Chemotherapy response and recurrence-free survival in neoadjuvant breast cancer depends on biomarker profiles: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657)

Laura J Esserman, Donald A Berry, Maggie C U Cheang, Christina Yau, Charles M Perou, Lisa Carey, Angela DeMichele, Joe W Gray, Kathleen Conway-Dorsey, Marc E Lenburg, Meredith B Buxton, Sarah E Davis, Laura J van't Veer, Clifford Hudis, Koei Chin, Denise Wolf, Helen Krontiras, Leslie Montgomery, Debu Tripathy, Constance Lehman, Minetta C Liu, Olufunmilayo I Olopade, Hope S Rugo, John T Carpenter, Chad Livasy, Lynn Dressler, David Chhieng, Baljit Singh, Carolyn Mies, Joseph Rabban, Yunni-Yi Chen, Dilip Giri, Alfred Au, Nola Hylton, I-SPY 1 TRIAL Investigators, Laura J Esserman, Donald A Berry, Maggie C U Cheang, Christina Yau, Charles M Perou, Lisa Carey, Angela DeMichele, Joe W Gray, Kathleen Conway-Dorsey, Marc E Lenburg, Meredith B Buxton, Sarah E Davis, Laura J van't Veer, Clifford Hudis, Koei Chin, Denise Wolf, Helen Krontiras, Leslie Montgomery, Debu Tripathy, Constance Lehman, Minetta C Liu, Olufunmilayo I Olopade, Hope S Rugo, John T Carpenter, Chad Livasy, Lynn Dressler, David Chhieng, Baljit Singh, Carolyn Mies, Joseph Rabban, Yunni-Yi Chen, Dilip Giri, Alfred Au, Nola Hylton, I-SPY 1 TRIAL Investigators

Abstract

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer allows individual tumor response to be assessed depending on molecular subtype, and to judge the impact of response to therapy on recurrence-free survival (RFS). The multicenter I-SPY 1 TRIAL evaluated patients with ≥ 3 cm tumors by using early imaging and molecular signatures, with outcomes of pathologic complete response (pCR) and RFS. The current analysis was performed using data from patients who had molecular profiles and did not receive trastuzumab. The various molecular classifiers tested were highly correlated. Categorization of breast cancer by molecular signatures enhanced the ability of pCR to predict improvement in RFS compared to the population as a whole. In multivariate analysis, the molecular signatures that added to the ability of HR and HER2 receptors, clinical stage, and pCR in predicting RFS included 70-gene signature, wound healing signature, p53 mutation signature, and PAM50 risk of recurrence. The low risk signatures were associated with significantly better prognosis, and also identified additional patients with a good prognosis within the no pCR group, primarily in the hormone receptor positive, HER-2 negative subgroup. The I-SPY 1 population is enriched for tumors with a poor prognosis but is still heterogeneous in terms of rates of pCR and RFS. The ability of pCR to predict RFS is better by subset than it is for the whole group. Molecular markers improve prediction of RFS by identifying additional patients with excellent prognosis within the no pCR group.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT diagram: patients available for analysis. Of the 237 patients enrolled in the study, 16 patients withdrew. Of the 221 patients available for analysis, six decided not to undergo surgery after completing neoadjuvant chemotherapy, leaving 215 patients available for pathologic response analysis
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Stratification, by molecular classifier, of the hormone receptor positive HER2 negative subgroup that did not achieve a pathologic complete response. The patients in the HR+/HER2− subgroup that did not achieve a pathologic complete response are stratified by the molecular subtypes as shown: a 70-gene prognosis profile (Blue line low risk/gold line high risk); b wound healing signature (Blue line quiescent; gold line activated); c risk of relapse subtype score (ROR-S) (Blue line low risk/Gold line medium and high risk); d p53 predicted mutation (Blue line predicted wild type/Gold line predicted mutation); e clinical stage (Blue line clinical stage 2/Gold line clinical stage 3). Stratification of the “no pCR” HR+/HER2− patient group by molecular signatures and clinical stage
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Heat map by molecular features and outcomes for all patients

