Martin Sjöström

A Combined Shotgun and Targeted Mass Spectrometry Strategy for Breast Cancer Biomarker Discovery

It is of highest importance to find proteins responsible for breast cancer dissemination, for use as biomarkers or treatment targets. We established and performed a combined nontargeted LC-MS/MS and a targeted LC-SRM workflow for discovery and validation of protein biomarkers. Eighty breast tumors, stratified for estrogen receptor status and development of distant recurrence (DR ± ), were collected. After enrichment of N-glycosylated peptides, label-free LC-MS/MS was performed on each individual tumor in triplicate. In total, 1515 glycopeptides from 778 proteins were identified and used to create a map of the breast cancer N-glycosylated proteome. Based on this specific proteome map, we constructed a 92-plex targeted label-free LC-SRM panel. These proteins were quantified across samples by LC-SRM, resulting in 10 proteins consistently differentially regulated between DR+/DR- tumors. Five proteins were further validated in a separate cohort as prognostic biomarkers at the gene expression level. We also compared the LC-SRM results to clinically reported HER2 status, demonstrating its clinical accuracy. In conclusion, we demonstrate a combined mass spectrometry strategy, at large scale on clinical samples, leading to the identification and validation of five proteins as potential biomarkers for breast cancer recurrence. All MS data are available via ProteomeXchange and PASSEL with identifiers PXD001685 and PASS00643.

G Protein-Coupled Estrogen Receptor Is Apoptotic and Correlates with Increased Distant Disease-Free Survival of Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Patients

Purpose: G protein–coupled estrogen receptor 1 (GPER1), previously named GPR30, is a membrane receptor reported to mediate nongenomic estrogen responses. We investigated if GPER1 expression correlates with any clinicopathologic variables and distant disease-free survival (DDFS) in patients with breast cancer, if any prognostic impact of the receptor is dependent on estrogen receptor-α (ER-α) status, and if the receptor impacts apoptotic signaling in ER-positive breast cancer cells. Experimental Design: GPER1 expression was analyzed by immunohistochemistry in breast tumors from 273 pre- and postmenopausal stage II patients, all treated with adjuvant tamoxifen for 2 years (cohort I) and from 208 premenopausal lymph node-negative patients, of which 87% were not subjected to any adjuvant systemic treatment (cohort II). GPER1-dependent proapoptotic signaling was analyzed in MCF7 cells with and without GPER1 knockdown, T47D cells, HEK293 cells (HEK), and HEK stably expressing GPER1 (HEK-R). Results: GPER1 positively correlates with ER and progesterone receptor expression. Multivariate analysis showed that GPER1 is an independent prognostic marker of increased 10-year DDFS in the ER-positive subgroup. HEK-R has higher basal proapoptotic signaling compared with HEK including increased cytochrome C release, caspase-3 cleavage, PARP cleavage, and decreased cell viability. Treating HEK-R with the proteasome inhibitor epoxomicin, to decrease GPER1 degradation, further increases receptor-dependent proapoptotic signaling. Also, GPER1 knockdown decreases basal and agonist-stimulated proapoptotic receptor signaling in MCF7 cells. Conclusions: GPER1 is a prognostic indicator for increased DDFS in ER-positive breast cancer, which may be associated with constitutive GPER1-dependent proapoptotic signaling in ER-positive breast cancer cells. Clin Cancer Res; 19(7); 1681–92. ©2013 AACR.

Remarkable similarities of chromosomal rearrangements between primary human breast cancers and matched distant metastases as revealed by whole-genome sequencing.

To better understand and characterize chromosomal structural variation during breast cancer progression, we enumerated chromosomal rearrangements for 11 patients by performing low-coverage whole-genome sequencing of 11 primary breast tumors and their 13 matched distant metastases. The tumor genomes harbored a median of 85 (range 18-404) rearrangements per tumor, with a median of 82 (26-310) in primaries compared to 87 (18-404) in distant metastases. Concordance between paired tumors from the same patient was high with a median of 89% of rearrangements shared (range 61-100%), whereas little overlap was found when comparing all possible pairings of tumors from different patients (median 3%). The tumors exhibited diverse genomic patterns of rearrangements: some carried events distributed throughout the genome while others had events mostly within densely clustered chromothripsis-like foci at a few chromosomal locations. Irrespectively, the patterns were highly conserved between the primary tumor and metastases from the same patient. Rearrangements occurred more frequently in genic areas than expected by chance and among the genes affected there was significant enrichment for cancer-associated genes including disruption of TP53, RB1, PTEN, and ESR1, likely contributing to tumor development. Our findings are most consistent with chromosomal rearrangements being early events in breast cancer progression that remain stable during the development from primary tumor to distant metastasis.

Changes in glycoprotein expression between primary breast tumour and synchronous lymph node metastases or asynchronous distant metastases.

BackgroundBreast cancer is a very heterogeneous disease and some patients are cured by the surgical removal of the primary tumour whilst other patients suffer from metastasis and spreading of the disease, despite adjuvant therapy. A number of prognostic and treatment predictive factors have been identified such as tumour size, oestrogen (ER) and progesterone (PgR) receptor status, human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) status, histological grade, Ki67 and age. Lymph node involvement is also assessed during surgery to determine if the tumour has spread which requires dissection of the axilla and adjuvant treatment. The prognostic and treatment predictive factors assessing the nature of the tumour are all routinely based on the status of the primary tumour.ResultsWe have analysed a unique tumour set of fourteen primary breast cancer tumours with matched synchronous axillary lymph node metastases and a set of nine primary tumours with, later developed, matched distant metastases from different sites in the body. We used a pairwise tumour analysis (from the same individual) since the difference between the same tumour-type in different patients was greater. Glycopeptide capture was used in this study to selectively isolate and quantify N-linked glycopeptides from tumours mixtures and the captured glycopeptides were subjected to label-free quantitative tandem mass spectrometry analysis. Differentially expressed proteins between primary tumours and matched lymph node metastasis and distant metastasis were identified. Two of the top hits, ATPIF1 and tubulin β-chain were validated by immunohistochemistry to be differentially regulated.ConclusionsWe show that the expression of a large number of glycosylated proteins change between primary tumours and matched lymph node metastases and distant metastases, confirming that cancer cells undergo a molecular transformation during the spread to a secondary site. The proteins are part of important pathways such as cell adhesion, migration pathways and immune response giving insight into molecular changes needed for the tumour to spread. The large difference between primary tumours and lymph node and distant metastases also suggest that treatment should be based on the phenotype of the lymph node and distant metastases.

Response to Radiotherapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Different Breast Cancer Subtypes in the Swedish Breast Cancer Group 91 Radiotherapy Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose To evaluate the effect of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after breast conservation surgery in different breast cancer subtypes in a large, randomized clinical trial with long-term follow-up. Patients and Methods Tumor tissue was collected from 1,003 patients with node-negative, stage I and II breast cancer who were randomly assigned in the Swedish Breast Cancer Group 91 Radiotherapy trial between 1991 and 1997 to breast conservation surgery with or without RT. Systemic adjuvant treatment was sparsely used (8%). Subtyping was performed with immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization on tissue microarrays for 958 tumors. Results RT reduced the cumulative incidence of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) as a first event within 10 years for luminal A-like tumors (19% v 9%; P = .001), luminal B-like tumors (24% v 8%; P < .001), and triple-negative tumors (21% v 6%; P = .08), but not for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (luminal and nonluminal) tumors (15% v 19%; P = .6); however, evidence of an overall difference in RT effect between subtypes was weak ( P = .21). RT reduced the rate of death from breast cancer (BCD) for triple-negative tumors (hazard ratio, 0.35; P = .06), but not for other subtypes. Death from any cause was not improved by RT in any subtype. A hypothesized clinical low-risk group did not have a low risk of IBTR without RT, and RT reduced the rate of IBTR as a first event after 10 years (20% v 6%; P = .008), but had no effect on BCD or death from any cause. Conclusion Subtype was not predictive of response to RT, although, in our study, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive tumors seemed to be most radioresistant, whereas triple-negative tumors had the largest effect on BCD. The effect of RT in the presumed low-risk luminal A-like tumors was excellent.

TOP2A and EZH2 provide early detection of an aggressive prostate cancer subgroup

Purpose: Current clinical parameters do not stratify indolent from aggressive prostate cancer. Aggressive prostate cancer, defined by the progression from localized disease to metastasis, is responsible for the majority of prostate cancer–associated mortality. Recent gene expression profiling has proven successful in predicting the outcome of prostate cancer patients; however, they have yet to provide targeted therapy approaches that could inhibit a patients progression to metastatic disease. Experimental Design: We have interrogated a total of seven primary prostate cancer cohorts (n = 1,900), two metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer datasets (n = 293), and one prospective cohort (n = 1,385) to assess the impact of TOP2A and EZH2 expression on prostate cancer cellular program and patient outcomes. We also performed IHC staining for TOP2A and EZH2 in a cohort of primary prostate cancer patients (n = 89) with known outcome. Finally, we explored the therapeutic potential of a combination therapy targeting both TOP2A and EZH2 using novel prostate cancer–derived murine cell lines. Results: We demonstrate by genome-wide analysis of independent primary and metastatic prostate cancer datasets that concurrent TOP2A and EZH2 mRNA and protein upregulation selected for a subgroup of primary and metastatic patients with more aggressive disease and notable overlap of genes involved in mitotic regulation. Importantly, TOP2A and EZH2 in prostate cancer cells act as key driving oncogenes, a fact highlighted by sensitivity to combination-targeted therapy. Conclusions: Overall, our data support further assessment of TOP2A and EZH2 as biomarkers for early identification of patients with increased metastatic potential that may benefit from adjuvant or neoadjuvant targeted therapy approaches. Clin Cancer Res; 23(22); 7072–83. ©2017 AACR.

Stem cell biomarker ALDH1A1 in breast cancer shows an association with prognosis and clinicopathological variables that is highly cut-off dependent

Aims Aldehyde dehydrogenase family 1 member A1 (ALDH1A1) is a putative marker of breast cancer stem cells (CSCs) with prognostic implications when expressed in cancer or stroma. However, previous results are contradictory and we therefore aimed to further evaluate the impact of ALDH1A1 on distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and correlation with clinicopathological variables in breast cancer, specifically by evaluating different cut-offs. Methods Two breast cancer cohorts (N=216 and N=210) were evaluated with immunohistochemistry for ALDH1A1 on tissue microarrays with three different cut-offs in cancer cells and in stromal cells. The association of ALDH1A1 with DDFS and other clinicopathological variables was assessed. As further validation, gene expression levels of ALDH1A1 and association with survival were analysed in one of the cohorts and a separate cohort. Results ALDH1A1 expression in cancer cells was associated with either a better or a worse prognosis, depending on cut-off. Considering weakly stained cancer cells as positive, ALDH1A1+ was associated with a better prognosis in both cohorts. Considering only strongly stained cells as positive, ALDH1A1+ was associated with oestrogen receptor and progesterone receptor negativity in both cohorts and worse prognosis in one of the cohorts. Stromal ALDH1A1 staining was associated with improved DDFS in one cohort. Gene expression analysis showed that a high ALDH1A1 expression was associated with a better prognosis. Conclusions ALDH1A1 is associated with DDFS and clinicopathological variables, both in cancer cells and stroma, but is highly cut-off dependent. Only the strongly ALDH1A1-stained cells show a more aggressive phenotype typical for CSCs.

Cancer associated proteins in blood plasma : Determining normal variation

Protein biomarkers have the potential to improve diagnosis, stratification of patients into treatment cohorts, follow disease progression and treatment response. One distinct group of potential biomarkers comprises proteins which have been linked to cancer, known as cancer associated proteins (CAPs). We determined the normal variation of 86 CAPs in 72 individual plasma samples collected from ten individuals using SRM mass spectrometry. Samples were collected weekly during 5 weeks from ten volunteers and over one day at nine fixed time points from three volunteers. We determined the degree of the normal variation depending on interpersonal variation, variation due to time of day, and variation over weeks and observed that the variation dependent on the time of day appeared to be the most important. Subdivision of the proteins resulted in two predominant protein groups containing 21 proteins with relatively high variation in all three factors (day, week and individual), and 22 proteins with relatively low variation in all factors. We present a strategy for prioritizing biomarker candidates for future studies based on stratification over their normal variation and have made all data publicly available. Our findings can be used to improve selection of biomarker candidates in future studies and to determine which proteins are most suitable depending on study design.

The Immune Landscape of Prostate Cancer and Nomination of PD-L2 as a Potential Therapeutic Target

BACKGROUND Immunotherapy has been less successful in treating prostate cancer than other solid tumors. We sought to better understand the immune landscape in prostate cancer and identify immune-related biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets. METHODS We analyzed gene expression data from 7826 prospectively collected prostatectomy samples (2013-2016), and 1567 retrospective samples with long-term clinical outcomes, for a total of 9393 samples, all profiled on the same commercial clinical platform in a CLIA-certified lab. The primary outcome was distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Secondary outcomes included biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS Unsupervised hierarchical clustering of hallmark pathways demonstrated an immune-related tumor cluster. Increased estimated immune content scores based on immune-specific genes from the literature were associated with worse bRFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.26 [95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.12 to 1.42]; P < .001), DMFS (HR = 1.34 [95% CI = 1.13 to 1.58]; P < .001), PCSS (HR = 1.53 [95% CI = 1.21 to 1.92]; P < .001), and OS (HR = 1.27 [95% CI = 1.07 to 1.50]; P = .006). Deconvolution using Cibersort revealed that mast cells, natural killer cells, and dendritic cells conferred improved DMFS, whereas macrophages and T-cells conferred worse DMFS. Interestingly, while PD-L1 was not prognostic, consistent with its low expression in prostate cancer, PD-L2 was expressed at statistically significantly higher levels (P < .001) and was associated with worse bRFS (HR = 1.17 [95% CI = 1.03 to 1.33]; P = .01), DMFS (HR = 1.25 [95% CI = 1.05 to 1.49]; P = .01), and PCSS (HR = 1.45 [95% CI = 1.13 to 1.86]; P = .003). PD-L2 was strongly associated with immune-related pathways on gene set enrichment analysis suggesting that it is playing an important role in immune modulation in clinical prostate cancer samples. Furthermore, PD-L2 was correlated with radiation response pathways, and also predicted response to postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) on multivariable interaction analysis (P = .03). CONCLUSION In the largest study of its kind to date, these results illustrate the complex relationship between the tumor-immune interaction, prognosis, and response to radiotherapy, and nominate PD-L2 as a potential novel therapeutic target in prostate cancer, potentially in combination with radiotherapy.

Abstract P4-05-01: G protein-coupled estrogen receptor expression in lymph node metastasis and contralateral breast cancer during endocrine treatment

Background: G protein-coupled estrogen receptor (GPER) is a putative estrogen receptor (ER) with potential clinical implications in breast cancer. Depending on subcellular location, cut-off and treatment, GPER has been proposed as both a marker of aggressive disease and of good prognosis. The correlation with known prognostic factors appears to be biphasic. Furthermore, plasma membrane GPER-overexpression (GPERPM) is associated to a worse prognosis, suggesting potential receptor mutation or amplification. In vitro studies also show that tamoxifen upregulates GPER in breast cancer cells, suggesting GPER as a mediator of endocrine resistance. To further clarify the role of GPER in breast cancer and endocrine treatment we studied GPER during evolution from primary tumor to lymph node metastasis (lgl-met), and from first tumor (BC1) to a second contralateral tumor (CBC), with/without endocrine treatment (mainly tamoxifen) in between. As a CBC developed despite adjuvant treatment given for BC1 is presumably resistant to this treatment, it may be used to study endocrine treatment escape mechanisms in vivo. Patients and methods: From a well-defined population-based cohort of CBC-patients we constructed a unique tissue-microarray including 688 patients with metachronous CBC. Overall GPER staining intensity (0-5) (GPERoverall) and GPERPM (present/absent) was evaluated by two investigators in BC1 (n=559), CBC (n=595) and corresponding lgl-met (nBC1=151 and nCBC=158). Impact on survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression, and p-values calculated with the log rank test. Association was tested with a chi-square test (for trend when appropriate), and differences between paired samples with Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: GPR30overall showed the expected biphasic association with ER-α and the progesterone receptor (PgR) in BC1 and CBC, where high and low GPER expression associated with ER/PgR negativity (p Conclusion: A high GPER expression in CBC and matched lgl-met is associated with worse OS. The overall expression of GPER decreases from primary tumor to lgl-met, but plasma membrane staining increases, supporting a mutation or amplification of the receptor. In addition, GPER expression correlates with other markers of aggressive disease, highlighting the potential as a novel treatment target. However, prior tamoxifen treatment did not alter tumor GPER expression. Citation Format: Sjostrom M, Ferno M, Ryden L, Leeb-Lundberg FLM, Alkner S. G protein-coupled estrogen receptor expression in lymph node metastasis and contralateral breast cancer during endocrine treatment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-05-01.