High-Throughput Mutation Profiling Changes before and 3 Weeks after Chemotherapy in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Patients

Sing-Huang Tan, Nur Sabrina Sapari, Hui Miao, Mikael Hartman, Marie Loh, Wee-Joo Chng, Philip Iau, Shaik Ahmad Buhari, Richie Soong, Soo-Chin Lee, Sing-Huang Tan, Nur Sabrina Sapari, Hui Miao, Mikael Hartman, Marie Loh, Wee-Joo Chng, Philip Iau, Shaik Ahmad Buhari, Richie Soong, Soo-Chin Lee

Abstract

Background: Changes in tumor DNA mutation status during chemotherapy can provide insights into tumor biology and drug resistance. The purpose of this study is to analyse the presence or absence of mutations in cancer-related genes using baseline breast tumor samples and those obtained after exposure to one cycle of chemotherapy to determine if any differences exist, and to correlate these differences with clinical and pathological features.

Methods: Paired breast tumor core biopsies obtained pre- and post-first cycle doxorubicin (n = 18) or docetaxel (n = 22) in treatment-naïve breast cancer patients were analysed for 238 mutations in 19 cancer-related genes by the Sequenom Oncocarta assay.

Results: Median age of patients was 48 years (range 32-64); 55% had estrogen receptor-positive tumors, and 60% had tumor reduction ≥25% after cycle 1. Mutations were detected in 10/40 (25%) pre-treatment and 11/40 (28%) post-treatment samples. Four mutation pattern categories were identified based on tumor mutation status pre- → post-treatment: wildtype (WT)→WT, n = 24; mutant (MT)→MT, n = 5; MT→WT, n = 5; WT→MT, n = 6. Overall, the majority of tumors were WT at baseline (30/40, 75%), of which 6/30 (20%) acquired new mutations after chemotherapy. Pre-treatment mutations were predominantly in PIK3CA (8/10, 80%), while post-treatment mutations were distributed in PIK3CA, EGFR, PDGFRA, ABL1 and MET. All 6 WT→MT cases were treated with docetaxel. Higher mutant allele frequency in baseline MT tumors (n = 10; PIK3CA mutations n = 8) correlated with less tumor reduction after cycle 1 chemotherapy (R = -0.667, p = 0.035). No other associations were observed between mutation pattern category with treatment, clinicopathological features, and tumor response or survival.

Conclusion: Tumor mutational profiles can change as quickly as after one cycle of chemotherapy in breast cancer. Understanding of these changes can provide insights on potential therapeutic options in residual resistant tumors.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00212082.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1. CONSORT flow chart in which…
Fig 1. CONSORT flow chart in which the number of paired samples with data available for Sequenom analysis are shown.
Fig 2. Oncogenic mutations detected pre- and…
Fig 2. Oncogenic mutations detected pre- and post-chemotherapy.
Representative chromatograms of (A) PIK3CA E542K in a MT→MT case HOB045, (B) EGFR S768I in a MT→WT case HOB035, and (C) MET Y1230C detected in a WT→MT case HOB090. The expected positions for the unextended primer (UEP) and the nucleotide and mutation status (mutant [MT] or wildtype [WT]) based on the size of the extension products are indicated above the gray vertical dashed lines.
Fig 3. Correlation between percentage allele frequency…
Fig 3. Correlation between percentage allele frequency and post-cycle 1 tumor response of at least 25%.
Fig 4. Progression-free and overall survival between…
Fig 4. Progression-free and overall survival between the WT→WT subgroup versus combination of other mutation pattern subgroups.
(A) Progression-free survival and (B) overall survival of the WT→WT subgroup and a combination of other mutation pattern subgroups (MT→MT, MT→WT, WT→MT). Bold line: WT→WT subgroup; broken line: combination of the other mutation subgroups MT→MT, MT→WT, WT→MT.

