Decision of Adjuvant Systemic Treatment in HR+ HER2- Early Invasive Breast Cancer: Which Biomarkers Could Help?

References

• Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), Peto R, Davies C, et al. Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000 women in 123 randomised trials. Lancet Lond Engl. 2012;379(9814):432–444. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61625-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munoz D, Near AM, van Ravesteyn NT, et al. Effects of screening and systemic adjuvant therapy on ER-specific US breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(11). doi:10.1093/jnci/dju289
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet Lond Engl. 2005;365(9472):1687–1717. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66544-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gnant M, Steger GG. Fighting overtreatment in adjuvant breast cancer therapy. Lancet Lond Engl. 2009;374(9707):2029–2030. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)62097-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mook S, Schmidt MK, Rutgers EJ, et al. Calibration and discriminatory accuracy of prognosis calculation for breast cancer with the online Adjuvant! program: a hospital-based retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(11):1070–1076. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70254-219801202
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olivotto IA, Bajdik CD, Ravdin PM, et al. Population-based validation of the prognostic model ADJUVANT! for early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2005;23(12):2716–2725. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.06.178
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wishart GC, Bajdik CD, Dicks E, et al. PREDICT Plus: development and validation of a prognostic model for early breast cancer that includes HER2. Br J Cancer. 2012;107(5):800–807. doi:10.1038/bjc.2012.33822850554
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406(6797):747–752. doi:10.1038/3502109310963602
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sørlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98(19):10869–10874. doi:10.1073/pnas.19136709811553815
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pusztai L, Mazouni C, Anderson K, Wu Y, Symmans WF. Molecular classification of breast cancer: limitations and potential. Oncologist. 2006;11(8):868–877. doi:10.1634/theoncologist.11-8-86816951390
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curtis BA, Tanifuji G, Burki F, et al. Algal genomes reveal evolutionary mosaicism and the fate of nucleomorphs. Nature. 2012;492(7427):59–65. doi:10.1038/nature1168123201678
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, et al. Strategies for subtypes–dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2011;22(8):1736–1747. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdr304
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guiu S, Michiels S, André F, et al. Molecular subclasses of breast cancer: how do we define them? The IMPAKT 2012 working group statement. Ann Oncol off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2012;23(12):2997–3006. doi:10.1093/annonc/mds586
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris LN, Ismaila N, McShane LM, et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer: american society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2016;34(10):1134–1150. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.65.2289
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teutsch SM, Bradley LA, Palomaki GE, et al. The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) initiative: methods of the EGAPP working group. Genet Med off J Am Coll Med Genet. 2009;11:3–14. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e318184137c
   Google Scholar
• Luporsi E, Bellocq J-P, Barrière J, et al. uPA/PAI-1, Oncotype DX™, MammaPrint®. Valeurs pronostique et prédictive pour une utilité clinique dans la prise en charge du cancer du sein. [uPA/PAI-1, Oncotype DXTM, MammaPrint(®). Prognosis and predictive values for clinical utility in breast cancer management]. Bull Cancer (Paris). 2015;102(9):719–729. French. doi:10.1016/j.bulcan.2015.05.00326235416
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes DF, Bast RC, Desch CE, et al. Tumor marker utility grading system: a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996;88:1456–1466. doi:10.1093/jnci/88.20.14568841020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon RM, Paik S, Hayes DF. Use of archived specimens in evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:1446–1452. doi:10.1093/jnci/djp33519815849
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamy P-J, Romieu G, Jacot W. uPA/PAI-1: un outil d’individualisation de la prise en charge des cancers du sein. Biologie, implications cliniques et méthodes de dosage. [UPA/PAI-1: a tool for breast cancer treatment individualization. Biology, clinical implications and quantification assays]. Bull Cancer (Paris). 2010;97(3):341–348. French. doi:10.1684/bdc.2010.104720159676
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dass K, Ahmad A, Azmi AS, Sarkar SH, Sarkar FH. Evolving role of uPA/uPAR system in human cancers. Cancer Treat Rev. 2008;34(2):122–136. doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2007.10.00518162327
