Search

IMPORTANCE: Pathologic complete response (pCR) is a known prognostic biomarker for long-term outcomes. The I-SPY2 trial evaluated if the strength of this clinical association persists in the context of a phase 2 neoadjuvant platform trial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of pCR with event-free survival (EFS) and pCR with distant recurrence–free survival (DRFS) in subpopulations of women with high-risk operable breast cancer treated with standard therapy or one of several novel agents. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter platform trial of women with operable clinical stage 2 or 3 breast cancer with no prior surgery or systemic therapy for breast cancer; primary tumors were 2.5 cm or larger. Women with tumors that were ERBB2 negative/hormone receptor (HR) positive with low 70-gene assay score were excluded. Participants were adaptively randomized to one of several different investigational regimens or control therapy within molecular subtypes from March 2010 through 2016. The analysis included participants with follow-up data available as of February 26, 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Standard-of-care neoadjuvant therapy consisting of taxane treatment with or without (as control) one of several investigational agents or combinations followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Pathologic complete response and 3-year EFS and DRFS. RESULTS: Of the 950 participants (median [range] age, 49 [23-77] years), 330 (34.7%) achieved pCR. Three-year EFS and DRFS for patients who achieved pCR were both 95%. Hazard ratios for pCR vs non-pCR were 0.19 for EFS (95% CI, 0.12-0.31) and 0.21 for DRFS (95% CI, 0.13-0.34) and were similar across molecular subtypes, varying from 0.14 to 0.18 for EFS and 0.10 to 0.20 for DRFS. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The 3-year outcomes from the I-SPY2 trial show that, regardless of subtype and/or treatment regimen, including 9 novel therapeutic combinations, achieving pCR after neoadjuvant therapy implies approximately an 80% reduction in recurrence rate. The goal of the I-SPY2 trial is to rapidly identify investigational therapies that may improve pCR when validated in a phase 3 confirmatory trial. Whether pCR is a validated surrogate in the sense that a therapy that improves pCR rate can be assumed to also improve long-term outcome requires further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01042379

To address cancer as a multifaceted adaptive system, the increasing momentum for cross-disciplinary connectivity between cancer biologists, physical scientists, mathematicians, chemists, biomedical engineers, computer scientists, clinicians, and advocates is fueling the emergence of new scientific frontiers, principles, and opportunities within physical sciences and oncology. In parallel to highlighting the advances, challenges, and acceptance of advocates as credible contributors, we offer recommendations for addressing real world hurdles in advancing equitable partnerships among advocacy stakeholders.

Mitochondrial genomes are separated from the nuclear genome for most of the cell cycle by the nuclear double membrane, intervening cytoplasm, and the mitochondrial double membrane. Despite these physical barriers, we show that somatically acquired mitochondrial-nuclear genome fusion sequences are present in cancer cells. Most occur in conjunction with intranuclear genomic rearrangements, and the features of the fusion fragments indicate that nonhomologous end joining and/or replication-dependent DNA double-strand break repair are the dominant mechanisms involved. Remarkably, mitochondrial-nuclear genome fusions occur at a similar rate per base pair of DNA as interchromosomal nuclear rearrangements, indicating the presence of a high frequency of contact between mitochondrial and nuclear DNA in some somatic cells. Transmission of mitochondrial DNA to the nuclear genome occurs in neoplastically transformed cells, but we do not exclude the possibility that some mitochondrial-nuclear DNA fusions observed in cancer occurred years earlier in normal somatic cells.

The year 2011 marked the 40 year anniversary of Richard Nixon signing the National Cancer Act, thus declaring the beginning of the “War on Cancer” in the United States. Whereas we have made tremendous progress toward understanding the genetics of tumors in the past four decades, and in developing enabling technology to dissect the molecular underpinnings of cancer at unprecedented resolution, it is only recently that the important role of the stromal microenvironment has been studied in detail. Cancer is a tissue-specific disease, and it is becoming clear that much of what we know about breast cancer progression parallels the biology of the normal breast differentiation, of which there is still much to learn. In particular, the normal breast and breast tumors share molecular, cellular, systemic and microenvironmental influences necessary for their progression. It is therefore enticing to consider a tumor to be a “rogue hacker”—one who exploits the weaknesses of a normal program for personal benefit. Understanding normal mammary gland biology and its “security vulnerabilities” may thus leave us better equipped to target breast cancer. In this review, we will provide a brief overview of the heterotypic cellular and molecular interactions within the microenvironment of the developing mammary gland that are necessary for functional differentiation, provide evidence suggesting that similar biology—albeit imbalanced and exaggerated—is observed in breast cancer progression particularly during the transition from carcinoma in situ to invasive disease. Lastly we will present evidence suggesting that the multigene signatures currently used to model cancer heterogeneity and clinical outcome largely reflect signaling from a heterogeneous microenvironment—a recurring theme that could potentially be exploited therapeutically.

Background: Over the past few years, a variety of multigene expression profiles have been developed to improve prognostication for early stage breast cancer and reduce overtreatment with chemotherapy. MammaPrint is the only test cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration for the prognostication of early breast cancer. The MammaPrint assay examines the expression of 70 genes in the primary tumor to stratify patients diagnosed with early stage breast cancer into good and poor prognosis groups. Objective: This evaluation reviews the development of the 70-gene profile, including validation studies involving patients with node-negative and 1 – 3 node-positive disease, the conversion of the 70-gene profile to a high-throughput diagnostic test, and the continuing prospective MINDACT clinical trial. Conclusion: The MammaPrint assay should help to determine which women with early breast cancer could be spared adjuvant chemotherapy.

Purpose: Gene expression profiling has been proposed as an alternative to clinical guidelines to identify high-risk patients for adjuvant chemotherapy. However, the outcomes associated with gene expression profiling are not clear, and guidelines for the appropriate use of genomic technologies have not been established.Methods: We developed a decision analytic model to evaluate the incremental cost and quality-adjusted life years of gene expression profiling versus NIH clinical guidelines in a hypothetical cohort of premenopausal early stage breast cancer patients 44 years of age. We conducted empirical analyses and identified literature-based data to inform the model, and performed probabilistic sensitivity analyses to evaluate uncertainty in the results. We interpreted the implications of our findings for treatment guidelines and policies.Results: Use of gene expression profiling resulted in an absolute 5% decrease in the proportion of cases of distant recurrence prevented, 0.21 fewer quality-adjusted life years, and a cost savings of $2882. The chosen test cutoff value to identify a tumor as poor prognosis and the cost of adjuvant chemotherapy were the most influential parameters in the analysis, but our findings did not change substantially in sensitivity analyses. Regardless of the test cutoff used to identify a poor prognosis tumor, the gene expression profiling assay studied in our analysis, at its current level of performance, did not attain the threshold sensitivity (95%) necessary to produce equal or greater quality-adjusted life years than NIH guidelines.Conclusion: Although the use of gene expression profiling in breast cancer care holds great promise, our analysis suggests additional refinement and validation are needed before use in clinical practice.

Gene expression profiling has been proposed as an alternative to clinical guidelines to identify high-risk patients for adjuvant chemotherapy. However, the outcomes associated with gene expression profiling are not clear, and guidelines for the appropriate use of genomic technologies have not been established.

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is a disease characterized by a long clinical course marked by frequent relapses that vary in clinical aggressiveness over time. Therefore, the main dilemma at each relapse is the choice for the most effective treatment for optimal disease control and failure-free survival while at the same time avoiding overtreatment and harmful side effects. The selection for more aggressive treatment is currently based on histologic grading and clinical criteria; however, in up to 30% of all cases these methods prove to be insufficient. Using supervised classification on a training set of paired samples from patients who experienced either an indolent or aggressive disease course, a gene expression profile of 81 genes was established that could, with an accuracy of 100%, distinguish low-grade from high-grade disease. This profile accurately classified 93% of the FL samples in an independent validation set. Most important, in a third series of FL cases where histologic grading was ambiguous, precluding meaningful morphologic guidance, the 81-gene profile shows a classification accuracy of 94%. The FL stratification profile is a more reliable marker of clinical behavior than the currently used histologic grading and clinical criteria and may provide an important alternative to guide the choice of therapy in patients with FL both at presentation and at relapse. (Blood. 2005;105:301-307)

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is a disease characterized by a long clinical course marked by frequent relapses that vary in clinical aggressiveness over time. Therefore, the main dilemma at each relapse is the choice for the most effective treatment for optimal disease control and failure-free survival while at the same time avoiding overtreatment and harmful side effects. The selection for more aggressive treatment is currently based on histologic grading and clinical criteria; however, in up to 30% of all cases these methods prove to be insufficient. Using supervised classification on a training set of paired samples from patients who experienced either an indolent or aggressive disease course, a gene expression profile of 81 genes was established that could, with an accuracy of 100%, distinguish low-grade from high-grade disease. This profile accurately classified 93% of the FL samples in an independent validation set. Most important, in a third series of FL cases where histologic grading was ambiguous, precluding meaningful morphologic guidance, the 81-gene profile shows a classification accuracy of 94%. The FL stratification profile is a more reliable marker of clinical behavior than the currently used histologic grading and clinical criteria and may provide an important alternative to guide the choice of therapy in patients with FL both at presentation and at relapse. (Blood. 2005;105:301-307)

To date, more than 300 distinct small deletions, insertions and point mutations, mostly leading to premature termination of translation1, have been reported in the breast/ovarian-cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. The elevated frequencies of some mutations in certain ethnic subpopulations2–4are caused by founder effects5,6, rather than by mutation hotspots. Here we report that the currently available mutation spectrum of BRCA1 has been biased by PCR-based mutation-screening methods, such as SSCP, the protein truncation test (PTT) and direct sequencing, using genomic DMA as template. Three large genomic deletions that are not detected by these approaches comprise 36% of all BRCA1 mutations found in Dutch breast-cancer families to date. A 510-bp Alu-mediated deletion comprising exon 22 was found in 8 of 170 breast-cancer families recruited for research purposes and in 6 of 49 probands referred to the Amsterdam Family Cancer Clinic for genetic counselling. In addition, a 3,835-bp Alu-mediated deletion encompassing exon 13 was detected in 6 of the 170 research families, while an deletion of approximately 14 kb was detected in a single family. Haplotype analyses indicated that each recurrent deletion had a single common ancestor.