Gene expression in extratumoral microenvironment predicts clinical outcome in breast cancer patients

IntroductionA gene expression signature indicative of activated wound responses is common to more than 90% of non-neoplastic tissues adjacent to breast cancer, but these tissues also exhibit substantial heterogeneity. We hypothesized that gene expression subtypes of breast cancer microenvironment can be defined and that these microenvironment subtypes have clinical relevance.MethodsGene expression was evaluated in 72 patient-derived breast tissue samples adjacent to invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ. Unsupervised clustering identified two distinct gene expression subgroups that differed in expression of genes involved in activation of fibrosis, cellular movement, cell adhesion and cell-cell contact. We evaluated the prognostic relevance of extratumoral subtype (comparing the Active group, defined by high expression of fibrosis and cellular movement genes, to the Inactive group, defined by high expression of claudins and other cellular adhesion and cell-cell contact genes) using clinical data. To establish the biological characteristics of these subtypes, gene expression profiles were compared against published and novel tumor and tumor stroma-derived signatures (Twist-related protein 1 (TWIST1) overexpression, transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β)-induced fibroblast activation, breast fibrosis, claudin-low tumor subtype and estrogen response). Histological and immunohistochemical analyses of tissues representing each microenvironment subtype were performed to evaluate protein expression and compositional differences between microenvironment subtypes.ResultsExtratumoral Active versus Inactive subtypes were not significantly associated with overall survival among all patients (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.4, 95% CI 0.6 to 2.8, P = 0.337), but there was a strong association with overall survival among estrogen receptor (ER) positive patients (HR = 2.5, 95% CI 0.9 to 6.7, P = 0.062) and hormone-treated patients (HR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 7.0, P = 0.045). The Active subtype of breast microenvironment is correlated with TWIST-overexpression signatures and shares features of claudin-low breast cancers. The Active subtype was also associated with expression of TGF-β induced fibroblast activation signatures, but there was no significant association between Active/Inactive microenvironment and desmoid type fibrosis or estrogen response gene expression signatures. Consistent with the RNA expression profiles, Active cancer-adjacent tissues exhibited higher density of TWIST nuclear staining, predominantly in epithelium, and no evidence of increased fibrosis.ConclusionsThese results document the presence of two distinct subtypes of microenvironment, with Active versus Inactive cancer-adjacent extratumoral microenvironment influencing the aggressiveness and outcome of ER-positive human breast cancers.

[1]  D. Radisky,et al.  Microenvironmental Influences that Drive Progression from Benign Breast Disease to Invasive Breast Cancer , 2010, Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia.

[2]  C. Perou,et al.  Gene expression profiles of breast biopsies from healthy women identify a group with claudin-low features , 2011, BMC Medical Genomics.

[3]  J. Parker,et al.  Abrogation of TGF-beta signaling enhances chemokine production and correlates with prognosis in human breast cancer. , 2009, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[4]  Jason R. Pirone,et al.  Activation of Host Wound Responses in Breast Cancer Microenvironment , 2009, Clinical Cancer Research.

[5]  R. Kalluri,et al.  Early role of Fsp1 in epithelial-mesenchymal transformation. , 1997, American journal of physiology. Renal physiology.

[6]  Zhiyuan Hu,et al.  Estrogen-regulated genes predict survival in hormone receptor-positive breast cancers. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  Kakajan Komurov,et al.  Core epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition interactome gene-expression signature is associated with claudin-low and metaplastic breast cancer subtypes , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Andrew H. Beck,et al.  The Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor 1 Response Signature in Breast Carcinoma , 2009, Clinical Cancer Research.

[9]  A. Neugut,et al.  Mutations in p53, p53 protein overexpression and breast cancer survival , 2008, Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine.

[10]  D. Proia,et al.  Reconstruction of human mammary tissues in a mouse model , 2006, Nature Protocols.

[11]  Robert A. Weinberg,et al.  The basics of epithelial-mesenchymal transition. , 2009, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[12]  G. Berx,et al.  The two-handed E box binding zinc finger protein SIP1 downregulates E-cadherin and induces invasion. , 2001, Molecular cell.

[13]  Antonio de las Morenas,et al.  Gene Expression Profiles of Estrogen Receptor–Positive and Estrogen Receptor–Negative Breast Cancers Are Detectable in Histologically Normal Breast Epithelium , 2010, Clinical Cancer Research.

[14]  S. Chanock,et al.  Polymorphisms in DNA double-strand break repair genes and risk of breast cancer: two population-based studies in USA and Poland, and meta-analyses , 2006, Human Genetics.

[15]  Y. Okada Volume expansion-sensing outward-rectifier Cl- channel: fresh start to the molecular identity and volume sensor. , 1997, The American journal of physiology.

[16]  Isabelle Bedrosian,et al.  Cyclin E and survival in patients with breast cancer. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  M. Sporn,et al.  Mediation of wound-related Rous sarcoma virus tumorigenesis by TGF-beta. , 1990, Science.

[18]  Jason I. Herschkowitz,et al.  Phenotypic and molecular characterization of the claudin-low intrinsic subtype of breast cancer , 2010, Breast Cancer Research.

[19]  Andrew H. Beck,et al.  Endogenous Versus Tumor-Specific Host Response to Breast Carcinoma: A Study of Stromal Response in Synchronous Breast Primaries and Biopsy Site Changes , 2010, Clinical Cancer Research.

[20]  C. Perou,et al.  Interactions with Fibroblasts Are Distinct in Basal-Like and Luminal Breast Cancers , 2010, Molecular Cancer Research.

[21]  Yufeng Liu,et al.  Building prognostic models for breast cancer patients using clinical variables and hundreds of gene expression signatures , 2011, BMC Medical Genomics.

[22]  A. Mannermaa,et al.  Nuclear expression of Snail1 in borderline and malignant epithelial ovarian tumours is associated with tumour progression , 2009, BMC Cancer.

[23]  J. Thiery Epithelial–mesenchymal transitions in tumour progression , 2002, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[24]  Andrew H. Beck,et al.  The fibromatosis signature defines a robust stromal response in breast carcinoma , 2008, Laboratory Investigation.

[25]  Raghu Kalluri,et al.  The basics of epithelial-mesenchymal transition. , 2009, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[26]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Significance analysis of microarrays applied to the ionizing radiation response , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  Andrew H. Beck,et al.  Analysis of stromal signatures in the tumor microenvironment of ductal carcinoma in situ , 2010, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[28]  A. Nobel,et al.  The molecular portraits of breast tumors are conserved across microarray platforms , 2006, BMC Genomics.

[29]  M. Barcellos-Hoff,et al.  Transforming growth factor-β in breast cancer: too much, too late , 2009, Breast Cancer Research.

[30]  F. Strutz,et al.  Identification and characterization of a fibroblast marker: FSP1 , 1995, The Journal of cell biology.

[31]  Christian A. Rees,et al.  Molecular portraits of human breast tumours , 2000, Nature.

[32]  N. Hynes,et al.  Key signalling nodes in mammary gland development and cancer: Myc , 2009, Breast Cancer Research.

[33]  C. Heaphy,et al.  Mammary field cancerization: molecular evidence and clinical importance , 2009, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[34]  M. Washington,et al.  TGF-ß Signaling in Fibroblasts Modulates the Oncogenic Potential of Adjacent Epithelia , 2004, Science.

[35]  Kimberly S. Butler,et al.  Markers of fibrosis and epithelial to mesenchymal transition demonstrate field cancerization in histologically normal tissue adjacent to breast tumors , 2011, International journal of cancer.

[36]  Kazuhiko Aoyagi,et al.  Artificially Induced Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in Surgical Subjects: Its Implications in Clinical and Basic Cancer Research , 2011, PloS one.

[37]  William C Hines,et al.  Why don't we get more cancer? A proposed role of the microenvironment in restraining cancer progression , 2011, Nature Medicine.

[38]  F. Pépin,et al.  Stromal gene expression predicts clinical outcome in breast cancer , 2008, Nature Medicine.

[39]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  Twist is a transcriptional repressor of E-cadherin gene expression in breast cancer. , 2008, Biochemical and biophysical research communications.

[40]  Hein Putter,et al.  Tumor–stroma ratio in the primary tumor is a prognostic factor in early breast cancer patients, especially in triple-negative carcinoma patients , 2011, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[41]  V. Borges,et al.  Breaking down barriers: the importance of the stromal microenvironment in acquiring invasiveness in young women's breast cancer , 2009, Breast Cancer Research.

[42]  T. Yeatman,et al.  Evaluation of malignancy-risk gene signature in breast cancer patients , 2010, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[43]  Wenjun Guo,et al.  The Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition Generates Cells with Properties of Stem Cells , 2008, Cell.

[44]  Rameen Beroukhim,et al.  Molecular characterization of the tumor microenvironment in breast cancer. , 2004, Cancer cell.

[45]  Xiao-Jun Ma,et al.  Gene expression profiling of the tumor microenvironment during breast cancer progression , 2009, Breast Cancer Research.

[46]  Adrian V. Lee,et al.  Insulin-like growth factor-I activates gene transcription programs strongly associated with poor breast cancer prognosis. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[47]  Ash A. Alizadeh,et al.  Gene Expression Signature of Fibroblast Serum Response Predicts Human Cancer Progression: Similarities between Tumors and Wounds , 2004, PLoS biology.