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffy MJ, O’Grady P, Devaney D, O’Siorain L, Fennelly JJ, Lijnen HJ. Urokinase-plasminogen activator, a marker for aggressive breast carcinomas. Preliminary report. Cancer. 1988;62(3):531–533. doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19880801)62:3<531::AID-CNCR2820620315>3.0.CO;2-B3134120
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jänicke F, Schmitt M, Graeff H. Clinical relevance of the urokinase-type and tissue-type plasminogen activators and of their type 1 inhibitor in breast cancer. Semin Thromb Hemost. 1991;17(3):303–312. doi:10.1055/s-2007-10026241796300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benraad TJ, Geurts-Moespot J, Grøndahl-Hansen J, et al. Immunoassays (ELISA) of urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA): report of an EORTC/BIOMED-1 workshop. Eur J Cancer Oxf Engl. 1996;32A(8):1371–1381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jänicke F, Prechtl A, Thomssen C, et al. Randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial in high-risk, lymph node-negative breast cancer patients identified by urokinase-type plasminogen activator and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(12):913–920. doi:10.1093/jnci/93.12.91311416112
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Look MP, van Putten WLJ, Duffy MJ, et al. Pooled analysis of prognostic impact of urokinase-type plasminogen activator and its inhibitor PAI-1 in 8377 breast cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94(2):116–128. doi:10.1093/jnci/94.2.11611792750
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Harbeck N, Schmitt M, Meisner C, et al. Ten-year analysis of the prospective multicentre Chemo-N0 trial validates American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)-recommended biomarkers uPA and PAI-1 for therapy decision making in node-negative breast cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(8):1825–1835. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2013.01.00723490655
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viala M, Alexandre M, Thezenas S, et al. Prognostic impact of the inclusion of uPA/PAI-1 for adjuvant treatment decision-making in ER+/Her2- pN0 early breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017;165:611–621. doi:10.1007/s10549-017-4373-728685212
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbeck N, Kates RE, Look MP, et al. Enhanced benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients classified high-risk according to urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (n = 3424). Cancer Res. 2002;62(16):4617–4622.12183417
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borstnar S, Sadikov A, Mozina B, Cufer T. High levels of uPA and PAI-1 predict a good response to anthracyclines. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;121(3):615–624. doi:10.1007/s10549-009-0691-820039121
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kantelhardt EJ, Vetter M, Schmidt M, et al. Prospective evaluation of prognostic factors uPA/PAI-1 in node-negative breast cancer: phase III NNBC3-Europe trial (AGO, GBG, EORTC-PBG) comparing 6×FEC versus 3×FEC/3×Docetaxel. BMC Cancer. 2011;11:140. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-11-14021496284
   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. 2004;351(27):2817–2826. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa04158815591335
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin M, Sangli C, Liu M-L, et al. Analytical validation of the Oncotype DX genomic diagnostic test for recurrence prognosis and therapeutic response prediction in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin Chem. 2007;53(6):1084–1091. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2006.07649717463177
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drury S, Salter J, Baehner FL, Shak S, Dowsett M. Feasibility of using tissue microarray cores of paraffin-embedded breast cancer tissue for measurement of gene expression: a proof-of-concept study. J Clin Pathol. 2010;63(6):513–517. doi:10.1136/jcp.2010.07575420498025
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2006;24(23):3726–3734. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.04.7985
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldstein LJ, Gray R, Badve S, et al. Prognostic utility of the 21-gene assay in hormone receptor-positive operable breast cancer compared with classical clinicopathologic features. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2008;26(25):4063–4071. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.14.4501
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowsett M, Cuzick J, Wale C, et al. Prediction of risk of distant recurrence using the 21-gene recurrence score in node-negative and node-positive postmenopausal patients with breast cancer treated with anastrozole or tamoxifen: a TransATAC study. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2010;28(11):1829–1834. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.24.4798
   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. Nature. 2002;415(6871):530–536. doi:10.1038/415530a11823860
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sapino A, Roepman P, Linn SC, et al. MammaPrint molecular diagnostics on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue. J Mol Diagn JMD. 2014;16(2):190–197. doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2013.10.00824378251
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buyse M, Loi S, Van’t Veer L, et al. Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(17):1183–1192. doi:10.1093/jnci/djj32916954471
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habel LA, Shak S, Jacobs MK, et al. A population-based study of tumor gene expression and risk of breast cancer death among lymph node-negative patients. Breast Cancer Res BCR. 2006;8(3):R25. doi:10.1186/bcr141216737553
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Espinosa E, Sánchez-Navarro I, Gámez-Pozo A, et al. Comparison of prognostic gene profiles using qRT-PCR in paraffin samples: a retrospective study in patients with early breast cancer. PLoS One. 2009;4(6):e5911. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.000591119547727
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toi M, Iwata H, Yamanaka T, et al. Clinical significance of the 21-gene signature (Oncotype DX) in hormone receptor-positive early stage primary breast cancer in the Japanese population. Cancer. 2010;116(13):3112–3118. doi:10.1002/cncr.2520620564629
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun B, Zhang F, Wu S-K, et al. Gene expression profiling for breast cancer prognosis in Chinese populations. Breast J. 2011;17(2):172–179. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.01049.x21410584
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prat A, Parker JS, Fan C, et al. Concordance among gene expression-based predictors for ER-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant tamoxifen. Ann Oncol off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2012;23(11):2866–2873. doi:10.1093/annonc/mds080
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naoi Y, Kishi K, Tsunashima R, et al. Comparison of efficacy of 95-gene and 21-gene classifier (Oncotype DX) for prediction of recurrence in ER-positive and node-negative breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;140(2):299–306. doi:10.1007/s10549-013-2640-923884597
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mamounas EP, Tang G, Fisher B, et al. Association between the 21-gene recurrence score assay and risk of locoregional recurrence in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: results from NSABP B-14 and NSABP B-20. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2010;28(10):1677–1683. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.23.7610
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolmark N, Mamounas EP, Baehner FL, et al. Prognostic Impact of the combination of recurrence score and quantitative estrogen receptor expression (ESR1) on predicting late distant recurrence risk in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer after 5 years of tamoxifen: results from NRG oncology/national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project B-28 and B-14. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2016;34(20):2350–2358. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.62.6630
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yorozuya K, Takeuchi T, Yoshida M, et al. Evaluation of oncotype DX recurrence score as a prognostic factor in Japanese women with estrogen receptor-positive, node-negative primary stage I or IIA breast cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2010;136(6):939–944. doi:10.1007/s00432-009-0736-819946706
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(1):55–65. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70314-620005174
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mamounas EP, Liu Q, Paik S, et al. 21-gene recurrence score and locoregional recurrence in node-positive/ER-positive breast cancer treated with chemo-endocrine therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017;109(4). doi:10.1093/jnci/djw259
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barcenas CH, Raghavendra A, Sinha AK, et al. Outcomes in patients with early-stage breast cancer who underwent a 21-gene expression assay. Cancer. 2017;123:2422–2431. doi:10.1002/cncr.3061828199747
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Du F, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Park M, Liu DD, Hortobagyi GN, Ueno NT. Effect of 21-gene RT-PCR assay on adjuvant therapy and outcomes in patients with stage I breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer. 2015;15(6):458–466. doi:10.1016/j.clbc.2015.06.00626233757
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wen HY, Krystel-Whittemore M, Patil S, et al. Breast carcinoma with an oncotype Dx recurrence score <18: rate of distant metastases in a large series with clinical follow-up. Cancer. 2017;123(1):131–137. doi:10.1002/cncr.3027127526056
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sestak I, Dowsett M, Zabaglo L, et al. Factors predicting late recurrence for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(19):1504–1511. doi:10.1093/jnci/djt24424029245
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sgroi DC, Sestak I, Cuzick J, et al. Prediction of late distant recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer: a prospective comparison of the breast-cancer index (BCI) assay, 21-gene recurrence score, and IHC4 in the TransATAC study population. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(11):1067–1076. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70387-524035531
