Serial expression analysis of breast tumors during neoadjuvant chemotherapy reveals changes in cell cycle and immune pathways associated with recurrence and response

Mark Jesus M Magbanua, Denise M Wolf, Christina Yau, Sarah E Davis, Julia Crothers, Alfred Au, Christopher M Haqq, Chad Livasy, Hope S Rugo, I-SPY 1 TRIAL Investigators, Laura Esserman, John W Park, Laura J van 't Veer, Mark Jesus M Magbanua, Denise M Wolf, Christina Yau, Sarah E Davis, Julia Crothers, Alfred Au, Christopher M Haqq, Chad Livasy, Hope S Rugo, I-SPY 1 TRIAL Investigators, Laura Esserman, John W Park, Laura J van 't Veer

Abstract

Introduction: The molecular biology involving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) response is poorly understood. To elucidate the impact of NAC on the breast cancer transcriptome and its association with clinical outcome, we analyzed gene expression data derived from serial tumor samples of patients with breast cancer who received NAC in the I-SPY 1 TRIAL.

Methods: Expression data were collected before treatment (T1), 24-96 hours after initiation of chemotherapy (T2) and at surgery (TS). Expression levels between T1 and T2 (T1 vs. T2; n = 36) and between T1 and TS (T1 vs. TS; n = 39) were compared. Subtype was assigned using the PAM50 gene signature. Differences in early gene expression changes (T2 - T1) between responders and nonresponders, as defined by residual cancer burden, were evaluated. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to identify genes in residual tumors associated with recurrence-free survival (RFS). Pathway analysis was performed with Ingenuity software.

Results: When we compared expression profiles at T1 vs. T2 and at T1 vs. TS, we detected significantly altered expression of 150 and 59 transcripts, respectively. We observed notable downregulation of proliferation and immune-related genes at T2. Lower concordance in subtype assignment was observed between T1 and TS (62 %) than between T1 and T2 (75 %). Analysis of early gene expression changes (T2 - T1) revealed that decreased expression of cell cycle inhibitors was associated with poor response. Increased interferon signaling (TS - T1) and high expression of cell proliferation genes in residual tumors (TS) were associated with reduced RFS.

Conclusions: Serial gene expression analysis revealed candidate immune and proliferation pathways associated with response and recurrence. Larger studies incorporating the approach described here are warranted to identify predictive and prognostic biomarkers in the NAC setting for specific targeted therapies.

Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00033397 . Registered 9 Apr 2002.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Serial gene expression analysis in locally advanced breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). a Study schema. Gene expression analysis was performed on breast cancer tumors collected before treatment (T1), 24–96 hours after initiation of anthracycline-based NAC (T2) and at the time of surgery (TS). b Heat map showing results of supervised clustering analysis of expression profiles of tumors before treatment (T1) and 24–96 hours after initiation of NAC (T2). Rows indicate expression levels for each gene, and columns indicate individual samples. Blue indicates downregulation of gene expression, and red indicates upregulation of gene expression. The upper color bar indicates response to NAC as defined by residual cancer burden (RCB 0/I or RCB II/III). Bars on the left indicate assignment of genes to an ontology group (i.e., immune system– or proliferation-related genes). Her2 Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, LumA luminal A, Lum B luminal B. c Subtype assignments of matched tumors at T1 and T2. Dark gray boxes running diagonally downward from top left indicate no change between two time points. d Heat map showing result of supervised clustering analysis of expression profiles of known nonresponding tumors at T1 and TS. The upper color bar indicates hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status (blue = HR+HER2−; green = HR−HER2+; red = HR−HER2−; white = no data). The 10 most significant differentially expressed genes are indicated at the right of the heat map. Blue indicates downregulation of gene expression, and red indicates upregulation of gene expression. e Subtype assignments of matched tumors at T1 and TS. Dark gray boxes running diagonally downward from top left indicate no change between two time points
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Association between gene expression and response to chemotherapy as defined by residual cancer burden (RCB). a Scatterplot showing the expression of a representative cell proliferation gene, CDKN2B, at baseline (T1) and 24–96 hours after initiation of chemotherapy (T2) with the color of the points indicating response [red = RCB 0/I (responders); blue = RCB II/III (nonresponders)]. The diagonal line represents no change in gene expression levels (T1 = T2). The length of the vertical lines between points and the diagonal line represents the magnitude of expression change from T1 to T2. bd Box plots show expression of CDKN2B in RCB 0/I and RCB II/III at T1 (b), at T2 (c) and the change in gene expression between two time points (T2 − T1) (d)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Association of changes in gene expression between pretreatment and residual tumors (TS − T1) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). a Scatterplot showing the expression of a representative interferon signaling gene, IFIH1, at TS and T1, with the color of the points indicating outcome (red = no recurrence; blue = recurrence). The diagonal line represents no change in gene expression levels (T1 = TS). The length of the vertical lines between points and the diagonal line represents the magnitude of expression change from T1 to TS. Kaplan-Meier analysis of RFS among patients with high (top tertile: blue) or low expression (red) levels of IFIH1 at T1 (b), at TS (c) and the change in gene expression between two time points (TS − T1) (d)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Association between gene expression in residual tumors (TS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Kaplan-Meier analysis of RFS among patients with high (top tertile: blue) or low expression (red) levels of a representative cell proliferation gene, CENPF, at T1 (a), at TS (b) and the change in gene expression between two time points (TS − T1) (c)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Assessment of Ki-67 protein expression. a Scatterplot showing Ki-67 scores at baseline (T1) and 24–96 hours after initiation of chemotherapy (T2), with the colors and shapes of the points indicating increases (red squares) or decreases (blue circles). The diagonal line represents no change in Ki-67 score (T1 = T2). The length of the vertical lines between points and the diagonal line represents the magnitude of expression change from T1 to T2. b Kaplan-Meier analysis of recurrence-free survival (RFS) among patients with low (bottom tertile: red) or high (blue) Ki-67 scores at TS

References

    1. Shin HC, Han W, Moon HG, Im SA, Moon WK, Park IA, et al. Breast-conserving surgery after tumor downstaging by neoadjuvant chemotherapy is oncologically safe for stage III breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:2582–9. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-2909-6.
    1. Schott AF, Hayes DF. Defining the benefits of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1747–9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.41.3161.
    1. Bear HD, Anderson S, Smith RE, Geyer CE, Jr, Mamounas EP, Fisher B, 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;24:2019–27. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.1665.
    1. Buchholz TA, Lehman CD, Harris JR, Pockaj BA, Khouri N, Hylton NF, et al. Statement of the science concerning locoregional treatments after preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer: a National Cancer Institute conference. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:791–7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.0326.
    1. Esserman LJ, Berry DA, DeMichele A, Carey L, Davis SE, Buxton M, et al. 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. 2012;30:3242–9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.39.2779.
    1. Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, Rajan R, Kuerer H, Valero V, et al. Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4414–22. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.10.6823.
    1. Esserman LJ, Berry DA, Cheang MC, Yau C, Perou CM, Carey L, et al. 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) Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;132:1049–62. doi: 10.1007/s10549-011-1895-2.
    1. Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Iwamoto T, Liu S, Chen H, Do KA, Hortobagyi GN, et al. Gene expression, molecular class changes, and pathway analysis after neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:1109–19. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2762.
    1. O’Regan RM, Von Roenn JH, Carlson RW, Malik U, Sparano JA, Staradub V, et al. Final results of a phase II trial of preoperative TAC (docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) in stage III breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer. 2005;6:163–8. doi: 10.3816/CBC.2005.n.019.
    1. Stearns V, Singh B, Tsangaris T, Crawford JG, Novielli A, Ellis MJ, et al. A prospective randomized pilot study to evaluate predictors of response in serial core biopsies to single agent neoadjuvant doxorubicin or paclitaxel for patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9:124–33.
    1. Hannemann J, Oosterkamp HM, Bosch CA, Velds A, Wessels LF, Loo C, et al. Changes in gene expression associated with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3331–42. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.09.077.
    1. Ferriere JP, Assier I, Cure H, Charrier S, Kwiatkowski F, Achard JL, et al. Primary chemotherapy in breast cancer: correlation between tumor response and patient outcome. Am J Clin Oncol. 1998;21:117–20. doi: 10.1097/00000421-199804000-00003.
    1. Pierga JY, Mouret E, Laurence V, Dieras V, Savigioni A, Beuzeboc P, et al. Prognostic factors for survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: the role of clinical response. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:1089–96. doi: 10.1016/S0959-8049(03)00069-8.
    1. Hess KR, Anderson K, Symmans WF, Valero V, Ibrahim N, Mejia JA, et al. Pharmacogenomic predictor of sensitivity to preoperative chemotherapy with paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4236–44. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.05.6861.
    1. Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, Mehta K, Costantino JP, Wolmark N, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet. 2014;384:164–72. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62422-8.
    1. Sørlie T, Perou CM, Fan C, Geisler S, Aas T, Nobel A, et al. Gene expression profiles do not consistently predict the clinical treatment response in locally advanced breast cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2006;5:2914–8. doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-06-0126.
    1. Hatzis C, Pusztai L, Valero V, Booser DJ, Esserman L, Lluch A, et al. A genomic predictor of response and survival following taxane-anthracycline chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer. JAMA. 2011;305:1873–81. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.593.
    1. Kuerer HM, Newman LA, Smith TL, Ames FC, Hunt KK, Dhingra K, 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;17:460–9.
    1. Jones RL, Salter J, A’Hern R, Nerurkar A, Parton M, Reis-Filho JS, et al. The prognostic significance of Ki67 before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;116:53–68. doi: 10.1007/s10549-008-0081-7.
    1. Hudis CA, Barlow WE, Costantino JP, Gray RJ, Pritchard KI, Chapman J-AW, et al. Proposal for standardized definitions for efficacy end points in adjuvant breast cancer trials: the STEEP System. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2127–32. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.10.3523.
    1. Magbanua MJ, Roy R, Sosa EV, Weinberg V, Federman S, Mattie MD, et al. Gene expression and biological pathways in tissue of men with prostate cancer in a randomized clinical trial of lycopene and fish oil supplementation. PLoS One. 2011;6 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024004.
    1. Haqq C, Nosrati M, Sudilovsky D, Crothers J, Khodabakhsh D, Pulliam BL, et al. The gene expression signatures of melanoma progression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102:6092–7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0501564102.
    1. Diehn M, Sherlock G, Binkley G, Jin H, Matese JC, Hernandez-Boussard T, et al. SOURCE: a unified genomic resource of functional annotations, ontologies, and gene expression data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003;31:219–23. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkg014.