References

    1. Osborne C, Wilson P, Tripathy D. Oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes in breast cancer: potential diagnostic and therapeutic applications. Oncologist. 2004; 9: 361–377.
    1. Tan SH, Lee SC. Clinical implications of chemotherapy-induced tumor gene expression in human breast cancers. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2010; 6: 283–306. 10.1517/17425250903510611
    1. Buchholz TA, Stivers DN, Stec J, Ayers M, Clark E, Bolt A, et al. Global gene expression changes during neoadjuvant chemotherapy for human breast cancer. Cancer J. 2002; 8: 461–468.
    1. Lee SC, Xu X, Lim YW, Iau P, Sukri N, Lim SE, et al. Chemotherapy-induced tumor gene expression changes in human breast cancers. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2009; 19: 181–192. 10.1097/FPC.0b013e32831ebb5d
    1. Jiang YZ, Yu KD, Bao J, Peng WT, Shao ZM. Favorable prognostic impact in loss of TP53 and PIK3CA mutations after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2014; 74: 3399–3407. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-0092
    1. Fumagalli D, Gavin PG, Taniyama Y, Kim SI, Choi HJ, Paik S, et al. A rapid, sensitive, reproducible and cost-effective method for mutation profiling of colon cancer and metastatic lymph nodes. BMC Cancer. 2010; 10: 101 10.1186/1471-2407-10-101
    1. Lee SC, Xu X, Chng WJ, Watson M, Lim YW, Wong CI, et al. Post-treatment tumor gene expression signatures are more predictive of treatment outcomes than baseline signatures in breast cancer. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2009; 19: 833–842. 10.1097/FPC.0b013e328330a39f
    1. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer. 1981; 47: 207–214.
    1. Wang Y, Waters J, Leung ML, Unruh A, Roh W, Shi X, et al. Clonal evolution in breast cancer revealed by single nucleus genome sequencing. Nature. 2014; 512: 155–160. 10.1038/nature13600
    1. Gerlinger M, Rowan AJ, Horswell S, Larkin J, Endesfelder D, Gronroos E, et al. Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366: 883–892. 10.1056/NEJMoa1113205
    1. Navin N, Kendall J, Troge J, Andrews P, Rodgers L, McIndoo J, et al. Tumour evolution inferred by single-cell sequencing. Nature. 2011; 472: 90–94. 10.1038/nature09807
    1. Marusyk A, Almendro V, Polyak K. Intra-tumour heterogeneity: a looking glass for cancer? Nat Rev Cancer. 2012; 12: 323–334. 10.1038/nrc3261
    1. Wang S, An T, Duan J, Zhang L, Wu M, Zhou Q, et al. Alterations in EGFR and related genes following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in Chinese patients with non-small cell lung cancer. PLoS One. 2013; 8: e51021 10.1371/journal.pone.0051021
    1. Karakas B, Bachman KE, Park BH. Mutation of the PIK3CA oncogene in human cancers. Br J Cancer. 2006; 94: 455–459.
    1. (accessed 19th Sept 2015).
    1. Yakes FM, Chen J, Tan J, Yamaguchi K, Shi Y, Yu P, et al. Cabozantinib (XL184), a novel MET and VEGFR2 inhibitor, simultaneously suppresses metastasis, angiogenesis, and tumor growth. Mol Cancer Ther. 2011; 10: 2298–2308. 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-11-0264
    1. Gordon MS, Vogelzang NJ, Schoffski P, Daud A, Spira AI, O'Keeffe BA, et al. Cabozantinib (XL184) has activity in both soft tissue and bone: Results of a phase II randomized discontinuation trial (RDT) in patients (pts) w/ advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 29: 2011. (suppl; abstr 3010).
    1. Winer EP, Tolaney S, Nechushtan H, Berger R, Kurzrock R, Ron I-G, et al. Activity of cabozantinib (XL184) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC): Results from a phase II randomized discontinuation trial (RDT). J Clin Oncol 30, 2012. (suppl; abstr 535).
    1. Teng YH, Tan WJ, Thike AA, Cheok PY, Tse GM, Wong NS, et al. Mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene in triple negative breast cancer: possible implications for targeted therapy. Breast Cancer Res. 2011; 13: R35 10.1186/bcr2857
    1. Kancha RK, von Bubnoff N, Peschel C, Duyster J. Functional analysis of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations and potential implications for EGFR targeted therapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2009; 15: 460–467. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1757
    1. Ehrich M, Hogg G, Pearce M. Low abundant mutation profiling in tumor samples using the Sequenom OncoCarta Panel (Sequenom Application Note 12/11/2008).
    1. Loibl S, von Minckwitz G, Schneeweiss A, Paepke S, Lehmann A, Rezai M, et al. PIK3CA mutations are associated with lower rates of pathologic complete response to anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (her2) therapy in primary HER2-overexpressing breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014; 32: 3212–3220. 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.7876
    1. Majewski IJ, Nuciforo P, Mittempergher L, Bosma AJ, Eidtmann H, Holmes E, et al. PIK3CA mutations are associated with decreased benefit to neoadjuvant human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-targeted therapies in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015; 33: 1334–1339. 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.2158
    1. COSMIC. Catalogue of somatic mutations in cancer. (accessed 21st Sept 2015)
    1. Stemke-Hale K, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Lluch A, Neve RM, Kuo WL, Davies M, et al. An integrative genomic and proteomic analysis of PIK3CA, PTEN, and AKT mutations in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2008; 68: 6084–6091. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-6854
    1. Santarpia L, Qi Y, Stemke-Hale K, Wang B, Young EJ, Booser DJ, et al. Mutation profiling identifies numerous rare drug targets and distinct mutation patterns in different clinical subtypes of breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012; 134: 333–343. 10.1007/s10549-012-2035-3
    1. Walerych D, Napoli M, Collavin L, Del Sal G. The rebel angel: mutant p53 as the driving oncogene in breast cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2012; 33: 2007–2017. 10.1093/carcin/bgs232
    1. Ng CK, Pemberton HN, Reis-Filho JS. Breast cancer intratumor genetic heterogeneity: causes and implications. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2012; 12: 1021–1032. 10.1586/era.12.85
    1. Dawson SJ, Tsui DW, Murtaza M, Biggs H, Rueda OM, Chin SF, et al. Analysis of circulating tumor DNA to monitor metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013; 368: 1199–1209. 10.1056/NEJMoa1213261

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren