Prognostic role of BRCA1 mutation in patients with triple‑negative breast cancer

Maksimenko,Jelena; Irmejs,Arvids; Nakazawa‑Miklasevica,Miki; Melbarde‑Gorkusa,Inga; Trofimovics,Genadijs; Gardovskis,Janis; Miklasevics,Edvins

doi:10.3892/ol.2013.1684

Prognostic role of BRCA1 mutation in patients with triple‑negative breast cancer

Authors:
- Jelena Maksimenko
- Arvids Irmejs
- Miki Nakazawa‑Miklasevica
- Inga Melbarde‑Gorkusa
- Genadijs Trofimovics
- Janis Gardovskis
- Edvins Miklasevics
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Oncology Institute, Riga Stradins University, Riga, LV‑1012, Latvia
Published online on: November 14, 2013 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2013.1684
Pages: 278-284

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Triple‑negative breast cancer (TNBC) is proposed to be an immunohistochemical surrogate of the basal‑like breast cancer subtype. In spite of the relative chemosensitivity of this cancer subtype, it is characterized by aggressive clinical behavior; therefore, a further subclassification of TNBC is required to develop new targeted treatment. In previous studies, a strong correlation between BRCA1 mutation‑associated tumors and TNBC has been identified. The aim of the present study was to investigate the prognostic significance of carrying two germline BRCA1 founder mutations (4153delA and 5382insC) in patients with TNBC in the Latvian population. A total of 78 consecutive BRCA1 mutation‑negative and 38 BRCA1 mutation‑positive invasive TNBC patients in stage I‑IV with no history of ovarian or other primary advanced cancers, who had undergone definitive surgery and genetic testing between 2005 and 2011, were deemed eligible for study. Relapse rates and breast cancer‑specific survival (BCS) outcomes were compared between mutation carriers and non‑carriers. Univariate and multivariate analyses Cox proportional‑hazards models were used to compute independent predictors of survival outcomes. No statistically significant differences were identified in relation to tumor size, T stage, stage, Ki‑67 status and tumor differentiation grade between the two groups. The median follow‑up period was 36 months for mutation carriers and 41 months for non‑carriers. A higher proportion of BRCA1 mutation non‑carriers experienced distant recurrence compared with that of mutation carriers (P<0.03). BRCA1 mutation carriers had a significantly higher BCS than non‑carriers (94.9 vs. 76.9%; P<0.02). In the univariate analyses, BRCA1‑positive status was associated with decreased risk of distant recurrence (HR, 0.228; 95% Cl, 0.052‑0.997; P<0.049) and breast cancer‑specific mortality (HR, 0.209; 95% Cl, 0.048‑0.902; P<0.036). In the multivariate analysis Cox proportional‑hazards model, BRCA1‑positive status was an independent favorable prognostic factor for distant recurrence‑free survival (HR, 3.301; 95% Cl, 1.102‑9.893; P<0.033). In conclusion, results of the present study demonstrate that positive BRCA1 founder mutation status in TNBC, with no evidence of ovarian or other cancer type in advanced stage, significantly improves prognosis.

View Figures

View References

1	Bauer KR, Brown M, Cress RD, et al: Descriptive analysis of estrogen receptor(ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, and HER2-negative invasive breast cancer, the so-called triple negative phenotype: A population-based study from the California cancer rRegistry. Cancer. 109:1721–1728. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar
2	Rakha EA, Elsheikh SE, Aleksandarany MA, et al: Triple-negative breast cancer: distinguishing between basal and nonbasal subtypes. Clin Cancer Res. 15:2302–2310. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar
3	Kaplan HG and Malmgren JA: Impact of triple negative phenotype on breast cancer prognosis. Breast J. 14:456–463. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L, et al: The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res. 13:2329–2334. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Atchley DP, Albarracin CT, Lopez A, et al: Clinical and pathologic characteristics of patients with BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 26:4282–4288. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Reis-Filho JS and Tutt AN: Triple negative tumours: a critical review. Histopathology. 52:108–118. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar
7	Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Timms KM, Liu S, et al: Incidence and outcome of BRCA mutations in unselected patients with triple receptor-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 17:1082–1089. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Hartman AR, Kaldate RR, Sailer LM, et al: Prevalence of BRCA mutations in an unselected population of triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer. 118:2787–2789. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Farmer H, McCabe N, Lord CJ, et al: Targeting the DNA repair defect in BRCA mutant cells as a therapeutic strategy. Nature. 434:917–921. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Silver DP, Richardson AL, Eklund AC, et al: Efficacy of neoadjuvant Cisplatin in triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 28:1145–1153. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Tutt A, Robson M, Garber JE, et al: Oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and advanced breast cancer: a proof-of-concept trial. Lancet. 376:235–244. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar
12	Lee LJ, Alexander B, Schnitt SJ, et al: Clinical outcome of triple-negative breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers and noncarriers. Cancer. 117:3093–100. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Bayraktar S, Gutierrez-Barrera AM, Liu D, et al: Outcome of triple-negative breast cancer in patients with and without deleterious BRCA mutations. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 130:145–153. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Plakhins G, Iremjs A, Gardovskis A, et al: Genotype-phenotype correlations among BRCA1 4153delA and 5382insC mutation carriers form Latvia. BMC Med Genet. 12:1472011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Thompson D and Easton D: Breast cancer linkage consortium: variation in BRCA1 cancer risks by mutation position. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 11:329–336. 2002.PubMed/NCBI
16	Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dawsett W, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 28:2784–2795. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar
17	Elston CW and Ellis IO: Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 19:403–410. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar
18	Rennert G, Bisland-Naggan S, Barnett-Griness O, et al: Clinical outcomes of breast cancer in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. N Engl J Med. 357:115–123. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Bordeleau L, Panchal S and Goodwin P: Prognosis of BRCA-associated breast cancer: a summary of evidence. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 119:13–24. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Moller P, Evans DG, Reis MM, et al: Surveilance for familial breast cancer: differences in outcome according to BRCA mutation status. Int J Cancer. 121:1017–1020. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Veronesi A, de Giacomi C, Magri MD, et al: Famialial breast cancer: characteristics and outcome of BRCA 1–2 positive and negative cases. BMC Cancer. 5:702005.
22	Cortesi L, Masini C, Cirilli C, et al: Favourable ten-year overall survival in a Caucasian population with high probability of hereditary breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 10:902010.
23	Bolton KL, Chenefix-Trench G, et al; EMBRACE; kConFab Investigators; Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Association between BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and survival in women with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer. JAMA. 307:382–390. 2012.
24	King MC, Marks JH, Mandell JB, et al: Breast and ovarian cancer risks due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Science. 302:643–646. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Finch A, Evans G, Narod SA, et al: BRCA carriers, prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy and menopause: clinical management considerations and recommendations. Womens Health (Lond Engl). 8:543–555. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar
26	Foulkes WD, Metcalfe K, Hanna W, et al: Disruption of the expected positive correlation between breast tumor size and lymph node status in BRCA-1 related breast carcinoma. Cancer. 98:1569–1577. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, et al: Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA. 295:2492–2502. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Vincent-Salomon A, Gruel N, Lucchesi R, et al: Identification of typical medullary breast carcinoma as a genomic sub-group of basal-like carcinomas, a heterogeneous new molecular entity. Breast Cancer Res. 9:R242007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Azoulay S, Laé M, Fréneaux P, et al: KIT is highly expressed in adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast, a basal-like carcinoma associated wtih favorable outcome. Mod Pathol. 18:1623–1631. 2005.
30	Marchiò C, Irivani M, Natrajan R, et al: Mixed micropapillary-ductal carcinomas of the breast: a genomic and immunohistochemical analysis of morphological distinct components. J Pathol. 218:301–315. 2009.
31	Hennessy BT, Giordano S, Broglio K, et al: Biphasic metaplastic sarcomoid carcinoma of the breast. Ann Oncol. 17:605–613. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar
32	Perou CM: Molecular stratification of triple-negative breast cancers. Oncologist. 16:61–70. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33	Beger C, Pierce LN, Kruger M, et al: Identification of Id4 as a regulator of BRCA1 expression by using a ribozyme-library-based inverse genomics approach. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 98:130–135. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
34	Grushko TA, Nwachukwu N, Charoenthammaraksa S, et al: Evaluation of BRCA1 inactivation by promoter methylation as a marker of triple-negative and basal-like breast cancers. J Clin Oncol. 28(Suppl; abstract 10510): 1552010.
35	Tassone P, Tagliafferi P, Perricelli, et al: BRCA1 expression modulates chemosensitivity of BRCA1-defective HCC1937 human breast cancer cells. Br J Cancer. 88:1285–1291. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Byrski T, Huzarski T, Dent R, et al: Response to neoadjuvant therapy with cisplatin in BRCA1-positive breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 115:359–363. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
37	O’Shaughnessy J, Schwartaberg LS, Danso MA, et al: A randomized phase III study of iniparib (BSI-201) in combination with gemcitabine/carboplatin (G/C) in metaplastic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). J Clin Oncol. 29.(Suppl; abstract 1007)2011.