    1. Karolchik D, Kuhn RM, Baertsch R, Barber GP, Clawson H, Diekhans M, et al. The UCSC Genome Browser Database: 2008 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008;36:D773–9. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkm966.
    1. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, Leung S, Voduc D, Vickery T, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1160–7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.1370.
    1. Dressman HK, Hans C, Bild A, Olson JA, Rosen E, Marcom PK, et al. Gene expression profiles of multiple breast cancer phenotypes and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:819–26. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1447.
    1. Kolacinska A, Fendler W, Szemraj J, Szymanska B, Borowska-Garganisz E, Nowik M, et al. Gene expression and pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Mol Biol Rep. 2012;39:7435–41. doi: 10.1007/s11033-012-1576-1.
    1. Lin Y, Lin S, Watson M, Trinkaus KM, Kuo S, Naughton MJ, et al. A gene expression signature that predicts the therapeutic response of the basal-like breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;123:691–9. doi: 10.1007/s10549-009-0664-y.
    1. Balko JM, Cook RS, Vaught DB, Kuba MG, Miller TW, Bhola NE, et al. Profiling of residual breast cancers after neoadjuvant chemotherapy identifies DUSP4 deficiency as a mechanism of drug resistance. Nat Med. 2012;18:1052–9. doi: 10.1038/nm.2795.
    1. Ayers M, Symmans WF, Stec J, Damokosh AI, Clark E, Hess K, et al. Gene expression profiles predict complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2284–93. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.05.166.
    1. Korde LA, Lusa L, McShane L, Lebowitz PF, Lukes L, Camphausen K, et al. Gene expression pathway analysis to predict response to neoadjuvant docetaxel and capecitabine for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;119:685–99. doi: 10.1007/s10549-009-0651-3.
    1. Chang JC, Wooten EC, Tsimelzon A, Hilsenbeck SG, Gutierrez MC, Elledge R, et al. Gene expression profiling for the prediction of therapeutic response to docetaxel in patients with breast cancer. Lancet. 2003;362:362–9. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14023-8.
    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;8:461–8. doi: 10.1097/00130404-200211000-00010.
    1. Modlich O, Prisack HB, Munnes M, Audretsch W, Bojar H. Immediate gene expression changes after the first course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with primary breast cancer disease. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:6418–31. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-1031.
    1. Beitsch P, Lotzova E, Hortobagyi G, Pollock R. Natural immunity in breast cancer patients during neoadjuvant chemotherapy and after surgery. Surg Oncol. 1994;3:211–9. doi: 10.1016/0960-7404(94)90036-1.
    1. Vera-Ramirez L, Sanchez-Rovira P, Ramirez-Tortosa CL, Quiles JL, Ramirez-Tortosa M, Lorente JA. Transcriptional shift identifies a set of genes driving breast cancer chemoresistance. PLoS One. 2013;8 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053983.
    1. Tsai MS, Bogart DF, Castañeda JM, Li P, Lupu R. Cyr61 promotes breast tumorigenesis and cancer progression. Oncogene. 2002;21:8178–85. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1205682.
    1. Xie D, Miller CW, O’Kelly J, Nakachi K, Sakashita A, Said JW, et al. Breast cancer: Cyr61 is overexpressed, estrogen-inducible, and associated with more advanced disease. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:14187–94.
    1. Lin MT, Chang CC, Chen ST, Chang HL, Su JL, Chau YP, et al. Cyr61 expression confers resistance to apoptosis in breast cancer MCF-7 cells by a mechanism of NF-κB-dependent XIAP up-regulation. J Biol Chem. 2004;279:24015–23. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M402305200.
    1. Lin J, Huo R, Wang L, Zhou Z, Sun Y, Shen B, et al. A novel anti-Cyr61 antibody inhibits breast cancer growth and metastasis in vivo. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2012;61:677–87. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1135-y.
    1. Ryu CS, Kwak HC, Lee KS, Kang KW, Oh SJ, Lee KH, et al. Sulfur amino acid metabolism in doxorubicin-resistant breast cancer cells. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2011;255:94–102. doi: 10.1016/j.taap.2011.06.004.
    1. de Visser KE, Eichten A, Coussens LM. Paradoxical roles of the immune system during cancer development. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6:24–37. doi: 10.1038/nrc1782.
    1. Callari M, Musella V, Di Buduo E, Sensi M, Miodini P, Dugo M, et al. Subtype-dependent prognostic relevance of an interferon-induced pathway metagene in node-negative breast cancer. Mol Oncol. 2014;8:1278–89. doi: 10.1016/j.molonc.2014.04.010.
    1. Weichselbaum RR, Ishwaran H, Yoon T, Nuyten DS, Baker SW, Khodarev N, et al. An interferon-related gene signature for DNA damage resistance is a predictive marker for chemotherapy and radiation for breast cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105:18490–5. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0809242105.
    1. Wolf DM, Lenburg ME, Yau C, Boudreau A, van ’t Veer LJ. Gene co-expression modules as clinically relevant hallmarks of breast cancer diversity. PLoS One. 2014;9 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0088309.
    1. Hoadley KA, Yau C, Wolf DM, Cherniack AD, Tamborero D, Ng S, et al. Multiplatform analysis of 12 cancer types reveals molecular classification within and across tissues of origin. Cell. 2014;158:929–44. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.06.049.
    1. Barker AD, Sigman CC, Kelloff GJ, Hylton NM, Berry DA, Esserman LJ. I-SPY 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009;86:97–100. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2009.68.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다