Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study

Sotiriou, Christos; Neo, Soek-Ying; McShane, Lisa M.; Korn, Edward L.; Long, Philip M.; Jazaeri, Amir A.; Martiat, Philippe; Fox, Stephen B.; Harris, Adrian L.; Liu, Edison Tak-Bun

doi:10.1073/pnas.1732912100

Cited by 1,792 publications

(1,505 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,371

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We have shown that FBC can be grouped in the different breast cancer subtypes described previously in SBC using IHC (Perou et al, 2000;Sorlie et al, 2001Sorlie et al, , 2003Sotiriou et al, 2003). In addition, we have performed a complete genomic characterization of the subtypes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…A mixture of the three FBC groups was found in this subgroup (Figure 1). We termed these two subgroups as luminal A and B, respectively, according to the parameters (such as grade and differential expression of TOPOII) that have been used previously to discriminate between them (Sorlie et al, 2001;Sotiriou et al, 2003). Finally, a group of nine tumors were described (Figure 1, green branch), which had luminal features (positive for hormonal receptors and CK8), high grade and overexpression of CHEK2 and survivin.…”

Section: Unsupervised Cluster Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies in sporadic breast cancer (SBC) based on expression profiling reflect this heterogeneity (Perou et al, 2000;Sorlie et al, 2001Sorlie et al, , 2003Sotiriou et al, 2003). Five distinct SBC subtypes defined by different expression patterns and clinical outcomes have been reported: luminal A and B, ERBB2, basal-like and normal breast-like (Sorlie et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Distinct genomic aberration patterns are found in familial breast cancer associated with different immunohistochemical subtypes

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Five breast cancer subtypes have been described in sporadic breast cancer (SBC) using expression arrays: basal-like, ERBB2, normal breast-like, luminal A and B. These molecular subtypes show different genomic aberration patterns (GAPs). Recently, our group described these breast cancer subtypes in 50 non-BRCA1/2 familial tumors using immunohistochemistry assays. We extended this study to the other classes of familial breast cancer (FBC), including 62 tumors (18 BRCA1, 16 BRCA2 and 28 non-BRCA1/2), with the same panel of 25 immunohistochemical (IHC) markers and histological grade obtaining a similar classification. We combined these data with results generated by a 1 Mb BAC array-based CGH study to evaluate the genomic aberrations of each group. We found that BRCA1-related tumors are preferentially basal-like, whereas non-BRCA1/2 familial tumors are mainly luminal A subtype. We described distinct GAPs related to each IHC subtype. Basal tumors had a greater number of gains/losses, while luminal B tumors had more high-level DNA amplifications. Our data are similar to those obtained in SBC studies, highlighting the existence of distinct genetic pathways of tumor evolution, common to both SBC and FBC.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Unsupervised Cluster Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Distinct genomic aberration patterns are found in familial breast cancer associated with different immunohistochemical subtypes

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent years, gene expression profiling data have further refined the subtypes of breast carcinomas. [1][2][3][4]12 Among the five subgroups (luminal A, luminal B, normal breast-like, ERB2 þ and basal-like) of breast carcinoma identified by gene expression profiling, most attention has been given to basal-like carcinoma. The possible interest is due to the fact that these tumors were not well recognized before the expression profiling, but in retrospect they seem to have a relatively specific immunohistologic profile.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Basal phenotype of ductal carcinoma in situ: recognition and immunohistologic profile

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The basal phenotype of breast carcinoma was demonstrated from a study of gene expression profiles, which demonstrated five carcinoma phenotypes with differing immunohistologic profiles and outcomes. The basal phenotype, so-named because of an immunohistologic profile that is similar to myoepithelial cells of the breast, has poor outcomes. While the invasive basal phenotype has been described, there is a paucity of literature regarding the existence or recognition of a precursor lesion. We searched our CoPath database for breast carcinomas in the age group of 37 years or less, and this yielded 98 cases from the years 2001 to April 2006. Pathology reports were screened for those cases that were negative for estrogen and progesterone receptors and HER-2/neu (triple negative). A total of 16 cases (16/98, 16%) fulfilled these criteria. Histology was reviewed and immunostains were performed for Cytokeratins 14, 17, and 5/6, vimentin, EGFR, c-kit, smooth muscle actin and p63. All 16 cases had a high-grade invasive ductal carcinoma, Nottingham score 9/9, with geographic necrosis, good circumscription and lymphoid infiltrates. Of the 16 cases, 13 exhibited at least one area of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The DCIS types were solid, flat or micropapillary, high nuclear grade, with comedonecrosis and invariably associated with intense lymphoid inflammatory cell infiltration. Of 16 invasive cases, 14 (88%) were positive for CK14, CK17, CK5/6 and EGFR; 94% were vimentin positive, while half or less of cases were positive for smooth muscle actin, c-kit or p63. All of the DCIS components demonstrated the same immunohistologic profile as the invasive component. A DCIS component of solid, flat or micropapillary type exists in the basal phenotype of breast carcinoma, and it demonstrates the same immunophenotype as the invasive carcinoma, typically positive for CK5/6, CK14, CK17, vimentin and EGFR, but negative for ER/PR and HER-2/neu.

show abstract

“…Some studies have shown that gene expression profiles are linked to ER status [3,4] and to clinical outcome [2,[5][6][7]. In metastatic breast cancer, a 44-gene expression signature was found to be associated with an objective response to tamoxifen [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the two-gene ratio in breast cancer—independent roles for HOXB13 and IL17BR in prediction of clinical outcome

Jerevall

Brommesson

Strand

et al. 2007

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study

Cited by 1,792 publications

References 26 publications

Distinct genomic aberration patterns are found in familial breast cancer associated with different immunohistochemical subtypes

Distinct genomic aberration patterns are found in familial breast cancer associated with different immunohistochemical subtypes

Basal phenotype of ductal carcinoma in situ: recognition and immunohistologic profile

Exploring the two-gene ratio in breast cancer—independent roles for HOXB13 and IL17BR in prediction of clinical outcome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About