Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 21, Issue 10, pp 3216–3222 | Cite as

Initial Experience with Genomic Profiling of Heavily Pretreated Breast Cancers

  • Edgar D. Staren
  • Donald Braun
  • Bradford Tan
  • Digant Gupta
  • Seungchan Kim
  • Kim Kramer
  • Maurie Markman
Breast Oncology

Abstract

Background

Rapidly evolving advances in the understanding of theorized unique driver mutations within individual patient’s cancers, as well as dramatic reduction in the cost of genomic profiling, have stimulated major interest in the role of such testing in routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to report our initial experience with genomic testing in heavily pretreated breast cancer patients.

Methods

Patients with primary or recurrent breast cancer managed at any of our five hospitals and whose malignancy had failed to respond to therapy or had progressed on all recognized standard-of-care options were offered the opportunity to have their cancer undergo next-generation sequencing genomic profiling.

Results

Of a total of 101 patients, 98 (97 %) had at least one specific genomic alteration identified. A total of 465 different somatic genetic abnormalities were revealed in this group of patients. Although 52 % of patients were found to have an abnormality for which an U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug was available, 69 % of patients had an FDA-approved agent for an indication other than breast cancer. The most common genomic alterations of potential clinical consequence were PIK3 (25 %), FGFR1 (16 %), AKT (11 %), PTEN (10 %), ERBB2 (8 %), JAK2 (6 %), and RAF1 (5 %).

Conclusions

Almost all advanced breast cancers possess at least one well-characterized genomic alteration that might be actionable at the clinical level. Further, in most cases, a plausible argument can be advanced for the potential biological and clinical relevance of an FDA-approved antineoplastic agent not currently indicated in the treatment of breast cancer.

Keywords

Breast Cancer Trastuzumab PIK3CA Mutation Genomic Alteration Pertuzumab 

Notes

Acknowledgment

Supported in part by Cancer Treatment Centers of America®.

Disclosure

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64:9–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sabatier R, Goncalves A, Bertucci F. Personalized medicine: present and future of breast cancer management. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2014;pii:S1040-8428(14)00051-1.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mitri Z, Constantine T, O’Regan R. The HER2 receptor in breast cancer: pathophysiology, clinical use, and new advances in therapy. Chemother Res Pract. 2012;2012:743193.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, et al. Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA. 2006;295:2492–502.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eroles P, Bosch A, Perez-Fidalgo JA, Lluch A. Molecular biology in breast cancer: intrinsic subtypes and signaling pathways. Cancer Treat Rev. 2012;38:698–707.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Giordano A, Tagliabue E, Pupa SM. Promise and failure of targeted therapy in breast cancer. Front Biosci (Schol Ed). 2012;4:356–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Curtis C, Shah SP, Chin SF, et al. The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups. Nature. 2012;486(7403):346–52.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ma CX, Ellis MJ. The Cancer Genome Atlas: clinical applications for breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 2013;27:1263–9.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cizkova M, Dujaric ME, Lehmann-Che J, et al. Outcome impact of PIK3CA mutations in HER2-positive breast cancer patients treated with trastuzumab. Br J Cancer. 2013;108:1807–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Berns K, Horlings HM, Hennessy BT, et al. A functional genetic approach identifies the PI3K pathway as a major determinant of trastuzumab resistance in breast cancer. Cancer Cell. 2007;12:395–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nagata Y, Lan KH, Zhou X, et al. PTEN activation contributes to tumor inhibition by trastuzumab, and loss of PTEN predicts trastuzumab resistance in patients. Cancer Cell. 2004;6:117–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Serra V, Markman B, Scaltriti M, et al. NVP-BEZ235, a dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor, prevents PI3K signaling and inhibits the growth of cancer cells with activating PI3K mutations. Cancer Res. 2008;68:8022–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    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;351:2817–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kean S. Breast cancer. The “other” breast cancer genes. Science. 2014;343(6178):1457–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ellsworth RE, Decewicz DJ, Shriver CD, Ellsworth DL. Breast cancer in the personal genomics era. Curr Genomics. 2010;11:146–61.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Balko JM, Giltnane JM, Wang K, et al. Molecular profiling of the residual disease of triple-negative breast cancers after neoadjuvant chemotherapy identifies actionable therapeutic targets. Cancer Discov. 2014;4:232–45.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jeselsohn R, Yelensky R, Buchwalter G, et al. Emergence of constitutively active estrogen receptor-alpha mutations in pretreated advanced estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:1757–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Saal LH, Holm K, Maurer M, et al. PIK3CA mutations correlate with hormone receptors, node metastasis, and ERBB2, and are mutually exclusive with PTEN loss in human breast carcinoma. Cancer Res. 2005;65:2554–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stemke-Hale K, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Lluch A, et al. An integrative genomic and proteomic analysis of PIK3CA, PTEN, and AKT mutations in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2008;68:6084–91.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Quintas-Cardama A, Verstovsek S. Molecular pathways: Jak/STAT pathway: mutations, inhibitors, and resistance. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:1933–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhao W, Du Y, Ho WT, Fu X, Zhao ZJ. JAK2V617F and p53 mutations coexist in erythroleukemia and megakaryoblastic leukemic cell lines. Exp Hematol Oncol. 2012;1:15.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Ferrer-Lozano J, Stemke-Hale K, et al. PI3K pathway mutations and PTEN levels in primary and metastatic breast cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2011;10:1093–101.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee SY, Haq F, Kim D, et al. Comparative genomic analysis of primary and synchronous metastatic colorectal cancers. PLoS One. 2014;9:e90459.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liedtke C, Broglio K, Moulder S, et al. Prognostic impact of discordance between triple-receptor measurements in primary and recurrent breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2009;20:1953–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Von Hoff DD, Stephenson JJ Jr, Rosen P, et al. Pilot study using molecular profiling of patients’ tumors to find potential targets and select treatments for their refractory cancers. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4877–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edgar D. Staren
    • 1
    • 2
  • Donald Braun
    • 1
  • Bradford Tan
    • 1
  • Digant Gupta
    • 1
  • Seungchan Kim
    • 2
  • Kim Kramer
    • 1
  • Maurie Markman
    • 1
  1. 1.Cancer Treatment Centers of America® (CTCA)GoodyearUSA
  2. 2.The Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen)PhoenixUSA

Personalised recommendations