Background: In this study we evaluated the interactions of human adipose tissue-derived stem cells (ADSCs) and different human breast cancer cell lines (BRCAs) with regard to the safety of cell-assisted lipotransfers for breast reconstruction and a thereby unintended co-localization of ADSCs and BRCAs. Methods: ADSCs were co-cultured with five different human BRCAs (MCF-7, MDA-MB-231, SK-BR-3, ZR-75-30, and EVSA-T) and primary BRCAs from one patient in a transwell system, and cell-cell-interactions were analyzed by assessing doubling time, migration and invasion, angiogenesis, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) of more than 300 tumor-associated genes, and multiplex protein assays of 20 chemokines and growth factors and eight matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs). Results of co-culture were compared to those of the respective monoculture. Results: Quantitative real-time PCR revealed remarkable changes in the expression of multiple tumor-associated genes in co-culture compared to monocultures of both ADSCs and BRCAs. Concomitantly, the concentration of several tumor-associated proteins, such as cytokines and MMPs, were strongly increased in co-culture. Furthermore, exclusively in co-culture with ADSCs, the different BRCAs were exposed to several important tumor-modulating proteins, such as CCL2, HGF, or interleukins. Co-culture did not significantly affect cellular proliferation of either ADSCs or BRCAs (p > 0.05). The migration of MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 BRCAs was significantly increased in co-culture with ADSCs by a mean of 11% and 23%, respectively (p = 0.04 and 0.012), as well as that of ADSCs in co-culture with MDA-MB-231, ZR-75-30, and EVSA-T (+11–15%, p = 0.035–0.045). Co-culture with MDA-MB-231, SK-BR-3, and EVSA-T BRCAs significantly increased the invasive behavior of ADSCs by a mean of 24–41% (p = 0.014–0.039). There were no significant differences in the in vitro invasive properties of BRCAs in co-culture compared to monoculture. An in vitro angiogenesis assay revealed an increased tube formation of conditioned media from co-cultured BRCAs and ADSCs compared to the respective monocultures. Conclusion: This study further elucidates the possible interactions of primary human ADSCs with human BRCAs, pointing towards a potential increased oncological risk which should not be neglected when considering a clinical use of cell-assisted lipoaspirates in breast reconstruction.
Background: Proliferation may predict response to neoadjuvant therapy of breast cancer and is commonly assessed by manual scoring of slides stained by immunohistochemistry (IHC) for Ki-67 similar to ER and PgR. This method carries significant intra- and inter-observer variability. Automatic scoring of Ki-67 with digital image analysis (qIHC) or assessment of MKI67 gene expression with RT-qPCR may improve diagnostic accuracy. Methods: Ki-67 IHC visual assessment was compared to the IHC nuclear tool (AperioTM) on core biopsies from a randomized neoadjuvant clinical trial. Expression of ESR1, PGR and MKI67 by RT-qPCR was performed on RNA extracted from the same formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. Concordance between the three methods (vIHC, qIHC and RT-qPCR) was assessed for all 3 markers. The potential of Ki-67 IHC and RT-qPCR to predict pathological complete response (pCR) was evaluated using ROC analysis and non-parametric Mann-Whitney Test. Results: Correlation between methods (qIHC versus RT-qPCR) was high for ER and PgR (spearman´s r = 0.82, p < 0.0001 and r = 0.86, p < 0.0001, respectively) resulting in high levels of concordance using predefined cut-offs. When comparing qIHC of ER and PgR with RT-qPCR of ESR1 and PGR the overall agreement was 96.6 and 91.4%, respectively, while overall agreement of visual IHC with RT-qPCR was slightly lower for ER/ESR1 and PR/PGR (91.2 and 92.9%, respectively). In contrast, only a moderate correlation was observed between qIHC and RT-qPCR continuous data for Ki-67/MKI67 (Spearman’s r = 0.50, p = 0.0001). Up to now no predictive cut-off for Ki-67 assessment by IHC has been established to predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Setting the desired sensitivity at 100%, specificity for the prediction of pCR (ypT0ypN0) was significantly higher for mRNA than for protein (68.9% vs. 22.2%). Moreover, the proliferation levels in patients achieving a pCR versus not differed significantly using MKI67 RNA expression (Mann-Whitney p = 0.002), but not with qIHC of Ki-67 (Mann-Whitney p = 0.097) or vIHC of Ki-67 (p = 0.131). Conclusion: Digital image analysis can successfully be implemented for assessing ER, PR and Ki-67. IHC for ER and PR reveals high concordance with RT-qPCR. However, RT-qPCR displays a broader dynamic range and higher sensitivity than IHC. Moreover, correlation between Ki-67 qIHC and RT-qPCR is only moderate and RT-qPCR with MammaTyper® outperforms qIHC in predicting pCR. Both methods yield improvements to error-prone manual scoring of Ki-67. However, RT-qPCR was significantly more specific.
Background: In Germany, most breast cancer patients are treated in specialized breast cancer units (BCU), which are certified, and routinely monitored. Herein, we evaluate up-to-date oncological outcome of breast cancer (BC) molecular subtypes in routine clinical care of a specialized BCU. Methods: The study was a prospectively single-center cohort study of 4102 female cases with primary, unilateral, non-metastatic breast cancer treated between 01 January 2003 and 31 December 2012. The five routinely used molecular subtypes (Luminal A-like, Luminal B/HER2 negative-like, Luminal B/HER2 positive-like, HER2-type, Triple negative) were analyzed. The median follow-up time of the whole cohort was 55 months. We calculated estimates for local control rate (LCR), disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), overall survival (OS), and relative overall survival (ROS). Results: Luminal A-like tumors were the most frequent (44.7%) and showed the best outcome with LCR of 99.1% (95% CI 98.5; 99.7), OS of 95.1% (95% CI 93.7; 96.5), and ROS of 100.0% (95% CI 98.5; 101.5). Triple negative tumors (12.3%) presented the poorest outcome with LCR of 89.6% (95% CI 85.8; 93.4), OS of 78.5% (95% CI 73.8; 83.3), and ROS of 80.1% (95% CI 73.8; 83.2). Conclusions: Patients with a favorable subtype can expect an OS above 95% and an LCR of almost 100% over 5 years. On the other hand the outcome of patients with HER2 and Triple negative subtypes remains poor, thus necessitating more intensified research and care.
Background: Ertumaxomab (ertu) is a bispecific, trifunctional antibody targeting Her2/neu, CD3 and the Fcγ-receptors I, IIa, and III forming a tri-cell complex between tumor cell, T cell and accessory cells. Methods: Patients (pts) with Her2/neu (1+/SISH positive, 2+ and 3+) expressing tumors progressing after standard therapy were treated to investigate safety, tolerability and preliminary efficacy. In this study, ertu was applied i.v. in 2 cycles following a predefined dose escalating scheme. Each cycle consisted of five ascending doses (10–500 μg) applied weekly within 28 days with a 21 day treatment-free interval. If 2 pts experienced a dose limiting toxicity (DLT) at a given dose level, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) had been exceeded. Results: Fourteen heavily pretreated pts (e.g. breast, rectal, gastric cancer) were enrolled in the four main cohorts. Three (21 %) pts had to be replaced. Two serious adverse events (SAE) with possible relation to the investigational drug were seen, both fully reversible. A DLT was not detected. Consequently, the MTD could not be determined. All adverse events (AE) were transient and completely reversible. Most frequent AEs were fatigue (14/14), pain (13/14), cephalgia (12/14), chills (11/14), nausea (8/14), fever (7/14), emesis (7/14) and diarrhea (5/14). Single doses up to 300 μg were well tolerated (total dose up to 800 μg per cycle). We observed one partial remission and two disease stabilizations after first treatment cycle. Conclusions: Single doses up to 300 μg could be safely administered in an escalating dose scheme. Immunological responses and clinical activity warrant further evaluation in patients with Her2 over expressing tumors. Trial registration EudraCT number: 2011-003201-14; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01569412
Introduction: The distribution of histopathological features of invasive breast tumors in BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutation carriers differs from that of individuals with no known mutation. Histopathological features thus have utility for mutation prediction, including statistical modeling to assess pathogenicity of BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants of uncertain clinical significance. We analyzed large pathology datasets accrued by the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) and the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) to reassess histopathological predictors of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status, and provide robust likelihood ratio (LR) estimates for statistical modeling. Methods: Selection criteria for study/center inclusion were estrogen receptor (ER) status or grade data available for invasive breast cancer diagnosed younger than 70 years. The dataset included 4,477 BRCA1 mutation carriers, 2,565 BRCA2 mutation carriers, and 47,565 BCAC breast cancer cases. Country-stratified estimates of the likelihood of mutation status by histopathological markers were derived using a Mantel-Haenszel approach. Results: ER-positive phenotype negatively predicted BRCA1 mutation status, irrespective of grade (LRs from 0.08 to 0.90). ER-negative grade 3 histopathology was more predictive of positive BRCA1 mutation status in women 50 years or older (LR = 4.13 (3.70 to 4.62)) versus younger than 50 years (LR = 3.16 (2.96 to 3.37)). For BRCA2, ER-positive grade 3 phenotype modestly predicted positive mutation status irrespective of age (LR = 1.7-fold), whereas ER-negative grade 3 features modestly predicted positive mutation status at 50 years or older (LR = 1.54 (1.27 to 1.88)). Triple-negative tumor status was highly predictive of BRCA1 mutation status for women younger than 50 years (LR = 3.73 (3.43 to 4.05)) and 50 years or older (LR = 4.41 (3.86 to 5.04)), and modestly predictive of positive BRCA2 mutation status in women 50 years or older (LR = 1.79 (1.42 to 2.24)). Conclusions: These results refine likelihood-ratio estimates for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status by using commonly measured histopathological features. Age at diagnosis is an important variable for most analyses, and grade is more informative than ER status for BRCA2 mutation carrier prediction. The estimates will improve BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant classification and inform patient mutation testing and clinical management.
Systemic treatment of non-metastatic breast cancer is based on endocrine therapy, cytotoxic chemotherapy, and molecular targeted therapy - with the major problems of immense overtreatment of patients who would not relapse without systemic therapy and the failure of treatment in others whose disease still recurs. These deficits can only be overcome by the identification of new and better prognostic and predictive markers. Currently, adjuvant treatment stratification is based on a limited number of established factors, namely locoregional tumour stage, age, grade, expression of hormone receptors, HER2, and Ki-67. Molecular profiling techniques, however, have revolutionized our understanding of breast cancer as a heterogeneous disease. Future results from even more comprehensive genetic analyses as part of the coordinated cancer genome projects will help to develop better treatment stratifications and new therapeutic approaches. Efforts to realize the dream of a personalized treatment for breast cancer will include drug development and intelligent design of trials for increasingly small subgroups of patients with specific host and disease characteristics. This will only be made possible by a strong cooperation between basic researchers and translational scientists, clinicians, as well as academia and industry.
...