Emad A. Rakha

Prognostic markers in triple-negative breast cancer.

Triple‐negative breast cancer (estrogen receptor‐negative, progesterone receptor‐negative, and HER2‐negative) is a high risk breast cancer that lacks the benefit of specific therapy that targets these proteins.

Subtyping of breast cancer by immunohistochemistry to investigate a relationship between subtype and short and long term survival: a collaborative analysis of data for 10,159 cases from 12 studies

Paul Pharoah and colleagues evaluate the prognostic significance of immunohistochemical subtype classification in more than 10,000 breast cancer cases with early disease, and examine the influence of a patients survival time on the prediction of future survival.

High-throughput protein expression analysis using tissue microarray technology of a large well-characterised series identifies biologically distinct classes of breast cancer confirming recent cDNA expression analyses

Recent studies on gene molecular profiling using cDNA microarray in a relatively small series of breast cancer have identified biologically distinct groups with apparent clinical and prognostic relevance. The validation of such new taxonomies should be confirmed on larger series of cases prior to acceptance in clinical practice. The development of tissue microarray (TMA) technology provides methodology for high‐throughput concomitant analyses of multiple proteins on large numbers of archival tumour samples. In our study, we have used immunohistochemistry techniques applied to TMA preparations of 1,076 cases of invasive breast cancer to study the combined protein expression profiles of a large panel of well‐characterized commercially available biomarkers related to epithelial cell lineage, differentiation, hormone and growth factor receptors and gene products known to be altered in some forms of breast cancer. Using hierarchical clustering methodology, 5 groups with distinct patterns of protein expression were identified. A sixth group of only 4 cases was also identified but deemed too small for further detailed assessment. Further analysis of these clusters was performed using multiple layer perceptron (MLP)‐artificial neural network (ANN) with a back propagation algorithm to identify key biomarkers driving the membership of each group. We have identified 2 large groups by their expression of luminal epithelial cell phenotypic characteristics, hormone receptors positivity, absence of basal epithelial phenotype characteristics and lack of c‐erbB‐2 protein overexpression. Two additional groups were characterized by high c‐erbB‐2 positivity and negative or weak hormone receptors expression but showed differences in MUC1 and E‐cadherin expression. The final group was characterized by strong basal epithelial characteristics, p53 positivity, absent hormone receptors and weak to low luminal epithelial cytokeratin expression. In addition, we have identified significant differences between clusters identified in this series with respect to established prognostic factors including tumour grade, size and histologic tumour type as well as differences in patient outcomes. The different protein expression profiles identified in our study confirm the biologic heterogeneity of breast cancer and demonstrate the clinical relevance of classification in this manner. These observations could form the basis of revision of existing traditional classification systems for breast cancer.

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Distinguishing between Basal and Nonbasal Subtypes

Purpose: Triple-negative (TN; estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER-2 negative) cancer and basal-like breast cancer (BLBC) are associated with poor outcome and lack the benefit of targeted therapy. It is widely perceived that BLBC and TN tumors are synonymous and BLBC can be defined using a TN definition without the need for the expression of basal markers. Experimental Design: We have used two well-defined cohorts of breast cancers with a large panel of biomarkers, BRCA1 mutation status, and follow-up data to compare the clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical features of TN tumors expressing one or more of the specific basal markers (CK5/6, CK17, CK14, and epidermal growth factor receptor; BLBC) with those TN tumors that express none of these markers (TN3BKE−). Results: Here, we show that although the morphologic features of BLBC are not significantly different from that of TN3BKE- tumors, BLBC showed distinct clinical and immunophenotypic differences. BLBC showed a statistically significant association with the expression of the hypoxia-associated factor (CA9), neuroendocrine markers, and other markers of poor prognosis such as p53. A difference in the expression of cell cycle-associated proteins and biomarkers involved in the immunologic portrait of tumors was seen. Compared with TN3BKE- tumors, BLBC was positively associated with BRCA1 mutation status and showed a unique pattern of distant metastasis, better response to chemotherapy, and shorter survival. Conclusion: TN breast cancers encompass a remarkably heterogeneous group of tumors. Expression of basal markers identifies a biologically and clinically distinct subgroup of TN tumors, justifying the use of basal markers (in TN tumors) to define BLBC.

Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease with varied morphological appearances, molecular features, behavior, and response to therapy. Current routine clinical management of breast cancer relies on the availability of robust clinical and pathological prognostic and predictive factors to support clinical and patient decision making in which potentially suitable treatment options are increasingly available. One of the best-established prognostic factors in breast cancer is histological grade, which represents the morphological assessment of tumor biological characteristics and has been shown to be able to generate important information related to the clinical behavior of breast cancers. Genome-wide microarray-based expression profiling studies have unraveled several characteristics of breast cancer biology and have provided further evidence that the biological features captured by histological grade are important in determining tumor behavior. Also, expression profiling studies have generated clinically useful data that have significantly improved our understanding of the biology of breast cancer, and these studies are undergoing evaluation as improved prognostic and predictive tools in clinical practice. Clinical acceptance of these molecular assays will require them to be more than expensive surrogates of established traditional factors such as histological grade. It is essential that they provide additional prognostic or predictive information above and beyond that offered by current parameters. Here, we present an analysis of the validity of histological grade as a prognostic factor and a consensus view on the significance of histological grade and its role in breast cancer classification and staging systems in this era of emerging clinical use of molecular classifiers.

Basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers: a critical review with an emphasis on the implications for pathologists and oncologists

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease encompassing a variety of entities with distinct morphological features and clinical behaviors. Although morphology is often associated with the pattern of molecular aberrations in breast cancers, it is also clear that tumors of the same histological type show remarkably different clinical behavior. This is particularly true for ‘basal-like cancer’, which is an entity defined using gene expression analysis. The purpose of this article was to review the current state of knowledge of basal-like breast cancers, to discuss the relationship between basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers, and to clarify practical implications of these diagnoses for pathologists and oncologists.

Morphological and immunophenotypic analysis of breast carcinomas with basal and myoepithelial differentiation

The aim of this study was to assess the morphological characteristics and immunohistochemical profile of breast carcinomas with basal and myoepithelial phenotypes to obtain a better understanding of their biological behaviour and nature. One thousand nine hundred and forty‐four invasive breast carcinomas were examined, using tissue microarray (TMA) technology and immunohistochemistry, to identify those tumours that showed basal and myoepithelial phenotypes, and their immunophenotype profile was characterized using a variety of markers. In addition, haematoxylin and eosin‐stained sections of these tumours were studied for several morphological parameters. The findings were correlated with patient and tumour characteristics and outcome data. Tumours were classified into two groups: (1) tumours with basal phenotype [expressing one or both basal markers (CK5/6 and/or CK14)] and (2) tumours with myoepithelial phenotype (expressing SMA and/or p63). Group 1 was further subdivided into two subgroups: (A) dominant basal pattern (more than 50% of cells positive) and (B) basal characteristics (10–50% of cells positive). Group 1 tumours constituted 18.6% (8.6% and 10% for groups 1A and 1B, respectively) and group 2 constituted 13.7% of the cases. In both groups, the most common histological types were ductal/no specific type, tubular mixed and medullary‐like carcinomas; the majority of these tumours were grade 3. There were positive associations with adenoid cystic growth pattern, loss of tubule formation, marked cellular pleomorphism, poorer Nottingham prognostic index, and development of distant metastasis. In addition, associations were found with loss of expression of steroid hormone receptors and FHIT proteins and positive expression of p53 and EGFR. The most common characteristics in group 1 were larger size, high‐grade comedo‐type necrosis, development of tumour recurrence, and absence of lymph node disease. Group 2 tumours were more common in younger patients and were associated with central acellular zones, basaloid change, and positive E‐cadherin protein expression. Group 1 characteristics were associated with both reduced overall survival (OS) [log rank (LR) = 22.5, p < 0.001] and reduced disease‐free interval (DFI) (LR = 30.1, p < 0.001), while group 2 characteristics showed an association with OS (LR = 5, p = 0.02) but not with DFI. Multivariate analysis showed that basal, but not myoepithelial, phenotype has an independent value in predicting outcome. Breast cancers with basal and myoepithelial phenotypes are distinct groups of tumours that share some common morphological features and an association with poor prognosis. The basal rather than the myoepithelial phenotype has the strongest relationship with patient outcome. Copyright

Prognostic Significance of Nottingham Histologic Grade in Invasive Breast Carcinoma

PURPOSE The three strongest prognostic determinants in operable breast cancer used in routine clinical practice are lymph node (LN) stage, primary tumor size, and histologic grade. However, grade is not included in the recent revision of the TNM staging system of breast cancer as its value is questioned in certain settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study is based on a large and well-characterized consecutive series of operable breast cancer (2,219 cases), treated according to standard protocols in a single institution, with a long-term follow-up (median, 111 months) to assess the prognostic value of routine assessment of histologic grade using Nottingham histologic grading system. RESULTS Histologic grade is strongly associated with both breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in the whole series as well as in different subgroups based on tumor size (pT1a, pT1b, pT1c, and pT2) and LN stages (pN0 and pN1 and pN2). Differences in survival were also noted between different individual grades (1, 2, and 3). Multivariate analyses showed that histologic grade is an independent predictor of both BCSS and DFS in operable breast cancer as a whole as well as in all studied subgroups. CONCLUSION Histologic grade, as assessed by the Nottingham grading system, provides a strong predictor of outcome in patients with invasive breast cancer and should be incorporated in breast cancer staging systems.

