Molecular apocrine tumours in EORTC 10994/BIG 1-00 phase III study: pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and clinical outcomes.
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ therapeutic use
Breast Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
Disease-Free Survival
ErbB Receptors
/ metabolism
Female
Gene Expression Profiling
Humans
Immunohistochemistry
Receptor, ErbB-2
/ metabolism
Receptors, Androgen
/ metabolism
Receptors, Estrogen
/ metabolism
Receptors, Progesterone
/ metabolism
Survival Rate
Treatment Outcome
Journal
British journal of cancer
ISSN: 1532-1827
Titre abrégé: Br J Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370635
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2019
04 2019
Historique:
received:
13
07
2018
accepted:
20
02
2019
revised:
09
02
2019
pubmed:
23
3
2019
medline:
29
2
2020
entrez:
23
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We explored, within the EORTC10994 study, the outcomes for patients with molecular apocrine (MA) breast cancer, and defined immunohistochemistry (IHC) as androgen-receptor (AR) positive, oestrogen (ER) and progesterone (PR) negative. We also assessed the concordance between IHC and gene expression arrays (GEA) in the identification of MA cancers. Centrally assessed biopsies for AR, ER, PR, HER2 and Ki67 by IHC were classified into six subtypes: MA, triple-negative (TN) basal-like, luminal A, luminal B HER2 negative, luminal B HER2 positive and "other". The two main objectives were the pCR rates and survival outcomes in the overall MA subtype (and further divided by HER2 status) and the remaining five subtypes. IHC subtyping was obtained in 846 eligible patients. Ninety-three (11%) tumours were classified as the MA subtype. Both IHC and GEA data were available for 64 patients. In this subset, IHC concordance was 88.3% in identifying MA tumours compared with GEA. Within the MA subtype, pCR was observed in 33.3% of the patients (95% CI: 29.4-43.9) and the 5-year recurrence-free interval was 59.2% (95% CI: 48.2-68.6). Patients with MA and TN basal-like tumours have lower survival outcomes. Irrespective of their HER2 status, the prognosis for MA tumours remains poor and adjuvant trials evaluating anti-androgens should be considered.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
We explored, within the EORTC10994 study, the outcomes for patients with molecular apocrine (MA) breast cancer, and defined immunohistochemistry (IHC) as androgen-receptor (AR) positive, oestrogen (ER) and progesterone (PR) negative. We also assessed the concordance between IHC and gene expression arrays (GEA) in the identification of MA cancers.
METHODS
Centrally assessed biopsies for AR, ER, PR, HER2 and Ki67 by IHC were classified into six subtypes: MA, triple-negative (TN) basal-like, luminal A, luminal B HER2 negative, luminal B HER2 positive and "other". The two main objectives were the pCR rates and survival outcomes in the overall MA subtype (and further divided by HER2 status) and the remaining five subtypes.
RESULTS
IHC subtyping was obtained in 846 eligible patients. Ninety-three (11%) tumours were classified as the MA subtype. Both IHC and GEA data were available for 64 patients. In this subset, IHC concordance was 88.3% in identifying MA tumours compared with GEA. Within the MA subtype, pCR was observed in 33.3% of the patients (95% CI: 29.4-43.9) and the 5-year recurrence-free interval was 59.2% (95% CI: 48.2-68.6). Patients with MA and TN basal-like tumours have lower survival outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Irrespective of their HER2 status, the prognosis for MA tumours remains poor and adjuvant trials evaluating anti-androgens should be considered.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30899086
doi: 10.1038/s41416-019-0420-y
pii: 10.1038/s41416-019-0420-y
pmc: PMC6734658
doi:
Substances chimiques
AR protein, human
0
Receptors, Androgen
0
Receptors, Estrogen
0
Receptors, Progesterone
0
EGFR protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
ERBB2 protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
ErbB Receptors
EC 2.7.10.1
Receptor, ErbB-2
EC 2.7.10.1
Types de publication
Clinical Trial, Phase III
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
913-921Références
Oncogene. 2005 Jul 7;24(29):4660-71
pubmed: 15897907
J Clin Oncol. 2007 May 20;25(15):2127-32
pubmed: 17513820
J Clin Oncol. 2013 Nov 1;31(31):3997-4013
pubmed: 24101045
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 May 20;101(10):736-50
pubmed: 19436038
JCO Precis Oncol. 2018 Nov;2:0
pubmed: 35135102
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Mar 10;27(8):1160-7
pubmed: 19204204
Nat Med. 2009 Jan;15(1):68-74
pubmed: 19122658
Lancet Oncol. 2011 Jun;12(6):527-39
pubmed: 21570352
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Mar 20;36(9):884-890
pubmed: 29373071
PLoS One. 2016 Jun 16;11(6):e0157368
pubmed: 27310713
Oncogene. 2012 Mar 1;31(9):1196-206
pubmed: 21785460
Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Apr 1;21(7):1688-98
pubmed: 25208879
Breast Cancer Res. 2018 Jan 30;20(1):8
pubmed: 29382369
Ann Oncol. 2016 May;27(5):812-8
pubmed: 27052658
Nature. 2000 Aug 17;406(6797):747-52
pubmed: 10963602
Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Oct 1;19(19):5505-12
pubmed: 23965901
Ann Oncol. 2011 Aug;22(8):1736-47
pubmed: 21709140
Mod Pathol. 2011 Jul;24(7):924-31
pubmed: 21552212
Oncogene. 1997 Jan 16;14(2):163-9
pubmed: 9010218
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Nov;130(2):477-87
pubmed: 21837479
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995 Apr 25;92(9):3963-7
pubmed: 7732013
Oncogene. 2006 Jun 29;25(28):3994-4008
pubmed: 16491124
J Clin Invest. 2011 Jul;121(7):2750-67
pubmed: 21633166
Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Oct 1;19(19):5533-40
pubmed: 23948975