References

    1. van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Van’t Veer LJ, et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1999–2009. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa021967.
    1. Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3726–3734. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.7985.
    1. Cheang MC, Chia Sk, Boduc D, et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:736–750. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp082.
    1. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:10869–10874. doi: 10.1073/pnas.191367098.
    1. Rouzier R, Perou CM, Symmans WF, et al. Breast cancer molecular subtypes respond differently to preoperative chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:5678–5685. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-2421.
    1. Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L, et al. The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:2329–2334. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-1109.
    1. Esserman LJ, van’t Veer LJ, Perou CM et al (2009) Biology of breast cancers that present as interval cancers and at young age should inform how we approach early detection and prevention. Cancer Res 69:2 (suppl 1; abstr 6034)
    1. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project B-18. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2483–2493.
    1. Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, et al. Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4414–4422. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.10.6823.
    1. Bear HD, Anderson S, Smith RE, et al. Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer: National surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2019–2027. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.1665.
    1. Baselga J, Bradbury I, Eidtmann H et al (2010) First results of the NeoALTO Trial (BIG 01-06EGF 106903): a phase III, randomized, open label, neoadjuvant study of lapatinib, trastuzumab, and their combination plus paclitaxel in women with HER2-positivie primary breast cancer. Cancer Res 70:24 (suppl 2; abstr S3-3)
    1. Untch M, Fasching PA, Konecny GE et al (2010) Pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy + trastuzumab treatment predicts survival and detects a patient subgroup at high need for improvement of anti-HER2 therapy. Three year medican follow-up data of the TECHNO Trial. Cancer Res 70:24 (suppl 2; abstr P1-11-03)
    1. Esserman LJ, Berry DA, DeMichele A, Carey L, Davis SE, Buxton MB, Hudis C, Gray J, Perou C, Yau C, Livasy C, Krontiras H, Montgomery L, Tripathy D, Lehman C, Liu MC, Olopade OI, Rugo HS, Carpenter JT, Dressler L, Chhieng D, Singh B, Mies C, Rabban J, Chen Y-Y, Giri D, van ’t Veer, Hylton N, on behalf of the I-SPY 1 TRIAL Investigators (2012) Pathologic complete response predicts recurrence-free survival more effectively by cancer subset: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657. J Clin Oncol (in press)
    1. Hylton NM, Blume J, Bernreuter W et al Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for women with locally-advanced breast cancer: results from the ACRIN 6657/I-SPY Trial. Radiology (in press)
    1. Allred DC, Harvey JM, Berardo M, et al. Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis. Mod Pathol. 1998;11:155–168.
    1. Livasy C, Carey L, DeMichele A et al (2009) Biomarkers associated with pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with locally advanced breast cancer: results from the I-SPY TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012 & ACRIN 6657). Cancer Res 69:2 (suppl 1; abstr 5102)
    1. Spyratos F, Ferrero-Pous M, Trassard M, et al. Correlation between MIB-1 and other proliferation markers: clinical implications of the MIB-1 cutoff value. Cancer. 2002;94(8):2151–2159. doi: 10.1002/cncr.10458.
    1. Hu Z, Fan C, Oh DS, et al. The molecular portraits of breast tumors are conserved across microarray platforms. BMC Genomics. 2006;7:96. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-7-96.
    1. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1160–1167. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.1370.
    1. van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijer MJ, et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature. 2002;415:530–536. doi: 10.1038/415530a.
    1. Glas AM, Floore A, Delahaye JL, et al. Converting a breast cancer microarray signature into a high-throughput diagnostic test. BMC Genomics. 2006;7:278. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-7-278.
    1. Chang HY, Nuyten DS, Sneddon JB, et al. Robustness, scalability, and integration of a wound-response gene expression signature in predicting breast cancer survival. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:3738–3743. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0409462102.
    1. Troester MA, Herschkowitz JI, Oh DS, et al. Gene expression patterns associated with p53 status in breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 2006;6:276. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-6-276.
    1. Hardenbol P, Baner J, Jain M, et al. Multiplexed genotyping with sequence-tagged molecular inversion probes. Nat Biotechnol. 2003;21:673–678. doi: 10.1038/nbt821.
    1. Hardenbol P, Yu F, Belmont J, et al. Highly multiplexed molecular inversion probe genotyping: over 10,000 targeted SNPs genotyped in a single tube assay. Genome Res. 2005;15:269–275. doi: 10.1101/gr.3185605.
    1. Ji H, Kumm J, Zhang M, et al. Molecular inversion probe analysis of gene copy alterations reveals distinct categories of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer Res. 2006;66:7910–7919. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-0595.
    1. Olshen AB, Venkatraman ES, Lucito R, et al. Circular binary segmentation for the analysis of array-based DNA copy number data. Biostatistics. 2004;5(4):557–572. doi: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxh008.
    1. Conway K, Edmiston SN, Cui L, et al. Prevalence and spectrum of p53 mutations associated with smoking in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2002;62:1987–1995.
    1. Hudis CA, Barlow WE, Constantino JP, et al. Proposal for standardized definitions for efficacy end points in adjuvant breast cancer trials: the STEEP system. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2127–2132. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.10.3523.
    1. Ihaka R, Gentleman R. R, A language for data analysis and graphics. J Comput Graph Stat. 1996;5(3):299–314. doi: 10.2307/1390807.
    1. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100(14):8418–8423. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0932692100.
    1. Lin C, Buxton MB, Moore D et al (2011) Locally advanced breast cancer are more likely to present as interval cancers: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012, ACRIN 6657, InterSPORE Trial). Breast Cancer Res Treat. doi:10.1007/s10549-011-1670-4
    1. Kuerer HM, Newman LA, Smith TL, et al. Clinical course of breast cancer patients with complete pathologic primary tumor and axillary lymph node response to doxorubicin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:460–469.
    1. Berry DA, Cirrincinoe C, Henderson IC, et al. Estrogen-receptor status and outcomes of modern chemotherapy for patients with node-positive breast cancer. JAMA. 2006;295:1658–1667. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.14.1658.
    1. Buyse M, Loi S, van’t Veer L, et al. Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(17):1183–1192. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj329.
    1. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence to tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(27):2817–2826. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa041588.
    1. Knauer M, Mook S, Rutgers EJ, et al. The predictive value of the 70-gene signature for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;120(3):655–661. doi: 10.1007/s10549-010-0814-2.
    1. Sparano JA. TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx) Clin Breast Cancer. 2006;7(4):347–350. doi: 10.3816/CBC.2006.n.051.
    1. Cardoso F, van’t Veer L, Rutgers EJ, et al. Clinical application of the 70-gene profile: the MINDACT trial. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(5):729–735. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.3222.
    1. Condeelis J, Pollard JW. Macrophages: obligate partners for tumor cell migration, invasion, and metastasis. Cell. 2006;124(2):263–266. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.01.007.
    1. Coussens LM, Pollard JW (2010) Leukocytes in mammary development and cancer. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2(10):a003202
    1. Mukhtar RA, Nseyo O, Campbell MJ, et al. Tumor-associated macrophages in breast cancer as potential biomarkers for new treatments and diagnostics. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2011;11(1):91–100. doi: 10.1586/erm.10.97.
    1. Esserman LJ, Moore DH, Tsing PJ, et al. Biologic markers determine both the risk and the timing of recurrence in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;129(2):263–266. doi: 10.1007/s10549-011-1564-5.
    1. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;365:1687–1717. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66544-0.
    1. Berry DA. The hazards of endpoints. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(18):1376–1377. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djq334.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe