Feasibility of analyzing DNA copy number variation in breast cancer tumor specimens from 1950 to 2010: how old is too old?

  • Nancy Krieger
  • Sheida Nabavi
  • Pamela D. Waterman
  • Ninah S. Achacoso
  • Luana Acton
  • Stuart J. Schnitt
  • Laurel A. Habel
Brief report
  • 34 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to assess the feasibility of quantifying long-term trends in breast tumor DNA copy number variation (CNV) profiles.

Methods

We evaluated CNV profiles in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor specimens from 30 randomly selected Kaiser Permanente Northern California health plan women members diagnosed with breast cancer from 1950 to 2010. Assays were conducted for five cases per decade who had available tumor blocks and pathology reports.

Results

As compared to the tumors from the 1970s to 2000s, the older tumors dating back to the 1950s and 1960s were much more likely to (1) fail quality control, and (2) have fewer CNV events (average 23 and 31 vs. 58 to 69), fewer CNV genes (average 5.1 and 3.7k vs. 8.1 to 10.3k), shorter CNV length (average 2,440 and 3,300k vs. 5,740 to 9,280k), fewer high frequency Del genes (37 and 25% vs. 54 to 76%), and fewer high frequency high_Amp genes (20% vs. 56 to 73%). On average, assay interpretation took an extra 60 min/specimen for cases from the 1960s versus 20 min/specimen for the most recent tumors.

Conclusions

Assays conducted in the mid-2010s for CNVs may be feasible for FFPE tumor specimens dating back to the 1980s, but less feasible for older specimens.

Keywords

Archival specimen Breast cancer Biomarker DNA copy number variation Epidemiology Historical trend 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We also would like to thank Marvella A. Villasenor, BA (Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, 2000 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94612; email: Marvella.A.Villasenor@kp.org) for her administrative assistance with study logistics.

Author contribution

NK led design of the study, arranged for the assays, oversaw the analyses, and led manuscript preparation. SN interpreted the assay results and contributed to text on the methods and results. LH oversaw the initial selection of cases and retrieval of the tumor specimens, and assisted in all logistics pertaining to handling of the specimens at KPNC, as carried out by LA and NA. PDW assisted with all logistics pertaining to the handling of the specimens and with arranging the assays, once the specimens were at Harvard. SJS oversaw the histological characterization of the tumor specimens and the extraction of tumor DNA for the study assay. All authors contributed to manuscript preparation and reviewed and approved the final manuscript prior to submission.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Human Subjects and Informed Consent