Global Histone Modifications in Breast Cancer Correlate with Tumor Phenotypes, Prognostic Factors, and Patient Outcome

Post-translational histone modifications are known to be altered in cancer cells, and loss of selected histone acetylation and methylation marks has recently been shown to predict patient outcome in human carcinoma. Immunohistochemistry was used to detect a series of histone lysine acetylation (H3K9ac, H3K18ac, H4K12ac, and H4K16ac), lysine methylation (H3K4me2 and H4K20me3), and arginine methylation (H4R3me2) marks in a well-characterized series of human breast carcinomas (n = 880). Tissue staining intensities were assessed using blinded semiquantitative scoring. Validation studies were done using immunofluorescence staining and Western blotting. Our analyses revealed low or absent H4K16ac in the majority of breast cancer cases (78.9%), suggesting that this alteration may represent an early sign of breast cancer. There was a highly significant correlation between histone modifications status, tumor biomarker phenotype, and clinical outcome, where high relative levels of global histone acetylation and methylation were associated with a favorable prognosis and detected almost exclusively in luminal-like breast tumors (93%). Moderate to low levels of lysine acetylation (H3K9ac, H3K18ac, and H4K12ac), lysine (H3K4me2 and H4K20me3), and arginine methylation (H4R3me2) were observed in carcinomas of poorer prognostic subtypes, including basal carcinomas and HER-2-positive tumors. Clustering analysis identified three groups of histone displaying distinct pattern in breast cancer, which have distinct relationships to known prognostic factors and clinical outcome. This study identifies the presence of variations in global levels of histone marks in different grades, morphologic types, and phenotype classes of invasive breast cancer and shows that these differences have clinical significance.

Expression of mucins (MUC1, MUC2, MUC3, MUC4, MUC5AC and MUC6) and their prognostic significance in human breast cancer

Mucins are a large family of glycoproteins expressed by many epithelial cells and their malignant counterparts. Much interest has been focused on expression of its members in breast cancer because of their potential role as prognostic indicators and their involvement in cancer therapy. We have examined 1447 cases of invasive breast carcinoma with a long-term follow-up, using tissue microarray (TMA) technology and immunohistochemistry to evaluate the expression profiles of several mucins (MUC1, MUC2, MUC3, MUC4, MUC5AC and MUC6) and to assess their prognostic value. We detected MUC1 expression in 91% of tumours. MUC1 overexpression was associated with a lower grade, smaller tumour size, a higher oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive phenotype and absence of both regional recurrence and distance metastasis. The subcellular localization but not the level of expression had a prognostic value in predicting outcome. The aberrant cytoplasmic and membranous localization of MUC1 was associated with poor outcome compared with apical localization, which is the normal physiological site of expression. MUC2 expression was noticed in only 8.3% of all cases and was restricted to the cytoplasm of the tumour cells. An inverse trend was identified between MUC2 expression and lymph node stage and vascular invasion status. On excluding cases of mucinous carcinoma from the analysis, the inverse association with vascular invasion was still defined and in addition an inverse association with ER status emerged. MUC3 expression was detected in 91% of cases and its expression was associated with increased local recurrence, and lymph node stage. The membranous expression of MUC3 was found to be a potentially poor prognostic feature, with higher grade and poorer Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI), and negative ER expression. MUC4, MUC5AC and MUC6 were expressed in 95, 37 and 20% of cases, respectively. Apart from an association between MUC4 expression and tumour grade and between MUC6 and ER-negative tumours, no other associations with any clinicopathological variables were found. Apart from the higher expression of MUC2 and MUC6 in mucinous carcinomas, no association was found between the expression of different mucins and tumour type. No association between the level of expression of any of the studied mucins and patient outcomes has been identified. In conclusion, most breast carcinomas express MUC1, MUC3 and MUC4. Among the various mucins expressed in breast cancer, MUC1 and MUC3 are potential prognostic indicators, MUC1 having the strongest relationship with patient outcome.