nach oben

Erschienen in:

21.05.2022 | Preclinical study

Identification of tumor biomarkers for pathological complete response to neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced breast cancer

verfasst von: Prarthana Gopinath, Sridevi Veluswami, Gopal Gopisetty, Shirley Sundersingh, Swaminathan Rajaraman, Rajkumar Thangarajan

Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Ausgabe 2/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Therapeutic response predictors like age, nodal status, and tumor grade and markers, like ER/PR, HER2, and Ki67, are not reliable in predicting the response to a specific form of chemotherapy. The current study aims to identify and validate reliable markers that can predict pathological complete response (pCR) in fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC)-based neoadjuvant therapy with (NACT/RT) and without concurrent radiation (NACT).

Materials and methods

Tandem mass tag (TMT) quantitative liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) was used to identify differentially expressed proteins from core needle breast biopsy between pCR (n = 4) and no-pCR (n = 4). Immunoblotting of shortlisted proteins with the tissue lysates confirmed the differential expression of the markers. Further, immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections of treatment-naive core needle biopsies. In the NACT, 29 pCR and 130 no-pCR and in NACT/RT, 32 pCR and 71 no-pCR were used.

Results

733 and 807 proteins were identified in NACT and NACT/RT groups, respectively. Ten proteins were shortlisted for validation as potential pCR-predictive markers. THBS1, TNC, and DCN were significantly overexpressed in no-pCR in both the groups. In NACT, CPA3 was significantly upregulated in the no-pCR. In NACT/RT, HnRNPAB was significantly upregulated and HMGB1 significantly downregulated in the no-pCR. HMGB1 was the only marker to show prognostic significance.

Conclusion

Quantitative proteomics followed by IHC identified and validated potential biomarkers for predicting patient response to therapy. These markers can be used, following larger-scale validation, in combination with routine histological analysis providing vital indications of treatment response.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Gupta S, Rai R (2020) Breast cancer:—risk factors, incidence, mortality and social functioning in India. Int J Biotechnol Biomed Sci 6:1–4

Giordano SH (2003) Update on locally advanced breast cancer. Oncologist 8:521–530. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.8-6-521CrossRefPubMed

Esteva FJ, Yu D, Hung MC, Hortobagyi GN (2010) Molecular predictors of response to trastuzumab and lapatinib in breast cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 7:98–107CrossRef

Das U, Lakshmaiah KC, Govind Babu K et al (2014) The actual scenario of neoadjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer in developing country: a report of 80 cases of breast cancer from a tertiary cancer center in India. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 140:1777–1782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-014-1724-1CrossRefPubMed

Londero V, Bazzocchi M, del Frate C et al (2004) Locally advanced breast cancer: comparison of mammography, sonography and MR imaging in evaluation of residual disease in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Radiol 14:1371–1379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-004-2246-zCrossRefPubMed

Martín M, Rodríguez-Lescure Á, Ruiz A et al (2008) Randomized phase 3 trial of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide alone or followed by paclitaxel for early breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:805–814. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djn151CrossRefPubMed

Baumann S, Ceglarek U, Fiedler GM et al (2005) Standardized approach to proteome profiling of human serum based on magnetic bead separation and matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Clin Chem 51:973–980. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2004.047308CrossRefPubMed

Tewari M, Krishnamurthy A, Shukla HS (2008) Predictive markers of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Surg Oncol 17:301–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2008.03.003CrossRefPubMed

Duffy MJ (2013) Tumor markers in clinical practice: A review focusing on common solid cancers. Med Princ Pract 22:4–11. https://doi.org/10.1159/000338393CrossRefPubMed

10.

Devita V, Lawren T, Rosenberg S (2015) Cancer: Principles & practice of oncology, 10th edn. Wolters Kluwer Health Adis (EPS), Riverwoods

11.

Aydiner A, İgci A, Soran A (2019) Breast Disease. Springer International Publishing, ChamCrossRef

12.

Duffy MJ, Harbeck N, Nap M et al (2017) Clinical use of biomarkers in breast cancer: Updated guidelines from the European Group on Tumor Markers (EGTM). Eur J Cancer 75:284–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.01.017CrossRefPubMed

13.

Liao Y, Wang J, Jaehnig EJ et al (2019) WebGestalt 2019: gene set analysis toolkit with revamped UIs and APIs. Nucleic Acids Res 47:W199–W205. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkz401CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Wang J, Vasaikar S, Shi Z et al (2017) WebGestalt 2017: a more comprehensive, powerful, flexible and interactive gene set enrichment analysis toolkit. Nucleic Acids Res 45:W130–W137. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkx356CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW (2012) NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods 9:671–675. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2089CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Pu RT, Schott AF, Sturtz DE et al (2005) Pathologic features of breast cancer associated with complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: importance of tumor necrosis. Am J Surg Pathol 29:354–358. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pas.0000152138.89395.fbCrossRefPubMed

17.

