Imaging , Diagnosis , Prognosis Clinical Cancer Research Integration of DNA Copy Number Alterations and Prognostic Gene Expression Signatures in Breast Cancer Patients

Purpose: Several prognostic gene expression profiles have been identified in breast cancer. In spite of this progress in prognostic classification, the underlying mechanisms that drive these gene expression patterns remain unknown. Specific genomic alterations, such as copy number alterations, are an important factor in tumor development and progression and are also associated with changes in gene expression. Experimental Design: We carried out array comparative genomic hybridization in 68 human breast carcinomas for which gene expression and clinical data were available. We used a two-class supervised algorithm, Supervised Identification of Regions of Aberration in aCGH data sets, for the identification of regions of chromosomal alterations that are associated with specific sample labeling. Using gene expression data from the same tumors, we identified genes in the altered regions for which the expression level is significantly correlated with the copy number and validated our results in public available data sets. Results: Specific chromosomal aberrations are related to clinicopathologic characteristics and prognostic gene expression signatures. The previously identified poor prognosis, 70-gene expression signature is associated with the gain of 3q26.33-27.1, 8q22.1-24.21, and 17q24.3-25.1; the 70-gene good prognosis profile is associated with the loss at 16q12.1-13 and 16q22.1-24.1; basal-like tumors are associated with the gain of 6p12.3-23, 8q24.21-22, and 10p12.33-14 and losses at 4p15.31, 5q12.3-13.1, 5q33.1, 10q23.33, 12q13.13-3, 15q15.1, and 15q21.1; HER2+ breast show amplification at 17q11.1-12 and 17q21.31-23.2 (including HER2 gene). Conclusions: There is a strong correlation between the different gene expression signatures and underlying genomic changes. These findings help to establish a link between genomic changes and gene expression signatures, enabling a better understanding of the tumor biology that causes poor prognosis. Clin Cancer Res; 16(2); 651–63

[1]  Philippe Dessen,et al.  Molecular Characterization of Breast Cancer with High-Resolution Oligonucleotide Comparative Genomic Hybridization Array , 2009, Clinical Cancer Research.

[2]  H. Tanke,et al.  Array comparative genomic hybridization with cyanin cis-platinum-labeled DNAs. , 2004, BioTechniques.

[3]  Marcel J. T. Reinders,et al.  SIRAC: Supervised Identification of Regions of Aberration in aCGH datasets , 2007, BMC Bioinformatics.

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

[5]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[6]  Barbara J. Trask,et al.  Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization Analysis of Genomic Alterations in Breast Cancer Subtypes , 2004, Cancer Research.

[7]  J. Foekens,et al.  Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer , 2005, The Lancet.

[8]  M. J. van de Vijver,et al.  Chromogenic in situ hybridisation for the assessment of HER2 status in breast cancer: an international validation ring study , 2007, Breast Cancer Research.

[9]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Breast tumor copy number aberration phenotypes and genomic instability , 2006, BMC Cancer.

[10]  Howard Y. Chang,et al.  Robustness, scalability, and integration of a wound-response gene expression signature in predicting breast cancer survival. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  M. Ringnér,et al.  Impact of DNA amplification on gene expression patterns in breast cancer. , 2002, Cancer research.

[12]  Van,et al.  A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  C Caldas,et al.  Using array-comparative genomic hybridization to define molecular portraits of primary breast cancers , 2007, Oncogene.

[14]  Peter A. Jones,et al.  The fundamental role of epigenetic events in cancer , 2002, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[15]  Yudong D. He,et al.  Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer , 2002, Nature.

[16]  Trevor Hastie,et al.  Combining biological gene expression signatures in predicting outcome in breast cancer: An alternative to supervised classification. , 2008, European journal of cancer.

[17]  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.

[18]  R. Redon,et al.  Genomic and Expression Profiling of Chromosome 17 in Breast Cancer Reveals Complex Patterns of Alterations and Novel Candidate Genes , 2004, Cancer Research.

[19]  S. Tavaré,et al.  High-resolution aCGH and expression profiling identifies a novel genomic subtype of ER negative breast cancer , 2007, Genome Biology.

[20]  J. Visvader,et al.  Transcriptional regulators in mammary gland development and cancer. , 2003, The international journal of biochemistry & cell biology.

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

[22]  Anne Vincent-Salomon,et al.  ESR1 gene amplification in breast cancer: a common phenomenon? , 2008, Nature Genetics.

[23]  M. J. van de Vijver,et al.  Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. , 2006, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[24]  Gianluca Bontempi,et al.  Comparison of prognostic gene expression signatures for breast cancer , 2008, BMC Genomics.

[25]  Howard Y. Chang,et al.  Genetic regulators of large-scale transcriptional signatures in cancer , 2006, Nature Genetics.

[26]  C. Nguyen,et al.  Genetic profiling of chromosome 1 in breast cancer: mapping of regions of gains and losses and identification of candidate genes on 1q , 2006, British Journal of Cancer.

[27]  P. D’Eustachio,et al.  The SH2 domain protein GRB‐7 is co‐amplified, overexpressed and in a tight complex with HER2 in breast cancer. , 1994, The EMBO journal.

[28]  T. Aas,et al.  Influence of TP53 gene alterations and c-erbB-2 expression on the response to treatment with doxorubicin in locally advanced breast cancer. , 2001, Cancer research.

[29]  O. Lingjaerde,et al.  ESR1 gene amplification in breast cancer: a common phenomenon? , 2008, Nature Genetics.

[30]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  Distinct patterns of DNA copy number alteration are associated with different clinicopathological features and gene‐expression subtypes of breast cancer , 2006, Genes, chromosomes & cancer.

[31]  F. Collin,et al.  [Recommendations for the immunohistochemical evaluation of hormone receptors on paraffin sections of breast cancer. Study Group on Hormone Receptors using Immunohistochemistry FNCLCC/AFAQAP. National Federation of Centres to Combat Cancer/French Association for Quality Assurance in Pathology]. , 1996, Annales de pathologie.

[32]  I. Ellis,et al.  A gene-expression signature to predict survival in breast cancer across independent data sets , 2007, Oncogene.

[33]  Carlos Caldas,et al.  A comprehensive analysis of prognostic signatures reveals the high predictive capacity of the Proliferation, Immune response and RNA splicing modules in breast cancer , 2008, Breast Cancer Research.

[34]  Christian A. Rees,et al.  Microarray analysis reveals a major direct role of DNA copy number alteration in the transcriptional program of human breast tumors , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  Z. Szallasi,et al.  A signature of chromosomal instability inferred from gene expression profiles predicts clinical outcome in multiple human cancers , 2006, Nature Genetics.

[36]  P. Nederlof,et al.  Automated array-CGH optimized for archival formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor material , 2007, BMC Cancer.

[37]  Michael Reiss,et al.  MTDH activation by 8q22 genomic gain promotes chemoresistance and metastasis of poor-prognosis breast cancer. , 2009, Cancer cell.

[38]  Y. Wang,et al.  High-resolution array-CGH and expression profiling identifies a novel genomic subtype of ER negative breast cancer , 2007 .

[39]  P. Lichter,et al.  Candidate genes in breast cancer revealed by microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization of archived tissue. , 2005, Cancer research.

[40]  A. Nobel,et al.  Concordance among Gene-Expression – Based Predictors for Breast Cancer , 2011 .

[41]  Michael L. Bittner,et al.  Comprehensive copy number and gene expression profiling of the 17q23 amplicon in human breast cancer , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[42]  G. Sauter,et al.  Estrogen receptor alpha (ESR1) gene amplification is frequent in breast cancer , 2007, Nature Genetics.

[43]  Daniel Birnbaum,et al.  Integrated profiling of basal and luminal breast cancers. , 2007, Cancer research.

[44]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Genomic and transcriptional aberrations linked to breast cancer pathophysiologies. , 2006, Cancer cell.