to be overdiagnosed. Furthermore, we wish to evaluate the impact of the transition from film-screen mammography (FSM) to the more sensitive full-field digital mammography (FFDM) on the biology of the tumors detected by each screening-modality. All Dutch breast cancer patients enrolled in the MINDACT trial (EORTC-10041) accrued 2007-2011, who participated in the national screening program (biennial screening ages 50-75) were included (n = 1,165). We calculated the proportions of high-, low- and among those the ultralow-risk tumors according to the 70-gene signature for patients with screen-detected (n = 775) and interval (n = 390) cancers for FSM and FFDM. Screen-detected cancers had significantly more often a low-risk tumor biology (68 %) of which 54 % even an ultralow-risk compared to interval cancers (53 % low-, of which 45 % ultralow-risk (p = 0.001) with an OR of 2.33 (p < 0.0001; 95 % CI 1.73-3.15). FFDM detected significantly more high-risk tumors (35 %) compared to FSM (27 %) (p = 0.011). Aside from favorable clinico-pathological factors, screen-detected cancers were also more likely to have a biologically low-risk or even ultralow-risk tumor. Especially for patients with screen-detected cancers the use of tools, such as the 70-gene signature, to differentiate breast cancers by risk of recurrence may minimize overtreatment. The recent transition in screening-modalities led to an increase in the detection of biologically high-risk cancers using FFDM.