Sasanpour P, Sandoughdaran S, Mosavi-Jarrahi A, Malekzadeh M (2018) Predictors of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in Iranian breast cancer patients. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 19:2423–2427. https://doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2018.19.9.2423CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Hayashi Y, Takei H, Nozu S et al (2012) Analysis of complete response by MRI following neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicts pathological tumor responses differently for molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Oncol Lett 5:83–89. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2012.1004CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Zhao Y, Dong X, Li R et al (2015) Evaluation of the pathological response and prognosis following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Onco Targets Ther 8:1511–1521. https://doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S83243CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Llombart-Cussac A, Cortés J, Paré L et al (2017) HER2-enriched subtype as a predictor of pathological complete response following trastuzumab and lapatinib without chemotherapy in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (PAMELA): an open-label, single-group, multicentre, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 18:545–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30021-9CrossRefPubMed

21.

Dhanushkodi M, Sridevi V, Shanta V et al (2021) Locally advanced breast cancer (LABC): real-world outcome of patients from cancer institute, Chennai. JCO Glob Oncol 7:767–781. https://doi.org/10.1200/GO.21.00001CrossRefPubMed

22.

Hortobagyi GN, Blumenschein GR, Spanos W et al (1983) Multimodal treatment of locoregionally advanced breast cancer. Cancer 51:763–768. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19830301)51:5%3c763::AID-CNCR2820510502%3e3.0.CO;2-CCrossRefPubMed

23.

Shanta V, Swaminathan R, Rama R, Radhika R (2008) Retrospective analysis of locally advanced noninflammatory breast cancer from Chennai, South India, 1990–1999. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 70:51–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJROBP.2007.05.050CrossRefPubMed

24.

Shanta V, Krishnamurthi S (1991) Preoperative multimodal therapy for locally advanced non-inflammatory breast cancer. Clin Oncol 3:137–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0936-6555(05)80833-7CrossRef

25.

Shanta V, Krishnamurthi S (1976) Combined therapy in carcinomas of the female breast. J Surg Oncol 8:113–120CrossRef

26.

Sandström M, Lindman H, Nygren P et al (2006) Population analysis of the pharmacokinetics and the haematological toxicity of the fluorouracil-epirubicin-cyclophosphamide regimen in breast cancer patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 58:143–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-005-0140-2CrossRefPubMed

27.

Brackstone M, Palma D, Tuck AB et al (2017) Concurrent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 99:769–776. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJROBP.2017.06.005CrossRefPubMed

28.

Levine MN, Bramwell VH, Pritchard KI et al (1998) Randomized trial of intensive cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil chemotherapy compared with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:2651–2658. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1998.16.8.2651CrossRefPubMed

29.

Lopez M, Papaldo P, di Lauro L et al (1989) 5–fluorouracil, adriamycin, cyclophosphamide (FAC) vs. 5–fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide (FEC) in metastatic breast cancer. Oncology 46:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1159/000226671CrossRefPubMed

30.

Yan PW, Huang XE, Jiang Y et al (2010) Clinical comparison of safety and efficacy of vinorelbine/epirubicin (NE) with fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (FEC). Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 11:1115–1118PubMed

31.

Anderson BO, Braun S, Lim S et al (2003) Early detection of breast cancer in countries with limited resources. Breast Journal. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1524-4741.9.s2.4.xCrossRefPubMed

32.

Farmer P, Bonnefoi H, Anderle P et al (2009) A stroma-related gene signature predicts resistance to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Nat Med 15:68–74. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.1908CrossRefPubMed

33.

Wang T, Srivastava S, Hartman M et al (2016) High expression of intratumoral stromal proteins is associated with chemotherapy resistance in breast cancer. Oncotarget 7:55155–55168. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.10894CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Bai Z, Zhang Z, Qu X et al (2012) Sensitization of breast cancer cells to taxol by inhibition of taxol resistance gene 1. Oncol Lett 3:135–140. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2011.416CrossRefPubMed

35.

Jayachandran A, Anaka M, Prithviraj P et al (2014) Thrombospondin 1 promotes an aggressive phenotype through epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in human melanoma. Oncotarget 5:5782–5797. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.2164CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Rofstad EK, Henriksen K, Galappathi K, Mathiesen B (2003) Antiangiogenic treatment with thrombospondin-1 enhances primary tumor radiation response and prevents growth of dormant pulmonary micrometastases after curative radiation therapy in human melanoma xenografts | cancer research. Can Res 63:4055–4061

37.

Liu L, Bai Z, Ma X et al (2016) Effects of taxol resistance gene 1 expression on the chemosensitivity of SGC-7901 cells to oxaliplatin. Exp Ther Med 11:846–852. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2016.2994CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Lin Y, Sun D, Xu Q et al (2020) miR-338-3p attenuates oxaliplatin resistance in gastric cancer cells via targeting thrombospondin-1. Arch Med Sci. https://doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2020.98039CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Buraschi S, Neill T, Owens RT et al (2012) Decorin protein core affects the global gene expression profile of the tumor microenvironment in a triple-negative orthotopic breast carcinoma xenograft model. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0045559CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Boström P, Sainio A, Kakko T et al (2013) Localization of decorin gene expression in normal human breast tissue and in benign and malignant tumors of the human breast. Histochem Cell Biol 139:161–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00418-012-1026-0CrossRefPubMed

41.