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (#CR-20929-02) and Kaiser Permanente Northern California (#CN-13Labe-O3-H). All procedures involving human subjects were in accordance with the ethical standards of these IRBs and the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For the type of retrospective study conducted, formal consent was not required for inclusion in this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhang F, Gu W, Hurles ME, Lupski JR (2009) Copy number variation in human health, disease, and evolution. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genom.9.081307.164217 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tang Y-C, Amon A (2013) Gene copy-number alterations: a cost–benefit analysis. Cell 152:394–405CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hart L, O’Driscoll M (2013) Causes and consequences of structural genomic alterations in the human genome. eLS  https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470015902.a0024976 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thompson PA, Brewster AM, Kim-Anh D, Baladandayuthapani V, Broom BM, Edgerton ME, Hahn KM, Murray JL, Sahin A, Tsavachidis S, Wang Y, Zhang L, Hortobagyi GN, Mills GB, Bondy ML (2011) Selective genomic copy number imbalances and probability of recurrence in early-stage breast cancer. PLoS ONE 6:e23543CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brewster AM, Thompson P, Sahin AA, Do K, Edgerton M, Murray JL, Tsavachidis S, Zhou R, Liu Y, Zhang L, Mills G, Bondy M (2011) Copy number imbalances between screen- and symptom-detected breast cancers and impact on disease-free survival. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 4:1609e1616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu Y, Zhou R, Baumbusch LO, Tsavachidis S, Brewster AM, Do K-A, Sahin A, Horobagyi GN, Taube JH, Mani SA, Aarøe J, Wärnberg F, Børresen-Dale A-L, Mills GB, Thompson PA, Bondy ML (2014) Genomic copy number imbalances associated with bone and non-bone metastasis of early-stage breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 143:189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cava C, Bertoli G, Castiglioni I (2015) Integrating genetics and epigenetics in breast cancer: biological insights, computational methods and therapeutic potential. BMC Syst Biol 9:62.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12918-015-0211-x CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Santarpia L, Bottai G, Kelly CM, Gyoffry B, Székely B, Puszlai L (2016) Deciphering and targeting oncogenic mutations and pathways in breast cancer. Oncologist 21:1063–1078CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rennhack J, To B, Wermuth H, Andrecheck ER (2017) Mouse models of breast cancer share amplification and deletion events with human breast cancer. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 22:71–84CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krieger N (2013) History, biology, and health inequities: emergent embodied phenotypes & the illustrative case of the breast cancer estrogen receptor. Am J Public Health 103:22–27CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Krieger N, Habel LA, Waterman PD, Shabani M, Ellison-Loschmann L, Achacoso NS, Acton L, Schnitt SJ (2015) Analyzing historical trends in breast cancer biomarker expression: a feasibility study (1947–2009). npj Breast Cancer 1:15016.  https://doi.org/10.1038/npjbcancer.2015.16 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kokkat TJ, Patel MS, McGarvey D, LiVolsi VA, Baloch ZW (2013) Archived formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) blocks: a valuable underexploited resource for extraction of DNA, RNA, and protein. Biopreserv Biobank 11:101–106CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Valla M, Vatten LJ, Engstrøm MJ, Haugen OA, Akslen LA, Bjørngaard JH, Hagen AI, Ytterhus B, Bofin AM, Ordahl S (2016) Molecular subtypes of breast cancer: long-term incidence trends and prognostic differences. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 25:1625–1634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang Y, Cottman ME, Schiffman JD (2012) Molecular inversion probes: a novel microarray technology and its application in cancer research. Cancer Genet 205:341–355CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Affymetrix. OncoScan® CNV FFPE assay kit. http://www.affymetrix.com/support/technical/byproduct.affx?product=oncoscan_cnv_ffpe_assay_kit. Accessed 8 Jan 2018
  16. 16.
    Mittempergher L, de Ronde JJ, Nieuwland M, Kerkhoveen RM, Simon I, Rutgers EEJT., Wessels LFA, Van’t Veer LJ (2011) Gene expression profiles from formalin fixed paraffin embedded breast cancer tissue are largely comparable to fresh frozen matched tissue. PLoS ONE 6(2):e17163CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Herrmann B, Hummel S (eds) (1994) Ancient DNA: recovery and analysis of genetic material from paleontological, archeological, museum, medical, and forensic specimens. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hendricks RL (1993) A model for national health care: the history of Kaiser Permanente. Rutgers University Press, New BrunswickGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gordon N (2008) What the member health surveys project tells us about the Kaiser Permanent Northern California adult membership: demographics, IT access, behavioral/lifestyle risks, and health: trends, race-ethnic differences, and variation across service populations. Kaiser Permanente Division of Research, Oakland, February 2008. https://divisionofresearch.kaiserpermanente.org/projects/memberhealthsurvey/SiteCollectionDocuments/What_Member_Health_Surveys_Project_Tells_about_KPNC_Population_Feb_2008.pdf. Accessed 8 Jan 2018
  20. 20.
    Kaiser Permanente Division of Research (2017) Cancer genomics. https://divisionofresearch.kaiserpermanente.org/Pages/cancergenomics.aspx. Accessed 8 Jan 2018
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Jung H, Lefferts JA, Tsongalis GJ (2017) Utilization of the Oncoscan microarray assay in cancer diagnostics. Appl Cancer Res 37:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Curtis C, Shah SP, Chin SF, Turashvili G, Rueda OM, Dunning MJ, Speed D, Lynch AG, Samarajiwa S, Yuan Y, Gräf S, Ha G, Haffari G, Bashashati A, Russell R, McKinney S, Group METABRIC, Langerød A, Green A, Provenzano E, Wishart G, Pinder S, Watson P, Markowetz F, Murphy L, Ellis I, Purushotham A, Børresen-Dale AL, Brenton JD, Tavaré S, Caldas C, Aparicio S (2012) The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups. Nature 486:346–352PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Singh RR, Mehrotra M, Chen H, Almohammedsalim A, Sahin A, Bosamra A, Patel KP, Routbort MJ, Lu X, Ronald A (2016) Comprehensive screening of gene copy number aberrations in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded solid tumors using molecular inversion probe-based single-nucleotide polymorphism array. J Mol Diagn 18:676–687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept of Social and Behavioral SciencesHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthBostonUSA
  2. 2.Dept of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA
  3. 3.Dept of Social and Behavioral SciencesHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthBostonUSA
  4. 4.Division of ResearchKaiser Permanente Northern CaliforniaOaklandUSA
  5. 5.Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women’s Hospital Breast Oncology Program, Department of PathologyBrigham and Women’s HospitalBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations