High‐throughput protein expression analysis using tissue microarray technology of a large well‐characterised series identifies biologically distinct classes of breast cancer confirming recent cDNA expression analyses

Abstract

Recent studies on gene molecular profiling using cDNA microarray in a relatively small series of breast cancer have identified biologically distinct groups with apparent clinical and prognostic relevance. The validation of such new taxonomies should be confirmed on larger series of cases prior to acceptance in clinical practice. The development of tissue microarray (TMA) technology provides methodology for high-throughput concomitant analyses of multiple proteins on large numbers of archival tumour samples. In our study, we have used immunohistochemistry techniques applied to TMA preparations of 1,076 cases of invasive breast cancer to study the combined protein expression profiles of a large panel of well-characterized commercially available biomarkers related to epithelial cell lineage, differentiation, hormone and growth factor receptors and gene products known to be altered in some forms of breast cancer. Using hierarchical clustering methodology, 5 groups with distinct patterns of protein expression were identified. A sixth group of only 4 cases was also identified but deemed too small for further detailed assessment. Further analysis of these clusters was performed using multiple layer perceptron (MLP)-artificial neural network (ANN) with a back propagation algorithm to identify key biomarkers driving the membership of each group. We have identified 2 large groups by their expression of luminal epithelial cell phenotypic characteristics, hormone receptors positivity, absence of basal epithelial phenotype characteristics and lack of c-erbB-2 protein overexpression. Two additional groups were characterized by high c-erbB-2 positivity and negative or weak hormone receptors expression but showed differences in MUC1 and E-cadherin expression. The final group was characterized by strong basal epithelial characteristics, p53 positivity, absent hormone receptors and weak to low luminal epithelial cytokeratin expression. In addition, we have identified significant differences between clusters identified in this series with respect to established prognostic factors including tumour grade, size and histologic tumour type as well as differences in patient outcomes. The different protein expression profiles identified in our study confirm the biologic heterogeneity of breast cancer and demonstrate the clinical relevance of classification in this manner. These observations could form the basis of revision of existing traditional classification systems for breast cancer. ' 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Key words: breast cancer; classification; protein expression; tissue microarray Routine clinical management of breast cancer relies on traditional histopathologic classification including tumour grade, histologic tumour type, carcinoma size and lymph node stage. Despite the overall association of these variables with prognosis and outcome, 1 these systems remain relatively weakly predictive of behaviour in some circumstances. Tumours of apparently homogenous morphologic character vary in response to therapy and have divergent outc...

Markers of progression in early-stage invasive breast cancer: a predictive immunohistochemical panel algorithm for distant recurrence risk stratification

“…This study was based on a well-characterised cohort of early stage (I-III) primary operable invasive BC (n=1902) from patients enrolled into the Nottingham Tenovus Primary Breast Carcinoma Series between 1987 and 1998, and managed in accordance to a uniform protocol and has been comprehensively studied with a broad range of markers [9,10]. During the follow-up time within this series, distant recurrence had developed in 578/1902 cases (30 %).…”

“…This study included 31 biomarkers of clinical and biological relevance to BC tumourigenesis and progression [9,11] Primary Breast Carcinoma series previously studied using gene expression profiling [14].…”

Distinguishing luminal breast cancer subtypes by Ki67, progesterone receptor or TP53 status provides prognostic information

“…Despite the fact that varying criteria have been used to define each category, many studies have shown immunohistochemicalbased classifiers to be prognostically significant. [5][6][7] Luminal A cancers have been defined by a number of groups as hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative and luminal B cancers as both hormone receptor positive and HER2 positive. [8][9][10][11][12] However, this definition is flawed as B70% of luminal B tumors, defined by gene expression profiling, are in fact HER2 negative.…”

Immunohistochemical heterogeneity of breast carcinomas negative for estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors and Her2/neu (basal-like breast carcinomas)

“…This variety of breast carcinoma was characterized by genetic studies and by immunohistochemical expression of basal cytokeratins, mainly types 5, 14 and 17, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and p53, [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] but results from diverse studies are not always concordant. Recently, 'pure' and 'myoepithelial' variants of basal breast carcinoma were described, based on S-100, actin or p63 expression.…”