Abstract
Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) has been reported to be less responsive to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) than invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). We sought to determine whether ILC histology indeed predicts poor response to NAC by analyzing tumor characteristics such as protein expression, gene expression, and imaging features, and by comparing NAC response rates to those seen in IDC after adjustment for these factors. We combined datasets from two large prospective NAC trials, including in total 676 patients, of which 75 were of lobular histology. Eligible patients had tumors ≥3 cm in diameter or pathologic documentation of positive nodes, and underwent serial biopsies, expression microarray analysis, and MRI imaging. We compared pathologic complete response (pCR) rates and breast conservation surgery (BCS) rates between ILC and IDC, adjusted for clinicopathologic factors. On univariate analysis, ILCs were significantly less likely to have a pCR after NAC than IDCs (11 vs. 25 %, p = 0.01). However, the known differences in tumor characteristics between the two histologic types, including hormone receptor (HR) status, HER2 status, histological grade, and p53 expression, accounted for this difference with the lowest pCR rates among HR+/HER2− tumors in both ILC and IDC (7 and 5 %, respectively). ILC which were HR− and/or HER2+ had a pCR rate of 25 %. Expression subtyping, particularly the NKI 70-gene signature, was correlated with pCR, although the small numbers of ILC in each group precluded significant associations. BCS rate did not differ between IDC and ILC after adjusting for molecular characteristics. We conclude that ILC represents a heterogeneous group of tumors which are less responsive to NAC than IDC. However, this difference is explained by differences in molecular characteristics, particularly HR and HER2, and independent of lobular histology.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gralow JR, Burstein HJ, Wood W, Hortobagyi GN, Gianni L, von Minckwitz G, Buzdar AU, Smith IE, Symmans WF, Singh B, Winer EP (2008) Preoperative therapy in invasive breast cancer: pathologic assessment and systemic therapy issues in operable disease. J Clin Oncol 26(5):814–819
Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP (2005) Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant systemic treatment in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 97(3):188–194
Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, Mamounas E, Brown A, Fisher ER, Wickerham DL, Begovic M, DeCillis A, Robidoux A, Margolese RG, Cruz AB Jr, Hoehn JL, Lees AW, Dimitrov NV, Bear HD (1998) Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 16(8):2672–2685
Mieog JS, van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ (2007) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer. Br J Surg 94(10):1189–1200
van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ, Julien JP, Tubiana-Hulin M, Vandervelden C, Duchateau L (2001) Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breast cancer: results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 10902. J Clin Oncol 19(22):4224–4237
Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, Geyer CE, Kahlenberg MS, Robidoux A, Margolese RG, Hoehn JL, Vogel VG, Dakhil SR, Tamkus D, King KM, Pajon ER, Wright MJ, Robert J, Paik S, Mamounas EP, Wolmark N (2008) Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 26(5):778–785
Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Sahin A, Krishnamurthy S, Yang Y, Kau SW, Hortobagyi GN, Cristofanilli M (2006) Biologic markers in axillary node-negative breast cancer: differential expression in invasive ductal carcinoma versus invasive lobular carcinoma. Clin Breast Cancer 7(5):396–400
Sullivan PS, Apple SK (2009) Should histologic type be taken into account when considering neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast carcinoma? Breast J 15(2):146–154
Cristofanilli M, Gonzalez-Angulo A, Sneige N, Kau SW, Broglio K, Theriault RL, Valero V, Buzdar AU, Kuerer H, Buccholz TA, Hortobagyi GN (2005) Invasive lobular carcinoma classic type: response to primary chemotherapy and survival outcomes. J Clin Oncol 23(1):41–48
Katz A, Saad ED, Porter P, Pusztai L (2007) Primary systemic chemotherapy of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Lancet Oncol 8(1):55–62
Turashvili G, Bouchal J, Baumforth K, Wei W, Dziechciarkova M, Ehrmann J, Klein J, Fridman E, Skarda J, Srovnal J, Hajduch M, Murray P, Kolar Z (2007) Novel markers for differentiation of lobular and ductal invasive breast carcinomas by laser microdissection and microarray analysis. BMC Cancer 7:55
Arpino G, Bardou VJ, Clark GM, Elledge RM (2004) Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res 6(3):R149–R156
Cocquyt VF, Blondeel PN, Depypere HT, Praet MM, Schelfhout VR, Silva OE, Hurley J, Serreyn RF, Daems KK, Van Belle SJ (2003) Different responses to preoperative chemotherapy for invasive lobular and invasive ductal breast carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 29(4):361–367
Tubiana-Hulin M, Stevens D, Lasry S, Guinebretiere JM, Bouita L, Cohen-Solal C, Cherel P, Rouesse J (2006) Response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in lobular and ductal breast carcinomas: a retrospective study on 860 patients from one institution. Ann Oncol 17(8):1228–1233
Boughey JC, Wagner J, Garrett BJ, Harker L, Middleton LP, Babiera GV, Meric-Bernstam F, Lucci A, Hunt KK, Bedrosian I (2009) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive lobular carcinoma may not improve rates of breast conservation. Ann Surg Oncol 16(6):1606–1611
Straver ME, Rutgers EJ, Rodenhuis S, Linn SC, Loo CE, Wesseling J, Russell NS, Oldenburg HS, Antonini N, Vrancken Peeters MT (2010) The relevance of breast cancer subtypes in the outcome of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 17(9):2411–2418
Costa SD, Loibl S, Kaufmann M, Zahm DM, Hilfrich J, Huober J, Eidtmann H, du BA, Blohmer JU, Ataseven B, Weiss E, Tesch H, Gerber B, Baumann KH, Thomssen C, Breitbach GP, Ibishi S, Jackisch C, Mehta K, von MG (2010) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy shows similar response in patients with inflammatory or locally advanced breast cancer when compared with operable breast cancer: a secondary analysis of the GeparTrio trial data. J Clin Oncol 28(1):83–91
Mathieu MC, Rouzier R, Llombart-Cussac A, Sideris L, Koscielny S, Travagli JP, Contesso G, Delaloge S, Spielmann M (2004) The poor responsiveness of infiltrating lobular breast carcinomas to neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be explained by their biological profile. Eur J Cancer 40(3):342–351
Wenzel C, Bartsch R, Hussian D, Pluschnig U, Altorjai G, Zielinski CC, Lang A, Haid A, Jakesz R, Gnant M, Steger GG (2007) Invasive ductal carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma of breast differ in response following neoadjuvant therapy with epidoxorubicin and docetaxel + G-CSF. Breast Cancer Res Treat 104(1):109–114
Esserman LJ, Berry DA, Cheang MC, Yau C, Perou CM, Carey L, DeMichele A (2012) 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 132(3):1049–1062
Esserman LJ, Berry DA, DeMichele A, Carey L, Davis SE, Buxton MB, Hudis C, Gray J, Perou CM (2012) Pathologic complete response predicts recurrence-free survival more effectively by cancer subset: results from the I-SPY 1 trial (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657). J Clin Oncol. [Epub ahead of print]
Hannemann J, Oosterkamp HM, Bosch CA, Velds A, Wessels LF, Loo C, Rutgers EJ, Rodenhuis S, van de Vijver MJ (2005) Changes in gene expression associated with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23(15):3331–3342
Rodenhuis S, Mandjes IA, Wesseling J, van de Vijver MJ, Peeters MJ, Sonke GS, Linn SC (2010) A simple system for grading the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 21(3):481–487
Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, Leung S, Voduc D, Vickery T, Davies S, Fauron C, He X, Hu Z, Quackenbush JF, Stijleman IJ, Palazzo J, Marron JS, Nobel AB, Mardis E, Nielsen TO, Ellis MJ, Perou CM, Bernard PS (2009) Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol 27(8):1160–1167
van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Hart AA, Mao M, Peterse HL, van der Kooy K, Marton MJ, Witteveen AT, Schreiber GJ, Kerkhoven RM, Roberts C, Linsley PS, Bernards R, Friend SH (2002) Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 415(6871):530–536
Chang HY, Nuyten DS, Sneddon JB, Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Sorlie T, Dai H, He YD, Van’t Veer LJ, Bartelink H, van de RM, Brown PO, van d V (2005) Robustness, scalability, and integration of a wound-response gene expression signature in predicting breast cancer survival. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102(10):3738–3743
Esserman LJ, Kumar AS, Herrera AF, Leung J, Au A, Chen YY, Moore DH, Chen DF, Hellawell J, Wolverton D, Hwang ES, Hylton NM (2006) Magnetic resonance imaging captures the biology of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 24(28):4603–4610
Purushotham A, Pinder S, Cariati M, Harries M, Goldhirsch A (2010) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy: not the best option in estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, invasive classical lobular carcinoma of the breast? J Clin Oncol 28(22):3552–3554
Fadare O, Wang SA, Hileeto D (2008) The expression of cytokeratin 5/6 in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: evidence of a basal-like subset? Hum Pathol 39(3):331–336
Straver ME, Glas AM, Hannemann J, Wesseling J, van de Vijver MJ, Rutgers EJ, Vrancken Peeters MJ, van Tinteren H, Van’t Veer LJ, Rodenhuis S (2010) The 70-gene signature as a response predictor for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 119(3):551–558
Padhani AR, Hayes C, Assersohn L, Powles T, Makris A, Suckling J, Leach MO, Husband JE (2006) Prediction of clinicopathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy at contrast-enhanced MR imaging: initial clinical results. Radiology 239(2):361–374
Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, Rajan R, Kuerer H, Valero V, Assad L, Poniecka A, Hennessy B, Green M, Buzdar AU, Singletary SE, Hortobagyi GN, Pusztai L (2007) Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 25(28):4414–4422
Acknowledgments
The NKI study was carried out within the framework of CTMM, the Center for Translational Molecular Medicine (www.ctmm.nl), Project Breast CARE Grant 030-104. The authors would like to thank Lennart Mulder for technical assistance in generating the gene expression profiles and Andrew Vincent for statistical review.
Conflict of interest
Laura J. van‘t Veer declares an employment/leadership role and has stock or other ownership interests at Agendia Inc. (Chief Research Officer). The other authors declare no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Corresponding authors
Additional information
Esther H. Lips and Rita A. Mukhtar contributed equally to this study.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lips, E.H., Mukhtar, R.A., Yau, C. et al. Lobular histology and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 136, 35–43 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2233-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2233-z