Klintman M, Buus R, Cheang MCU et al (2016) Changes in expression of genes representing key biologic processes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer, and prognostic implications in residual disease. Clin Cancer Res 22:2405–2416. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1488CrossRefPubMed

42.

Lanceta L, O’Neill C, Lypova N et al (2020) Transcriptomic profiling identifies differentially expressed genes in palbociclib-resistant ER+ MCF7 breast cancer cells. Genes (Basel) 11:467. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes11040467CrossRef

43.

Mavrogonatou E, Papadopoulou A, Fotopoulou A et al (2021) Down-regulation of the proteoglycan decorin fills in the tumor-promoting phenotype of ionizing radiation-induced senescent human breast stromal fibroblasts. Cancers (Basel). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13081987CrossRef

44.

Teicher BA, Holden SA, Ara G, Chen G (1996) Reversal of in vivo drug resistance by the transforming growth factor-beta inhibitor decorin. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 37:601–609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002800050435CrossRefPubMed

45.

Teicher BA, Ikebe M, Keyes SR, Herbst RS (1997) Transforming growth factor-beta 1 overexpression produces drug resistance in vivo: reversal by decorin. In Vivo 11:463–472PubMed

46.

Helleman J, Jansen MPHM, Ruigrok-Ritstier K et al (2008) Association of an extracellular matrix gene cluster with breast cancer prognosis and endocrine therapy response. Clin Cancer Res 14:5555–5564. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0555CrossRefPubMed

47.

Naik A, Al-Yahyaee A, Abdullah N et al (2018) Neuropilin-1 promotes the oncogenic Tenascin-C/integrin β3 pathway and modulates chemoresistance in breast cancer cells. BMC Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4446-yCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Li ZL, Zhang HL, Huang Y et al (2020) Autophagy deficiency promotes triple-negative breast cancer resistance to T cell-mediated cytotoxicity by blocking tenascin-C degradation. Nat Commun 11:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17395-yCrossRef

49.

Popova OP, Bogomazova SY, Ivanov AA (2017) Role of tenascin C in triple-negative breast cancer. Arkh Patol 79:10–15. https://doi.org/10.17116/patol201779510-15CrossRefPubMed

50.

Li X, Warren S, Pelekanou V et al (2019) Immune profiling of pre- and post-treatment breast cancer tissues from the SWOG S0800 neoadjuvant trial. J Immunother Cancer 7:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40425-019-0563-7CrossRef

51.

Moriggi M, Giussani M, Torretta E et al (2018) ECM remodeling in breast cancer with different grade: contribution of 2D-DIGE proteomics. Proteomics. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201800278CrossRefPubMed

52.

Teicher BA, Maehara Y, Kakeji Y et al (1997) Reversal of in vivo drug resistance by the transforming growth factor-β inhibitor decorin. Int J Cancer 71:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19970328)71:1%3c49::AID-IJC10%3e3.0.CO;2-4CrossRefPubMed

53.

Zarzynska JM (2014) Two Faces of TGF-Beta1 in Breast Cancer. Mediators Inflamm 2014:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/141747CrossRef

54.

Ning X, Chen Y, Wang X et al (2016) The potential role of CacyBP / SIP in tumorigenesis. Tumour Biol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13277-016-4871-yCrossRefPubMed

55.

Shi Y, Hu W, Yin F et al (2004) Regulation of drug sensitivity of gastric cancer cells by human calcyclin-binding protein (CacyBP). Gastric Cancer 7:160–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-004-0286-3CrossRefPubMed

56.

Fucikova J, Kralikova P, Fialova A et al (2011) Human tumor cells killed by anthracyclines induce a tumor-specific immune response. Can Res 71:4821–4833. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-0950CrossRef

57.

Jiao Y, Wang H, Fan S (2007) Growth suppression and radiosensitivity increase by HMGB1 in breast cancer. Acta Pharmacol Sin 28:1957–1967. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-7254.2007.00669.xCrossRefPubMed

58.

An J, Luo Z, An W et al (2021) Identification of spliceosome components pivotal to breast cancer survival. RNA Biol 18:833–842. https://doi.org/10.1080/15476286.2020.1822636CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Identification of tumor biomarkers for pathological complete response to neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced breast cancer
verfasst von: Prarthana Gopinath
Sridevi Veluswami
Gopal Gopisetty
Shirley Sundersingh
Swaminathan Rajaraman
Rajkumar Thangarajan
Publikationsdatum: 21.05.2022
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Ausgabe 2/2022
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-022-06617-0

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Umsetzung der POMGAT-Leitlinie läuft

03.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Seit November 2023 gibt es evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen zum perioperativen Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT) auf S3-Niveau. Vieles wird schon entsprechend der Empfehlungen durchgeführt. Wo es im Alltag noch hapert, zeigt eine Umfrage in einem Klinikverbund.

Springer Medizin

Identification of tumor biomarkers for pathological complete response to neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced breast cancer