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, et al. Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(21):2005–2014. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa151076426412349
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gluz O, Nitz UA, Christgen M, et al. West German Study Group Phase III planb trial: first prospective outcome data for the 21-gene recurrence score assay and concordance of prognostic markers by central and local pathology assessment. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2016;34(20):2341–2349. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.63.5383
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparano JA, Paik S. Development of the 21-gene assay and its application in clinical practice and clinical trials. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2008;26(5):721–728. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.15.1068
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy guided by a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(2):111–121. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa180471029860917
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Ravdin PM, et al. Clinical and genomic risk to guide the use of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(25):2395–2405. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa190481931157962
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glas AM, Floore A, Delahaye LJMJ, et al. Converting a breast cancer microarray signature into a high-throughput diagnostic test. BMC Genomics. 2006;7:278. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-7-27817074082
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Van’t Veer LJ, et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(25):1999–2009. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa02196712490681
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, Linn SC, Keijzer R, et al. Validation of 70-gene prognosis signature in node-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;117(3):483–495. doi:10.1007/s10549-008-0191-218819002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mook S, Schmidt MK, Weigelt B, et al. The 70-gene prognosis signature predicts early metastasis in breast cancer patients between 55 and 70 years of age. Ann Oncol off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2010;21(4):717–722. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdp388
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kok M, Koornstra RH, Mook S, et al. Additional value of the 70-gene signature and levels of ER and PR for the prediction of outcome in tamoxifen-treated ER-positive breast cancer. Breast Edinb Scotl. 2012;21(6):769–778. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2012.04.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drukker CA, van Tinteren H, Schmidt MK, et al. Long-term impact of the 70-gene signature on breast cancer outcome. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;143(3):587–592. doi:10.1007/s10549-013-2831-424445566
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Straver ME, Glas AM, Hannemann J, et al. The 70-gene signature as a response predictor for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;119(3):551–558. doi:10.1007/s10549-009-0333-119214742
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esserman LJ, Berry DA, Cheang MCU, 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(3):1049–1062. doi:10.1007/s10549-011-1895-222198468
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitworth P, Beitsch P, Mislowsky A, et al. Chemosensitivity and endocrine sensitivity in clinical luminal breast cancer patients in the prospective Neoadjuvant Breast Registry Symphony Trial (NBRST) predicted by molecular subtyping. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(3):669–675. doi:10.1245/s10434-016-5600-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardoso F, Van’t Veer LJ, Bogaerts J, et al. 70-gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(8):717–729. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa160225327557300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mook S, Schmidt MK, Viale G, et al. The 70-gene prognosis-signature predicts disease outcome in breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes in an independent validation study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;116(2):295–302. doi:10.1007/s10549-008-0130-218661261
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krop I, Ismaila N, Andre F, et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer: american society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline focused update. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2017;35(24):2838–2847. doi:10.1200/JCO.2017.74.0472
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filipits M, Rudas M, Jakesz R, et al. A new molecular predictor of distant recurrence in ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer adds independent information to conventional clinical risk factors. Clin Cancer Res off J Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2011;17(18):6012–6020. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0926
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denkert C, Kronenwett R, Schlake W, et al. Decentral gene expression analysis for ER+/Her2- breast cancer: results of a proficiency testing program for the EndoPredict assay. Virchows Arch Int J Pathol. 2012;460(3):251–259. doi:10.1007/s00428-012-1204-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronenwett R, Bohmann K, Prinzler J, et al. Decentral gene expression analysis: analytical validation of the Endopredict genomic multianalyte breast cancer prognosis test. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:456. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-12-45623039280
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin M, Brase JC, Calvo L, et al. Clinical validation of the EndoPredict test in node-positive, chemotherapy-treated ER+/HER2- breast cancer patients: results from the GEICAM 9906 trial. Breast Cancer Res BCR. 2014;16(2):R38. doi:10.1186/bcr364224725534
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buus R, Sestak I, Kronenwett R, et al. Comparison of endopredict and epclin with oncotype DX recurrence score for prediction of risk of distant recurrence after endocrine therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108(11). doi:10.1093/jnci/djw149
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bertucci F, Finetti P, Viens P, Birnbaum D. EndoPredict predicts for the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. Cancer Lett. 2014;355(1):70–75. doi:10.1016/j.canlet.2014.09.01425218596
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubsky P, Brase JC, Jakesz R, et al. The EndoPredict score provides prognostic information on late distant metastases in ER+/HER2- breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer. 2013;109(12):2959–2964. doi:10.1038/bjc.2013.67124157828
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao X, Rødland EA, Sørlie T, et al. Systematic assessment of prognostic gene signatures for breast cancer shows distinct influence of time and ER status. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:211. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-14-21124645668
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MCU, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2009;27(8):1160–1167. doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.18.1370
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallden B, Storhoff J, Nielsen T, et al. Development and verification of the PAM50-based Prosigna breast cancer gene signature assay. BMC Med Genomics. 2015;8. doi:10.1186/s12920-015-0129-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chia SK, Bramwell VH, Tu D, et al. A 50-gene intrinsic subtype classifier for prognosis and prediction of benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen. Clin Cancer Res off J Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2012;18(16):4465–4472. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-0286
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowsett M, Sestak I, Lopez-Knowles E, et al. Comparison of PAM50 risk of recurrence score with oncotype DX and IHC4 for predicting risk of distant recurrence after endocrine therapy. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2013;31(22):2783–2790. doi:10.1200/JCO.2012.46.1558
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gnant M, Filipits M, Greil R, et al. Predicting distant recurrence in receptor-positive breast cancer patients with limited clinicopathological risk: using the PAM50 risk of recurrence score in 1478 postmenopausal patients of the ABCSG-8 trial treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone. Ann Oncol off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2014;25(2):339–345. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdt494
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin M, Brase JC, Ruiz A, et al. Prognostic ability of EndoPredict compared to research-based versions of the PAM50 risk of recurrence (ROR) scores in node-positive, estrogen receptor-positive, and HER2-negative breast cancer. A GEICAM/9906 sub-study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;156(1):81–89. doi:10.1007/s10549-016-3725-z26909792
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nielsen TO, Parker JS, Leung S, et al. A comparison of PAM50 intrinsic subtyping with immunohistochemistry and clinical prognostic factors in tamoxifen-treated estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res off J Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2010;16(21):5222–5232. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1282
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cockburn JG, Hallett RM, Gillgrass AE, et al. The effects of lymph node status on predicting outcome in ER+/HER2- tamoxifen treated breast cancer patients using gene signatures. BMC Cancer. 2016;16:555. doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2501-027469239
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filipits M, Nielsen TO, Rudas M, et al. The PAM50 risk-of-recurrence score predicts risk for late distant recurrence after endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20(5):1298–1305. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-184524520097
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sestak I, Cuzick J, Dowsett M, et al. Prediction of late distant recurrence after 5 years of endocrine treatment: a combined analysis of patients from the Austrian breast and colorectal cancer study group 8 and arimidex, tamoxifen alone or in combination randomized trials using the PAM50 risk of recurrence score. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2015;33(8):916–922. doi:10.1200/JCO.2014.55.6894
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prat A, Galván P, Jimenez B, et al. Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using core needle biopsy samples with the prosigna assay. Clin Cancer Res off J Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2016;22(3):560–566. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-0630
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunbier AK, Anderson H, Ghazoui Z, et al. Association between breast cancer subtypes and response to neoadjuvant anastrozole. Steroids. 2011;76(8):736–740. doi:10.1016/j.steroids.2011.02.02521447351
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Descotes F, Riche B, Saez S, et al. Plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 is the most significant of the usual tissue prognostic factors in node-negative breast ductal adenocarcinoma independent of urokinase-type plasminogen activator. Clin Breast Cancer. 2008;8(2):168–177. doi:10.3816/CBC.2008.n.01818621614
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Cremoux P, Grandin L, Diéras V, et al. Urokinase-type plasminogen activator and plasminogen-activator-inhibitor type 1 predict metastases in good prognosis breast cancer patients. Anticancer Res. 2009;29(5):1475–1482.19443353
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang JC, Makris A, Gutierrez MC, et al. Gene expression patterns in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded core biopsies predict docetaxel chemosensitivity in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;108(2):233–240. doi:10.1007/s10549-007-9590-z17468949
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saghatchian M, Mook S, Pruneri G, et al. Additional prognostic value of the 70-gene signature (MammaPrint(®)) among breast cancer patients with 4-9 positive lymph nodes. Breast Edinb Scotl. 2013;22(5):682–690. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2012.12.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomassen M, Tan Q, Eiriksdottir F, Bak M, Cold S, Kruse TA. Prediction of metastasis from low-malignant breast cancer by gene expression profiling. Int J Cancer. 2007;120(5):1070–1075. doi:10.1002/ijc.2244917131339
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan C, Oh DS, Wessels L, et al. Concordance among gene-expression-based predictors for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(6):560–569. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa05293316899776
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvarado MD, Prasad C, Rothney M, et al. A prospective comparison of the 21-gene recurrence score and the PAM50-based prosigna in estrogen receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer. Adv Ther. 2015;32(12):1237–1247. doi:10.1007/s12325-015-0269-226610383
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varga Z, Sinn P, Fritzsche F, et al. Comparison of endopredict and oncotype DX test results in hormone receptor positive invasive breast cancer. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e58483. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.005848323505515
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartlett JMS, Bayani J, Marshall A, et al. Comparing breast cancer multiparameter tests in the OPTIMA prelim trial: no test is more equal than the others. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108(9). doi:10.1093/jnci/djw050
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ettl J, Klein E, Hapfelmeier A, et al. Decision impact and feasibility of different ASCO-recommended biomarkers in early breast cancer: prospective comparison of molecular marker EndoPredict and protein marker uPA/PAI-1. PLoS One. 2017;12(9):e0183917. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.018391728877230
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poudel P, Nyamundanda G, Patil Y, Cheang MCU, Sadanandam A. Heterocellular gene signatures reveal luminal-A breast cancer heterogeneity and differential therapeutic responses. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2019;5:21. doi:10.1038/s41523-019-0116-831396557
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soran A, Bhargava R, Johnson R, et al. The impact of Oncotype DX® recurrence score of paraffin-embedded core biopsy tissues in predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with breast cancer. Breast Dis. 2016;36(2–3):65–71. doi:10.3233/BD-15019927662272
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dubsky P, Filipits M, Jakesz R, et al. EndoPredict improves the prognostic classification derived from common clinical guidelines in ER-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. Ann Oncol off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2013;24(3):640–647. doi:10.1093/annonc/mds334
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzal F, Filipits M, Rudas M, et al. The genomic expression test EndoPredict is a prognostic tool for identifying risk of local recurrence in postmenopausal endocrine receptor-positive, her2neu-negative breast cancer patients randomised within the prospective ABCSG 8 trial. Br J Cancer. 2015;112(8):1405–1410. doi:10.1038/bjc.2015.9825867274
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar