Filippo Santoro

Multicenter surveillance of women at high genetic breast cancer risk using mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (the high breast cancer risk italian 1 study): final results.

Objectives:To prospectively compare clinical breast examination, mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a multicenter surveillance of high-risk women. Materials and Methods:We enrolled asymptomatic women aged ≥25: BRCA mutation carriers; first-degree relatives of BRCA mutation carriers, and women with strong family history of breast/ovarian cancer, including those with previous personal breast cancer. Results:A total of 18 centers enrolled 501 women and performed 1592 rounds (3.2 rounds/woman). Forty-nine screen-detected and 3 interval cancers were diagnosed: 44 invasive, 8 ductal carcinoma in situ; only 4 pT2 stage; 32 G3 grade. Of 39 patients explored for nodal status, 28 (72%) were negative. Incidence per year-woman resulted 3.3% overall, 2.1% <50, and 5.4% ≥50 years (P < 0.001), 4.3% in women with previous personal breast cancer and 2.5% in those without (P = 0.045). MRI was more sensitive (91%) than clinical breast examination (18%), mammography (50%), ultrasonography (52%), or mammography plus ultrasonography (63%) (P < 0.001). Specificity ranged 96% to 99%, positive predictive value 53% to 71%, positive likelihood ratio 24 to 52 (P not significant). MRI showed significantly better negative predictive value (99.6) and negative likelihood ratio (0.09) than those of the other modalities. At receiver operating characteristic analysis, the area under the curve of MRI (0.97) was significantly higher than that of mammography (0.83) or ultrasonography (0.82) and not significantly increased when MRI was combined with mammography and/or ultrasonography. Of 52 cancers, 16 (31%) were diagnosed only by MRI, 8 of 21 (38%) in women <50, and 8 of 31 (26%) in women ≥50 years of age. Conclusion:MRI largely outperformed mammography, ultrasonography, and their combination for screening high-risk women below and over 50.

Triple-negative breast cancer: Present challenges and new perspectives

Triple‐negative breast cancers (TNBC), characterized by absence of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and lack of overexpression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), are typically associated with poor prognosis, due to aggressive tumor phenotype(s), only partial response to chemotherapy and present lack of clinically established targeted therapies. Advances in the design of individualized strategies for treatment of TNBC patients require further elucidation, by combined ‘omics’ approaches, of the molecular mechanisms underlying TNBC phenotypic heterogeneity, and the still poorly understood association of TNBC with BRCA1 mutations. An overview is here presented on TNBC profiling in terms of expression signatures, within the functional genomic breast tumor classification, and ongoing efforts toward identification of new therapy targets and bioimaging markers. Due to the complexity of aberrant molecular patterns involved in expression, pathological progression and biological/clinical heterogeneity, the search for novel TNBC biomarkers and therapy targets requires collection of multi‐dimensional data sets, use of robust multivariate data analysis techniques and development of innovative systems biology approaches.

Pharmacological blockade of group II metabotropic glutamate receptors reduces the growth of glioma cells in vivo

U87MG human glioma cells in cultures expressed metabotropic glutamate (mGlu) receptors mGlu2 and mGlu3. Addition of the mGlu2/3 receptor antagonist LY341495 to the cultures reduced cell growth, expression of cyclin D1/2, and activation of the MAP kinase and phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase pathways. This is in line with the evidence that activation of mGlu2/3 receptors sustains glioma cell proliferation. U87MG cells were either implanted under the skin (1x10(6) cells/0.5 ml) or infused into the caudate nucleus (0.5x10(6) cells/5 microl) of nude mice. Animals were treated for 28 days with mGlu receptor antagonists by means of subcutaneous osmotic minipumps. Treatments with LY341495 or (2S)-alpha-ethylglutamate (both infused at a rate of 1 mg/kg per day) reduced the size of tumors growing under the skin. Infusion of LY341495 (10 mg/kg per day) also reduced the growth of brain tumors, as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging analysis carried out every seven days. The effect of drug treatment was particularly evident during the exponential phase of tumor growth, that is, between the third and the fourth week following cell implantation. Immunohistochemical analysis showed that U87MG cells retained the expression of mGlu2/3 receptors when implanted into the brain of nude mice. These data suggest that mGlu2/3 receptor antagonists are of potential use in the experimental treatment of malignant gliomas.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Improves Breast Screening Sensitivity in BRCA Mutation Carriers Age ≥ 50 Years: Evidence From an Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE There is no consensus on whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) should be included in breast screening protocols for women with BRCA1/2 mutations age ≥ 50 years. Therefore, we investigated the evidence on age-related screening accuracy in women with BRCA1/2 mutations using individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS IPD were pooled from six high-risk screening trials including women with BRCA1/2 mutations who had completed at least one screening round with both MRI and mammography. A generalized linear mixed model with repeated measurements and a random effect of studies estimated sensitivity and specificity of MRI, mammography, and the combination in all women and specifically in those age ≥ 50 years. RESULTS Pooled analysis showed that in women age ≥ 50 years, screening sensitivity was not different from that in women age < 50 years, whereas screening specificity was. In women age ≥ 50 years, combining MRI and mammography significantly increased screening sensitivity compared with mammography alone (94.1%; 95% CI, 77.7% to 98.7% v 38.1%; 95% CI, 22.4% to 56.7%; P < .001). The combination was not significantly more sensitive than MRI alone (94.1%; 95% CI, 77.7% to 98.7% v 84.4%; 95% CI, 61.8% to 94.8%; P = .28). Combining MRI and mammography in women age ≥ 50 years resulted in sensitivity similar to that in women age < 50 years (94.1%; 95% CI, 77.7% to 98.7% v 93.2%; 95% CI, 79.3% to 98%; P = .79). CONCLUSION Addition of MRI to mammography for screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers age ≥ 50 years improves screening sensitivity by a magnitude similar to that observed in younger women. Limiting screening MRI in BRCA1/2 carriers age ≥ 50 years should be reconsidered.

Contribution of mammography to MRI screening in BRCA mutation carriers by BRCA status and age : individual patient data meta-analysis

Background:We investigated the additional contribution of mammography to screening accuracy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers screened with MRI at different ages using individual patient data from six high-risk screening trials.Methods:Sensitivity and specificity of MRI, mammography and the combination of these tests were compared stratified for BRCA mutation and age using generalised linear mixed models with random effect for studies. Number of screens needed (NSN) for additional mammography-only detected cancer was estimated.Results:In BRCA1/2 mutation carriers of all ages (BRCA1=1219 and BRCA2=732), adding mammography to MRI did not significantly increase screening sensitivity (increased by 3.9% in BRCA1 and 12.6% in BRCA2 mutation carriers, P>0.05). However, in women with BRCA2 mutation younger than 40 years, one-third of breast cancers were detected by mammography only. Number of screens needed for mammography to detect one breast cancer not detected by MRI was much higher for BRCA1 compared with BRCA2 mutation carriers at initial and repeat screening.Conclusions:Additional screening sensitivity from mammography above that from MRI is limited in BRCA1 mutation carriers, whereas mammography contributes to screening sensitivity in BRCA2 mutation carriers, especially those ⩽40 years. The evidence from our work highlights that a differential screening schedule by BRCA status is worth considering.

MRI screening of women with hereditary predisposition to breast cancer: diagnostic performance and survival analysis

Purpose MRI screening has been shown to allow for an earlier diagnosis of breast cancer in asymptomatic women with proven or suspected mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes. Major efforts are presently addressed to assess to which extent this improves high-risk women survival. Methods We here discuss the article by Gareth et al (Breast Cancer Res Treat 145(3):663–672, 2014). Results Gareth and colleagues compared MRI sensitivity and specificity and clinical characteristics of breast cancers detected in their study with those reported in six similar prospective cohort screening studies. We here extended this analysis to a total of nine published cohort studies, including the High Breast Cancer Risk Italian Study 1 (HIBCRIT-1) for which we considered the final results published in 2011, instead of those of our interim report (2007) utilized by Gareth et al. Our updated analysis shows that in a total of 392 diagnosed breast cancers, 77 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 73–81 %) were invasive and 52 % (95 % CI 46–58 %) were invasive grade 3. Only 23 % (95 % CI 18–28 %) of MRI-detected invasive breast cancers had metastatic lymph nodal involvement and 45 % (95 % CI 39–51 %) had a size ≤10 mm. Discussion and Conclusions The capability of MRI to detect invasive breast cancers at early stages could at least partly explain the significantly higher 10-year survival estimated by Gareth et al for asymptomatic highrisk women screened using MRI in the period 1997–2013 (95 %) compared with unscreened high-risk women diagnosed for breast cancer after 1990 and identified as BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers in the years following diagnosis (74 %). It appears however worth noting that the evolution of therapeutic protocols applied to high-risk patients after the discovery of BRCA mutations in 1995-1997 could also have contributed to the observed difference in the survival of these two groups. On the other hand, we agree with Gareth et al that larger datasets are needed to evaluate to which extent improvements in the cancer detection impact on disease-free and overall survival of MRI-screened compared with mammography-alone-screened high-risk women.

Generation and characterization of a human single-chain fragment variable (scFv) antibody against cytosine deaminase from Yeast

BackgroundThe ability of cytosine deaminase (CD) to convert the antifungal agent 5-fluorocytosine (5-FC) into one of the most potent and largely used anticancer compound such as 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) raised considerable interest in this enzyme to model gene or antibody – directed enzyme-prodrug therapy (GDEPT/ADEPT) aiming to improve the therapeutic ratio (benefit versus toxic side-effects) of cancer chemotherapy. The selection and characterization of a human monoclonal antibody in single chain fragment (scFv) format represents a powerful reagent to allow in in vitro and in vivo detection of CD expression in GDEPT/ADEPT studies.ResultsAn enzymatic active recombinant CD from yeast (yCD) was expressed in E. coli system and used as antigen for biopanning approach of the large semi-synthetic ETH-2 antibody phage library. Several scFvs were isolated and specificity towards yCD was confirmed by Western blot and ELISA. Further, biochemical and functional investigations demonstrated that the binding of specific scFv with yCD did not interfere with the activity of the enzyme in converting 5-FC into 5-FU.ConclusionThe construction of libraries of recombinant antibody fragments that are displayed on the surface of filamentous phage, and the selection of phage antibodies against target antigens, have become an important biotechnological tool in generating new monoclonal antibodies for research and clinical applications. The scFvH5 generated by this method is the first human antibody which is able to detect yCD in routinary laboratory techniques without interfering with its enzymatic function.

Triple negative versus non-triple negative breast cancers in high-risk women: Phenotype features and survival from the HIBCRIT-1 MRI-including screening study

Purpose: To compare phenotype features and survival of triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) versus non-TNBCs detected during a multimodal annual screening of high-risk women. Experimental Design: Analysis of data from asymptomatic high-risk women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer during the HIBCRIT-1 study with median 9.7-year follow-up. Results: Of 501 enrolled women with BRCA1/2 mutation or strong family history (SFH), 44 were diagnosed with invasive breast cancers: 20 BRCA1 (45%), 9 BRCA2 (21%), 15 SFH (34%). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sensitivity (90%) outperformed that of mammography (43%, P < 0.001) and ultrasonography (61%, P = 0.004). The 44 cases (41 screen-detected; 3 BRCA1-associated interval TNBCs) comprised 14 TNBCs (32%) and 30 non-TNBCs (68%), without significant differences for age at diagnosis, menopausal status, prophylactic oophorectomy, or previous breast cancer. Of 14 TNBC patients, 11 (79%) were BRCA1; of the 20 BRCA1 patients, 11 (55%) had TNBC; and of 15 SFH patients, 14 (93%) had non-TNBCs (P = 0.007). Invasive ductal carcinomas (IDC) were 86% for TNBCs versus 43% for non-TNBCs (P = 0.010), G3 IDCs 71% versus 23% (P = 0.006), size 16 ± 5 mm versus 12 ± 6 mm (P = 0.007). TNBC patients had more frequent ipsilateral mastectomy (79% vs. 43% for non-TNBCs, P = 0.050), contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (43% vs. 10%, P = 0.019), and adjuvant chemotherapy (100% vs. 44%, P < 0.001). The 5-year overall survival was 86% ± 9% for TNBCs versus 93% ± 5% (P = 0.946) for non-TNBCs; 5-year disease-free survival was 77% ± 12% versus 76% ± 8% (P = 0.216). Conclusions: In high-risk women, by combining an MRI-including annual screening with adequate treatment, the usual reported gap in outcome between TNBCs and non-TNBCs could be reduced. Clin Cancer Res; 22(4); 895–904. ©2015 AACR.

Screening high risk women with MRI alone

Breast cancer affects up to 1:7 to 1:11 women in Western countries. Although breast cancer is mainly a sporadic disease, about 15% of cases are clustered in families with highly or moderately elevated incidence. Pathogenic mutations in high-risk genes at autosomic dominant inheritance are held responsible for about 5% of BCs, in which the disease may have early onset, with an estimated cumulative lifetime risk as high as 50% to 85%. About 50% of hereditary BCs can be explained by mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes [1,2]. In women at high risk of breast cancer, screening mammography has shown a lower sensitivity (29–50%) compared with that of the screening addressed to the general female population (70–80%), with higher percentages of interval cancers (35–50% versus 20–25%) and a higher rate of nodal involvement (20–56% versus 22%) [1,3]. In the last decade a number of prospective, non-randomized studies have been conducted in Europe and North America to assess the value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI as a screening tool to be used as an adjunct to mammography, or to mammography plus ultrasonography (US) for the surveillance of women at high geneticfamiliar risk of BC [4–12]. The general result of these studies is that MRI largely outperforms mammography and/or US in detecting breast cancers in asymptomatic high-risk women, as confirmed by reviews and meta-analyses [13–17]. In 2007, on the basis of early evidence available in the literature, the American Cancer Society issued a recommendation in favor

An Educational Video Showing How to Use the CoBRA Guideline

Standardized and retrievable citation of bioresources is paramount for the recognition of the work needed for setting and maintaining them. Here we present an educational video to help researchers and biobankers to correctly use the CoBRA guideline, when writing a scientific paper in which the bioresources used in the study have to be cited. As in the acronym, CoBRA is a guideline for the Citation of BioResources in journal Articles and it sets a standard for citing bioresources (including biobanks) in scientific articles, whenever a study based on the use of a bioresource is published.