Molecular Cytogenetic Identification of Subgroups of Grade III Invasive Ductal Breast Carcinomas with Different Clinical Outcomes

Tumor grade is an established indicator of breast cancer outcome, although considerable heterogeneity exists even within-grade. Around 25% of grade III invasive ductal breast carcinomas are associated with a “basal” phenotype, and these tumors are reported to be a distinct subgroup. We have investigated whether this group of breast cancers has a distinguishing pattern of genetic alterations and which of these may relate to the different clinical outcome of these patients. We performed comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analysis on 43 grade III invasive ductal breast carcinomas positive for basal cytokeratin 14, as well as 43 grade- and age-matched CK14-negative controls, all with up to 25 years (median, 7 years) of clinical follow-up. Significant differences in CGH alterations were seen between the two groups in terms of mean number of changes (CK14+ve − 6.5, CK14−ve − 10.3; P = 0.0012) and types of alterations at chromosomes 4q, 7q, 8q, 9p, 13q, 16p, 17p, 17q, 19p, 19q, 20p, 20q and Xp. Supervised and unsupervised algorithms separated the two groups on CGH data alone with 76% and 74% accuracy, respectively. Hierarchical clustering revealed distinct subgroups, one of which contained 18 (42%) of the CK14+ve tumors. This subgroup had significantly shorter overall survival (P = 0.0414) than other grade III tumors, regardless of CK14 status, and was an independent prognostic marker (P = 0.031). These data provide evidence that the “basal” phenotype on its own does not convey a poor prognosis. Basal tumors are also heterogeneous with only a subset, identifiable by pattern of genetic alterations, exhibiting a shorter overall survival. Robust characterization of this basal group is necessary if it is to have a major impact on management of patients with breast cancer.

[1]  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.

[2]  R. Nagle,et al.  Coexpression patterns of vimentin and glial filament protein with cytokeratins in the normal, hyperplastic, and neoplastic breast. , 1990, The American journal of pathology.

[3]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Diagnosis of multiple cancer types by shrunken centroids of gene expression , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  P. Maxwell,et al.  Cytokeratin intermediate filament expression in benign and malignant breast disease. , 1995, Journal of clinical pathology.

[5]  S. Pileri,et al.  DIFFERENTIATION PATHWAYS IN PRIMARY INVASIVE BREAST CARCINOMA AS SUGGESTED BY INTERMEDIATE FILAMENT AND BIOPATHOLOGICAL MARKER EXPRESSION , 1996, The Journal of pathology.

[6]  D. Visscher,et al.  Centrally Necrotizing Carcinomas of the Breast: A Distinct Histologic Subtype With Aggressive Clinical Behavior , 2001, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[7]  I. Ellis,et al.  The value of histological grade in breast cancer experience from a large study with a long term follow up , 1991 .

[8]  M. J. van de Vijver,et al.  The pathology of familial breast cancer: predictive value of immunohistochemical markers estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER-2, and p53 in patients with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  I. Ellis,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. , 1999, Critical reviews in oncology/hematology.

[10]  V. Eusebi,et al.  Molecular cytogenetic comparison of apocrine hyperplasia and apocrine carcinoma of the breast. , 2001, The American journal of pathology.

[11]  I. Ellis,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. , 2002, Histopathology.

[12]  H Buerger,et al.  Different genetic pathways in the evolution of invasive breast cancer are associated with distinct morphological subtypes , 1999, The Journal of pathology.

[13]  Martin Eisenacher,et al.  Cytogenetic Alterations and Cytokeratin Expression Patterns in Breast Cancer: Integrating a New Model of Breast Differentiation into Cytogenetic Pathways of Breast Carcinogenesis , 2002, Laboratory Investigation.

[14]  J. Delhanty,et al.  Detailed chromosomal and molecular genetic analysis of single cells by whole genome amplification and comparative genomic hybridisation. , 1999, Nucleic acids research.

[15]  E. Lane,et al.  Detection of basement membrane components and basal cell keratin 14 in noninvasive and invasive carcinomas of the breast. , 1989, The American journal of pathology.

[16]  S. Hirohashi,et al.  Large, central acellular zones indicating myoepithelial tumor differentiation in high-grade invasive ductal carcinomas as markers of predisposition to lung and brain metastases. , 2000, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[17]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  Ductal invasive G2 and G3 carcinomas of the breast are the end stages of at least two different lines of genetic evolution , 2001, The Journal of pathology.

[18]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  I. Tomlinson,et al.  Allelic imbalance analysis of chromosome 16q shows that grade I and grade III invasive ductal breast cancers follow different genetic pathways , 2002, The Journal of pathology.

[20]  A. Hanby,et al.  Comparative genomic hybridization of breast tumors stratified by histological grade reveals new insights into the biological progression of breast cancer. , 1999, Cancer research.

[21]  S. Hirohashi,et al.  Myoepithelial differentiation in high-grade invasive ductal carcinomas with large central acellular zones. , 1999, Human pathology.

[22]  K. Weber,et al.  Keratin polypeptide distribution in benign and malignant breast tumors: subdivision of ductal carcinomas using monoclonal antibodies , 1986, Virchows Archiv. B, Cell pathology including molecular pathology.

[23]  S. Lakhani,et al.  CGH analysis of ductal carcinoma of the breast with basaloid/myoepithelial cell differentiation , 2001, British Journal of Cancer.

[24]  D. Barnes,et al.  Immunohistochemical determination of oestrogen receptor: comparison of different methods of assessment of staining and correlation with clinical outcome of breast cancer patients. , 1996, British Journal of Cancer.

[25]  R. Nagle,et al.  Differential diagnosis of benign epithelial proliferations and carcinomas of the breast using antibodies to cytokeratins. , 1988, Human pathology.

[26]  I. Ellis,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. , 2002, Histopathology.

[27]  R. Nagle,et al.  Characterization of breast carcinomas by two monoclonal antibodies distinguishing myoepithelial from luminal epithelial cells. , 1986, The journal of histochemistry and cytochemistry : official journal of the Histochemistry Society.

[28]  R. Moll,et al.  Biological and prognostic significance of stratified epithelial cytokeratins in infiltrating ductal breast carcinomas , 1998, Virchows Archiv.

[29]  S. Lakhani,et al.  Comparative Genomic Hybridization Analysis of Myoepithelial Carcinoma of the Breast , 2000, Laboratory Investigation.

[30]  B. Ljung,et al.  Immunolocalization of a human basal epithelium specific keratin in benign and malignant breast disease , 1987, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[31]  A. Rejthar,et al.  The intermediate filaments and prognostically oriented morphological classification in ductal breast carcinoma. , 1997, Neoplasma.

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

[33]  E. Lane,et al.  Basal cell-specific and hyperproliferation-related keratins in human breast cancer. , 1991, The American journal of pathology.

[34]  D. Miles,et al.  Retention of the expression of E‐cadherin and catenins is associated with shorter survival in grade III ductal carcinoma of the breast , 2001, The Journal of pathology.

[35]  B. Gusterson,et al.  Distribution of myoepithelial cells and basement membrane proteins in the normal breast and in benign and malignant breast diseases. , 1982, Cancer research.

[36]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Copyright © American Society for Investigative Pathology Short Communication Expression of Cytokeratins 17 and 5 Identifies a Group of Breast Carcinomas with Poor Clinical Outcome , 2022 .

[37]  H. Smith,et al.  Monoclonal antibody that defines human myoepithelium. , 1985, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.