Implications of genomic instability in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer

References

• Key TJ, Verkasalo PK, Banks E. Epidemiology of breast cancer. Lancet Oncol.2(3), 133–140 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J. Clin.59(4), 225–249 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature406(6797), 747–752 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertucci F, Birnbaum D. Reasons for breast cancer heterogeneity. J. Biol.7(2), 6 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wiechec E, Hansen LL. The effect of genetic variability on drug response in conventional breast cancer treatment. Eur. J. Pharmacol.625(1–3), 122–130 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Choi JY, Nowell SA, Blanco JG, Ambrosone CB. The role of genetic variability in drug metabolism pathways in breast cancer prognosis. Pharmacogenomics7(4), 613–624 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitt NC, Hickson ID. Caretaker tumour suppressor genes that defend genome integrity. Trends Mol. Med.8(4), 179–186 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Wiseman H, Halliwell B. Damage to DNA by reactive oxygen and nitrogen species: role in inflammatory disease and progression to cancer. Biochem. J.313(Pt 1), 17–29 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feig DI, Reid TM, Loeb LA. Reactive oxygen species in tumorigenesis. Cancer Res.54(7 Suppl.), 1890s–1894s (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson GR, Stoler DL, Brenner BM. Cancer: the evolved consequence of a destabilized genome. Bioessays23(11), 1037–1046 (2001).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eyfjord JE, Bodvarsdottir SK. Genomic instability and cancer: networks involved in response to DNA damage. Mutat. Res.592(1–2), 18–28 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA98(19), 10869–10874 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hennessy BT, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Stemke-Hale K et al. Characterization of a naturally occurring breast cancer subset enriched in epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and stem cell characteristics. Cancer Res.69(10), 4116–4124 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonsson G, Staaf J, Vallon-Christersson J et al. Genomic subtypes of breast cancer identified by array-comparative genomic hybridization display distinct molecular and clinical characteristics. Breast Cancer Res.12(3), R42 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prat A, Perou CM. Deconstructing the molecular portraits of breast cancer. Mol. Oncol.5(1), 5–23 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst.101(10), 736–750 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouzier R, Perou CM, Symmans WF et al. Breast cancer molecular subtypes respond differently to preoperative chemotherapy. Clin. Cancer Res.11(16), 5678–5685 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reis-Filho JS, Tutt AN. Triple negative tumours: a critical review. Histopathology52(1), 108–118 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dent R, Trudeau M, Pritchard KI et al. Triple-negative breast cancer: clinical features and patterns of recurrence. Clin. Cancer Res.13(15 Pt 1), 4429–4434 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anders CK, Carey LA. Biology, metastatic patterns, and treatment of patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Clin. Breast Cancer9(Suppl. 2), S73–S81 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin BK, Lee Y, Lee JB, Kim HK, Cho SJ, Kim A. Breast carcinomas expressing basal markers have poor clinical outcome regardless of estrogen receptor status. Oncol. Rep.19(3), 617–625 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Prat A, Parker JS, Karginova O et al. Phenotypic and molecular characterization of the claudin-low intrinsic subtype of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res.12(5), R68 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taube JH, Herschkowitz JI, Komurov K et al. Core epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition interactome gene-expression signature is associated with claudin-low and metaplastic breast cancer subtypes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA107(35), 15449–15454 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens PJ, McBride DJ, Lin ML et al. Complex landscapes of somatic rearrangement in human breast cancer genomes. Nature462(7276), 1005–1010 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boulton SJ. Cellular functions of the BRCA tumour-suppressor proteins. Biochem. Soc. Trans.34(Pt 5), 633–645 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linger RJ, Kruk PA. BRCA1 16 years later: risk-associated BRCA1 mutations and their functional implications. FEBS J.277(15), 3086–3096 (2010).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Holstege H, Horlings HM, Velds A et al. BRCA1-mutated and basal-like breast cancers have similar aCGH profiles and a high incidence of protein truncating TP53 mutations. BMC Cancer10, 654 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saal LH, Gruvberger-Saal SK, Persson C et al. Recurrent gross mutations of the PTEN tumor suppressor gene in breast cancers with deficient DSB repair. Nat. Genet.40(1), 102–107 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• O’Shaughnessy J, Osborne C, Pippen JE et al. Iniparib plus chemotherapy in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.364(3), 205–214 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anbazhagan R, Fujii H, Gabrielson E. Microsatellite instability is uncommon in breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res.5(4), 839–844 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lacroix-Triki M, Lambros MB, Geyer FC, Suarez PH, Reis-Filho JS, Weigelt B. Absence of microsatellite instability in mucinous carcinomas of the breast. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Pathol.4(1), 22–31 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Geigl JB, Obenauf AC, Schwarzbraun T, Speicher MR. Defining ‘chromosomal instability’. Trends Genet.24(2), 64–69 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pellman D. Cell biology: aneuploidy and cancer. Nature446(7131), 38–39 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weaver BA, Cleveland DW. Does aneuploidy cause cancer? Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.18(6), 658–667 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang YC, Williams BR, Siegel JJ, Amon A. Identification of aneuploidy-selective antiproliferation compounds. Cell144(4), 499–512 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang HE, Chin SF, Ginestier C et al. A recurrent chromosome breakpoint in breast cancer at the NRG1/neuregulin 1/heregulin gene. Cancer Res.64(19), 6840–6844 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cheung AL, Deng W. Telomere dysfunction, genome instability and cancer. Front. Biosci.13, 2075–2090 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo AW, Sabatier L, Fouladi B, Pottier G, Ricoul M, Murnane JP. DNA amplification by breakage/fusion/bridge cycles initiated by spontaneous telomere loss in a human cancer cell line. Neoplasia4(6), 531–538 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruhne B, Kamranvar SA, Masucci MG, Sompallae R. EBV and genomic instability – a new look at the role of the virus in the pathogenesis of Burkitt’s lymphoma. Semin. Cancer Biol.19(6), 394–400 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Bailey SM, Murnane JP. Telomeres, chromosome instability and cancer. Nucleic Acids Res.34(8), 2408–2417 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Poonepalli A, Banerjee B, Ramnarayanan K, Palanisamy N, Putti TC, Hande MP. Telomere-mediated genomic instability and the clinico-pathological parameters in breast cancer. Genes Chromosomes Cancer47(12), 1098–1109 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paik S, Kim C, Wolmark N. HER2 status and benefit from adjuvant trastuzumab in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.358(13), 1409–1411 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tokunaga E, Okada S, Yamashita N et al. High incidence and frequency of LOH are associated with aggressive features of high-grade HER2 and triple-negative breast cancers. Breast Cancer DOI: 10.1007/s12282-010-0232-7 (2010) (Epub ahead of print).
   Google Scholar
• Osborne RJ, Hamshere MG. A genome-wide map showing common regions of loss of heterozygosity/allelic imbalance in breast cancer. Cancer Res.60(14), 3706–3712 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiechec E, Overgaard J, Hansen LL. A fragile site within the HPC1 region at 1q25.3 affecting RGS16, RGSL1, and RGSL2 in human breast carcinomas. Genes Chromosomes Cancer47(9), 766–780 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Arun B, Kilic G, Yen C et al. Loss of FHIT expression in breast cancer is correlated with poor prognostic markers. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.14(7), 1681–1685 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Pluciennik E, Kusinska R, Potemski P, Kubiak R, Kordek R, Bednarek AK. WWOX – the FRA16D cancer gene: expression correlation with breast cancer progression and prognosis. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol.32(2), 153–157 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• McClelland SE, Burrell RA, Swanton C. Chromosomal instability: a composite phenotype that influences sensitivity to chemotherapy. Cell Cycle8(20), 3262–3266 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter SL, Eklund AC, Kohane IS, Harris LN, Szallasi Z. A signature of chromosomal instability inferred from gene expression profiles predicts clinical outcome in multiple human cancers. Nat. Genet.38(9), 1043–1048 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooks J, Cairns P, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A. Promoter methylation and the detection of breast cancer. Cancer Causes Control20(9), 1539–1550 (2009).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Daskalos A, Nikolaidis G, Xinarianos G et al. Hypomethylation of retrotransposable elements correlates with genomic instability in non-small cell lung cancer. Int. J. Cancer124(1), 81–87 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elsheikh SE, Green AR, Rakha EA et al. Global histone modifications in breast cancer correlate with tumor phenotypes, prognostic factors, and patient outcome. Cancer Res.69(9), 3802–3809 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurdistani SK. Histone modifications as markers of cancer prognosis: a cellular view. Br. J. Cancer97(1), 1–5 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bediaga NG, Acha-Sagredo A, Guerra I et al. DNA methylation epigenotypes in breast cancer molecular subtypes. Breast Cancer Res.12(5), R77 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holm K, Hegardt C, Staaf J et al. Molecular subtypes of breast cancer are associated with characteristic DNA methylation patterns. Breast Cancer Res.12(3), R36 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hicks J, Krasnitz A, Lakshmi B et al. Novel patterns of genome rearrangement and their association with survival in breast cancer. Genome Res.16(12), 1465–1479 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergamaschi A, Kim YH, Wang P et al. Distinct patterns of DNA copy number alteration are associated with different clinicopathological features and gene-expression subtypes of breast cancer. Genes Chromosomes Cancer45(11), 1033–1040 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou H, Kuang J, Zhong L et al. Tumour amplified kinase STK15/BTAK induces centrosome amplification, aneuploidy and transformation. Nat. Genet.20(2), 189–193 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lingle WL, Lukasiewicz K, Salisbury JL. Deregulation of the centrosome cycle and the origin of chromosomal instability in cancer. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol.570, 393–421 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yildirim-Assaf S, Coumbos A, Hopfenmuller W, Foss HD, Stein H, Kuhn W. The prognostic significance of determining DNA content in breast cancer by DNA image cytometry: the role of high grade aneuploidy in node negative breast cancer. J. Clin. Pathol.60(6), 649–655 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tutt A, Gabriel A, Bertwistle D et al. Absence of Brca2 causes genome instability by chromosome breakage and loss associated with centrosome amplification. Curr. Biol.9(19), 1107–1110 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salisbury JL, D’Assoro AB, Lingle WL. Centrosome amplification and the origin of chromosomal instability in breast cancer. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasia9(3), 275–283 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li Y, Benezra R. Identification of a human mitotic checkpoint gene: hsMAD2. Science274(5285), 246–248 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi YH, Ahn JH, Kim SB et al. Tissue microarray-based study of patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer shows that HER2/neu overexpression is an important predictive marker of poor prognosis. Ann. Oncol.20(8), 1337–1343 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chumsri S, Jeter S, Jacobs LK et al. Pathologic complete response to preoperative sequential doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide and single-agent taxane with or without trastuzumab in stage II/III HER2-positive breast cancer. Clin. Breast Cancer10(1), 40–45 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Yao L, Liu Y, Li Z et al. HER2 and response to anthracycline-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Ann. Oncol. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdq612 (2010) (Epub ahead of print).
   Google Scholar
• Visscher DW, Wallis T, Awussah S, Mohamed A, Crissman JD. Evaluation of MYC and chromosome 8 copy number in breast carcinoma by interphase cytogenetics. Genes Chromosomes Cancer18(1), 1–7 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Schlotter CM, Vogt U, Bosse U, Mersch B, Wassmann K. C-myc, not HER-2/neu, can predict recurrence and mortality of patients with node-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res.5(2), R30–R36 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gillett C, Fantl V, Smith R et al. Amplification and overexpression of cyclin D1 in breast cancer detected by immunohistochemical staining. Cancer Res.54(7), 1812–1817 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartkova J, Lukas J, Muller H, Lutzhoft D, Strauss M, Bartek J. Cyclin D1 protein expression and function in human breast cancer. Int. J. Cancer57(3), 353–361 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudas M, Lehnert M, Huynh A et al. Cyclin D1 expression in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant tamoxifen-based therapy. Clin. Cancer Res.14(6), 1767–1774 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Anzick SL, Kononen J, Walker RL et al. AIB1, a steroid receptor coactivator amplified in breast and ovarian cancer. Science277(5328), 965–968 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alkner S, Bendahl PO, Grabau D et al. AIB1 is a predictive factor for tamoxifen response in premenopausal women. Ann. Oncol.21(2), 238–244 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Ray ME, Yang ZQ, Albertson D et al. Genomic and expression analysis of the 8p11–12 amplicon in human breast cancer cell lines. Cancer Res.64(1), 40–47 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner N, Pearson A, Sharpe R et al. FGFR1 amplification drives endocrine therapy resistance and is a therapeutic target in breast cancer. Cancer Res.70(5), 2085–2094 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prentice LM, Shadeo A, Lestou VS et al. NRG1 gene rearrangements in clinical breast cancer: identification of an adjacent novel amplicon associated with poor prognosis. Oncogene24(49), 7281–7289 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esteva FJ, Guo H, Zhang S et al. PTEN, PIK3CA, p-AKT, and p-p70S6K status: association with trastuzumab response and survival in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Am. J. Pathol.177(4), 1647–1656 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bieche I, Lidereau R. Loss of heterozygosity at 13q14 correlates with RB1 gene underexpression in human breast cancer. Mol. Carcinog.29(3), 151–158 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Chano T, Ikebuchi K, Tomita Y et al. RB1CC1 together with RB1 and p53 predicts long-term survival in Japanese breast cancer patients. PLoS One5(12), e15737 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleton-Jansen AM. E-cadherin and loss of heterozygosity at chromosome 16 in breast carcinogenesis: different genetic pathways in ductal and lobular breast cancer? Breast Cancer Res.4(1), 5–8 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowalski PJ, Rubin MA, Kleer CG. E-cadherin expression in primary carcinomas of the breast and its distant metastases. Breast Cancer Res.5(6), R217–R222 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bednarek AK, Laflin KJ, Daniel RL, Liao Q, Hawkins KA, Aldaz C. WWOXM, a novel WW domain-containing protein mapping to human chromosome 16q23.3-24.1, a region frequently affected in breast cancer. Cancer Res.60(8), 2140–2145 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingvarsson S, Sigbjornsdottir BI, Huiping C, Jonasson JG, Agnarsson BA. Alterations of the FHIT gene in breast cancer: association with tumor progression and patient survival. Cancer Detect. Prev.25(3), 292–298 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Ingvarsson S. FHIT alterations in breast cancer. Semin. Cancer Biol.11(5), 361–366 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Friedrich K, von Heydebreck A, Haroske G et al. Comparative genomic hybridization-based oncogenetic tree model for genetic classification of breast cancer. Anal. Quant. Cytol. Histol.31(2), 101–108 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Tsuneizumi M, Emi M, Hirano A et al. Association of allelic loss at 8p22 with poor prognosis among breast cancer cases treated with high-dose adjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer Lett.180(1), 75–82 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen LL, Yilmaz M, Overgaard J, Andersen J, Kruse TA. Allelic loss of 16q23.2–24.2 is an independent marker of good prognosis in primary breast cancer. Cancer Res.58(10), 2166–2169 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adeyinka A, Mertens F, Idvall I et al. Different patterns of chromosomal imbalances in metastasising and non-metastasising primary breast carcinomas. Int. J. Cancer84(4), 370–375 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Muller HM, Widschwendter A, Fiegl H et al. DNA methylation in serum of breast cancer patients: an independent prognostic marker. Cancer Res.63(22), 7641–7645 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molina R, Jo J, Filella X et al. C-erbB-2, CEA and CA 15.3 serum levels in the early diagnosis of recurrence of breast cancer patients. Anticancer Res.19(4A), 2551–2555 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar