Genomic instability in the breast microenvironment? A critical evaluation of the evidence

References

• Bowcock A. Breast Cancer: Molecular Genetics, Pathogenesis, and Therapeutics. Bowcock A (Ed.). Humana Press, NJ, USA (1999).
   Google Scholar
• American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures 2008. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Shekhar MP, Pauley R, Heppner G. Host microenvironment in breast cancer development: extracellular matrix-stromal cell contribution to neoplastic phenotype of epithelial cells in the breast. Breast Cancer Res.5, 130–135 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiquet-Ehrissmann R, Mackie EJ, Pearson CA, Sakakura T. Tenasc an extracellular matrix protein involved in tissue interactions during fetal development and oncogenesis. Cell47, 131–139 (1986).
   Google Scholar
• Singer C, Rasmussen A, Smith HS, Lippman ME, Lynch HT, Cullen KJ. Malignant breast epithelium selects for insulin-like growth factor II expression in breast stroma: evidence for paracine function. Cancer Res.55, 2448–2454 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yee D, Rosen N, Favoni RE, Cullen KJ. The insulin-like growth factors and their receptors, and their binding proteins in human breast cancer. Cancer Treat. Res.53, 93–106 (1991).
   Google Scholar
• Boudreau N, Myers C. Breast cancer-induced angiogenesis: multiple mechanisms and the role of the microenvironment. Breast Cancer Res.5, 140–146 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng G, Lu Y, Zlotnikov G, Thor AD, Smith HS. Loss of heterozygosity in normal tissue adjacent to breast carcinomas. Science274, 2057–2059 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellsworth DL, Ellsworth RE, Love B et al. Genomic patterns of allelic imbalance in disease free tissue adjacent to primary breast carcinomas. Breast Cancer Res. Treat.88, 131–139 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Ellsworth DL, Ellsworth RE, Love B et al. Outer breast quadrants demonstrate increased levels of genomic instability. Annals Surg. Oncol.11, 861–868 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Fukino K, Shen L, Matsumoto S, Morrison CD, Mutter GL, Eng C. Combined total genome loss of heterozygosity scan of breast cancer stroma and epithelium reveals multiplicity of stromal targets. Cancer Res.64, 7231–7236 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fukino K, Shen L, Patocs A, Mutter GL, Eng C. Genomic instability within tumor stroma and clinicopathological characteristics of sporadic primary invasive breast carcinoma. JAMA297, 2103–2111 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurose K, Hoshaw-Woodard S, Adeyinka A, Lemeshow S, Watson PH, Eng C. Genetic model of multi-step breast carcinogenesis involving the epithelium and stroma: clues to tumour-microenvironment interactions. Hum. Mol. Gen.10, 1907–1913 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moinfar F, Man YG, Arnold L, Bratthauer GL, Ratschchek M, Tavassoli FA. Concurrent and independent genetic alterations in stromal and epithelial cells of mammary carcinoma: implications for tumorigenesis. Cancer Res.60, 2562–2566 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber F, Shen L, Fukino K et al. Total-genome analysis of BRCA1/2-related invasive carcinomas of the breast identifies tumor stroma as potential landscaper for neoplastic initiation. Am. J. Hum. Genet.78, 961–972 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan DS, Marchio C, Reis-Filho JS. Hereditary breast cancer: from molecular pathology to tailored therapies. J. Clin. Pathol.61, 1073–1082 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Easton DF, Pooley KA, Dunning AM et al. Genome-wide association study identifies novel breast cancer susceptibility loci. Nature447, 1087–1093 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewster A, Bondy M. Clinical and molecular epidemiology of breast cancer. In: Molecular Oncology of Breast Cancer. Ross JS, Hortobagyi GN (Eds). Jones and Bartlett Publishers, MA, USA, 34–47 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Miller BJ, Wang D, Krahe R, Wright FA. Pooled analysis of loss of heterozygosity in breast cancer: a genome scan provides comparative evidence for multiple tumor suppressors and identified novel candidate regions. Am. J. Hum. Genet.73, 748–767 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petitjean A, Achatz MI, Borresen-Dale AL, Hainaut P, Olivier M. TP53 mutations in human cancers: functional selection and impact on cancer prognosis and outcomes. Oncogene26, 2157–2165 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agrawal A, Murphy RF, Agrawal DK. DNA methylation in breast and colorectal cancers. Mod. Pathol.20, 711–721 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paik S, Shak S, Tang G et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.351, 2817–2826 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature406, 747–752 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Loi S et al. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J. Natl Cancer Inst.98, 262–272 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature415, 530–536 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolini A, Carpi A, Tarro G. Biomolecular markers of breast cancer. Front Biosci.11, 1818–1843 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cukierman E. A visual-quantitative analysis of fibroblastic stromagenesis in breast cancer progression. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasia9, 311–324 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li H, Fan X, Houghton J. Tumor microenvironment: the role of the tumor stroma in cancer. J. Cell. Biochem.101, 805–815 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollard JW. Macrophages define the invasive microenvironment in breast cancer. J. Leukoc. Biol.84, 623–630 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tlsty TD, Coussens LM. Tumor stroma and regulation of cancer development. Annu. Rev. Pathol.1, 119–150 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green ED. The Human Genome Project and its impact on the study of human disease. In: Metabolic and Molecular Bases of Inherited Disease. Scriver CR, Beaudet AL, Sly WS et al. (Eds). McGraw-Hill Incorporated, NY, USA (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Medintz IL, Lee C-CR, Wong WW, Pirkola K, Sidransky D, Mathies RA. Loss of heterozygosity assay for molecular detection of cancer using energy-transfer primers and capillary array electrophoresis. Genome Res.10, 1211–1218 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertheau P, Plassa LF, Lerebours F et al. Allelic loss detection in inflammatory breast cancer: improvement with laser microdissection. Lab. Invest.81, 1397–1402 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Shen C-Y, Yu J-C, Lo Y-L et al. Genome-wide search for loss of heterozygosity using laser capture microdissected tissue of breast carcinoma: an implication for mutator phenotype and breast cancer pathogenesis. Cancer Res.60, 3884–3892 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Huang S-C, Linn JF et al. Microsatellie-based cancer detection using capillary array electrophoresis and energy-transfer fluorescent primers. Electrophoresis18, 1742–1749 (1997).
   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, 3706–3712 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker TE, Ellsworth RE, Deyarmin B et al. The genomic heritage of lymph node metastases: implications for clinical management of patients with breast cancer. Ann. Surg. Oncol.15, 1056–1063 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ellsworth RE, Ellsworth DL, Patney HL et al. Amplification of HER2 is a marker for global genomic instability. BMC Cancer8, 297 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagahata T, Hirano A, Utada Y et al. Correlation of allelic losses and clinicopathological factors in 504 primary breast cancers. Breast Cancer9, 208–215 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• O’Connell P, Pekkel V, Fuqua SAW, Osborne CK, Allred DC. Analysis of loss of heterozygosity in 399 premalignant breast lesions at 15 genetic loci. J. Natl Cancer Inst.90, 697–703 (1998).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roylance R, Gorman P, Hanby A, Tomlinson I. Allelic imbalance analysis of chromosome 16q shows that grade I and grade III invasive ductal breast cancers follow different genetic pathways. J. Pathol.196, 32–36 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Ellsworth RE, Ellsworth DL, Lubert SM, Hooke J, Somiari RI, Shriver CD. High-throughput loss of heterozygosity mapping in 26 commonly deleted regions in breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.12, 915–919 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allinen M, Beroukhim R, Cai L et al. Molecular characterization of the tumor microenvironment in breast cancer. Cancer Cell6, 17–32 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu M, Yao J, Cai L et al. Distinct epigenetic changes in the stromal cells of breast cancers. Nature Genet.37, 899–905 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu M, Polyak K. Molecular characterisation of the tumour microenvironment in breast cancer. Eur. J. Cancer44, 2760–2765 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polyak K, Haviv I, Campbell IG. Co-evolution of tumor cells and their microenvironment. Trends Genet.25, 30–38 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qiu W, Hu M, Sridhar A et al. No evidence of clonal somatic genetic alterations in cancer-associated fibroblasts from human breast and ovarian carcinomas. Nat. Genet.40, 650–655 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srinivasan M, Sedmak D, Jewell S. Effect of fixatives and tissue processing on the content and integrity of nucleic acids. Am. J. Pathol.161, 1961–1971 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrand K, Jovanovic L, Delahunt D et al. Loss of heterozygosity studies revisited: prior quantification of the amplifiable DNA content of archival samples improves efficiency and reliability. J. Mol. Diagn.4, 150–158 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Williams C, Ponten F, Moberg C et al. A high frequency of sequence alterations is due to formalin fixation of archival specimens. Am. J. Pathol.155, 1467–1471 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellsworth RE, Ellsworth DL, Deyarmin B et al. Timing of critical genetic changes in human breast disease. Annals Surg. Oncol.12, 1054–1060 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tirkkonen M, Tanner M, Karhu R, Kallioniemi A, Isola J, Kallioniemi OP. Molecular cytogenetics of primary breast cancer by CGH. Genes Chromosomes Cancer21, 177–184 (1998).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roylance R, Gorman P, Harris W et al. Comparative genomic hybridization of breast tumors stratified by histological grade reveals new insights into the biological progression of breast cancer. Cancer Res.59, 1433–1436 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellsworth RE, Hooke JA, Love B et al. Correlation of levels and patterns of genomic instability with histological grading of invasive breast tumors. Breast Cancer Res. Treat107, 259–265 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Joosse SA, van Beers EH, Nederlof PM. Automated array-CGH optimized for archival formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor material. BMC Cancer7, 43 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Tuefferd M, De Bondt A, Van Den Wyngaert I et al. Genome-wide copy number alterations detection in fresh frozen and matched FFPE samples using SNP 6.0 arrays. Genes Chromosomes Cancer47, 957–964 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs S, Thompson ER, Nannya Y et al. Genome-wide, high-resolution detection of copy number, loss of heterozygosity, and genotypes from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor tissue using microarrays. Cancer Res.67, 2544–2551 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heaphy CM, Bisoffi M, Fordyce CA et al. Telomere DNA content and allelic imbalance demonstrate field cancerization in histologically normal tissue adjacent to breast tumors. Int. J. Cancer119, 108–116 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slaughter DP, Southwick HW, Smejkal W. ‘Field cancerization’ in oral stratified squamous epithelium. Cancer6, 963–968 (1953).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braakhuis BJ, Tabor MP, Kummer JA, Leemans CR, Brakenhoff RH. A genetic explanation of Slaughter’s concept of field cancerization: evidence and clinical implications. Cancer Res.63, 1727–1730 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connell P. Genetic and cytogenetic analysis of breast cancer yield different perspectives of a complex disease. Breast Cancer Res. Treat78, 347–357 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Hicks J, Krasnitz A, Lakshmi B et al. Novel patterns of genome arrangement and their association with survival in breast cancer. Genome Res.16, 1465–1479 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardina PJ, Lo KC, Lee W, Cowell JK, Turpaz Y. Ploidy status and copy number aberrations in primary glioblastomas defined by integrated analysis of allelic ratios, signal ratios and loss of heterozygosity using 500K SNP Mapping arrays. BMC Genomics9, 489 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Gorringe KL, Campbell IG. High-resolution copy number arrays in cancer and the problem of normal genome copy number variation. Genes Chromosomes Cancer47, 933–938 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Soto AM, Sonnenschein C. The somatic mutation theory of cancer: growing problems with the paradigm? BioEssays26, 1097–1107 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Oudin C, Bonnetain F, Boidot R et al. Patterns of loss of heterozygosity in breast carcinoma during neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Int. J. Oncol.30, 1145–1151 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Li Z, Moore DH, Meng ZH, Ljung B-M, Gray JW, Dairkee SH. Increased risk of local recurrence is associated with allelic loss in normal lobules of breast cancer patients. Cancer Res.62, 1000–1003 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ellsworth DL, Ellsworth RE, Liebman MN, Hooke JA, Shriver CD. Genomic instability in histologically normal breast tissues: implications for carcinogenesis. Lancet Oncol.5, 753–758 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar