Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 

About: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment is an academic journal published by Springer Science+Business Media. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Breast cancer & Cancer. It has an ISSN identifier of 0167-6806. Over the lifetime, 10734 publications have been published receiving 427514 citations.

An online survival analysis tool to rapidly assess the effect of 22,277 genes on breast cancer prognosis using microarray data of 1,809 patients.

Abstract: Validating prognostic or predictive candidate genes in appropriately powered breast cancer cohorts are of utmost interest. Our aim was to develop an online tool to draw survival plots, which can be used to assess the relevance of the expression levels of various genes on the clinical outcome both in untreated and treated breast cancer patients. A background database was established using gene expression data and survival information of 1,809 patients downloaded from GEO (Affymetrix HGU133A and HGU133+2 microarrays). The median relapse free survival is 6.43 years, 968/1,231 patients are estrogen-receptor (ER) positive, and 190/1,369 are lymph-node positive. After quality control and normalization only probes present on both Affymetrix platforms were retained (n = 22,277). In order to analyze the prognostic value of a particular gene, the cohorts are divided into two groups according to the median (or upper/lower quartile) expression of the gene. The two groups can be compared in terms of relapse free survival, overall survival, and distant metastasis free survival. A survival curve is displayed, and the hazard ratio with 95% confidence intervals and logrank P value are calculated and displayed. Additionally, three subgroups of patients can be assessed: systematically untreated patients, endocrine-treated ER positive patients, and patients with a distribution of clinical characteristics representative of those seen in general clinical practice in the US. Web address: www.kmplot.com . We used this integrative data analysis tool to confirm the prognostic power of the proliferation-related genes TOP2A and TOP2B, MKI67, CCND2, CCND3, CCNDE2, as well as CDKN1A, and TK2. We also validated the capability of microarrays to determine estrogen receptor status in 1,231 patients. The tool is highly valuable for the preliminary assessment of biomarkers, especially for research groups with limited bioinformatic resources.

The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer.

Abstract: In 1982 we constructed a prognostic index for patients with primary, operable breast cancer This index was based on a retrospective analysis of 9 factors in 387 patients Only 3 of the factors (tumour size, stage of disease, and tumour grade) remained significant on multivariate analysis The index was subsequently validated in a prospective study of 320 patients We now present the results of applying this prognostic index to all of the first 1,629 patients in our series of operable breast cancer up to the age of 70 We have used the index to define three subsets of patients with different chances of dying from breast cancer: 1) good prognosis, comprising 29% of patients with 80% 15-year survival; 2) moderate prognosis, 54% of patients with 42% 15-year survival; 3) poor prognosis, 17% of patients with 13% 15-year survival The 15-year survival of an age-matched female population was 83%

Effect of obesity on survival of women with breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract: Obesity is a risk factor for the development of new cases of breast cancer and also affects survival in women who have already been diagnosed with breast cancer. Early studies of obesity and breast cancer survival have been summarised in two meta-analyses, but the latest of these only included studies that recruited women diagnosed as recently as 1991. The primary aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis that included the more recent studies. A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL was conducted to identify original data evaluating the effects of obesity on survival in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) from individual studies were pooled using a random effects model. A series of pre-specified sensitivity analyses were conducted on factors such as overall versus breast cancer survival and treatment versus observational cohort. The meta-analysis included 43 studies that enrolled women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1963 and 2005. Sample size ranged from 100 to 424168 (median 1192). The meta-analysis showed poorer survival among obese compared with non-obese women with breast cancer, which was similar for overall (HR = 1.33; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.21, 1.47) and breast cancer specific survival (HR = 1.33; 95% CI: 1.19, 1.50). The survival differential varied only slightly, depending on whether body mass index (1.33; 1.21, 1.47) or waist-hip ratio (1.31; 1.08, 1.58) was used as the measure of obesity. There were larger differences by whether the woman was pre-menopausal (1.47) or post-menopausal (1.22); whether the cohort included women diagnosed before (1.31) or after 1995 (1.49); or whether the women were in a treatment (1.22) or observational cohort (1.36), but none of the differences were statistically significant. Women with breast cancer, who are obese, have poorer survival than women with breast cancer, who are not obese. However, no study has elucidated the causal mechanism and there is currently no evidence that weight loss after diagnosis improves survival. Consequently, there is currently no reason to place the additional burden of weight loss on women already burdened with a diagnosis of cancer. Further research should concentrate on assessing whether factors such as diabetes or type of chemotherapy modify the obesity effect and on understanding the causal mechanism, in particular the role of relative under-dosing.

Relevance of breast cancer cell lines as models for breast tumours: an update

Abstract: The number of available breast cancer cell (BCC) lines is small, and only a very few of them have been extensively studied. Whether they are representative of the tumours from which they originated remains a matter of debate. Whether their diversity mirrors the well-known inter-tumoural heterogeneity is another essential question. While numerous similarities have long been found between cell lines and tumours, recent technical advances, including the use of micro-arrays and comparative genetic analysis, have brought new data to the discussion. This paper presents most of the BCC lines that have been described in some detail to date. It evaluates the accuracy of the few of them widely used (MCF-7, T-47D, BT-474, SK-BR-3, MDA-MB-231, Hs578T) as tumour models. It is concluded that BCC lines are likely to reflect, to a large extent, the features of cancer cells in vivo. The importance of oestrogen receptor-alpha (gene ESR1) and Her-2/neu (ERBB2) as classifiers for cell lines and tumours is underlined. The recourse to a larger set of cell lines is suggested since the exact origin of some of the widely used lines remains ambiguous. Investigations on additional specific lines are expected to improve our knowledge of BCC and of the dialogue that these maintain with their surrounding normal cells in vivo.

Epidemiology of basal-like breast cancer

Abstract: Risk factors for the newly identified “intrinsic” breast cancer subtypes (luminal A, luminal B, basal-like and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive/estrogen receptor-negative) were determined in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, a population-based, case–control study of African-American and white women. Immunohistochemical markers were used to subtype 1,424 cases of invasive and in situ breast cancer, and case subtypes were compared to 2,022 controls. Luminal A, the most common subtype, exhibited risk factors typically reported for breast cancer in previous studies, including inverse associations for increased parity and younger age at first full-term pregnancy. Basal-like cases exhibited several associations that were opposite to those observed for luminal A, including increased risk for parity and younger age at first term full-term pregnancy. Longer duration breastfeeding, increasing number of children breastfed, and increasing number of months breastfeeding per child were each associated with reduced risk of basal-like breast cancer, but not luminal A. Women with multiple live births who did not breastfeed and women who used medications to suppress lactation were at increased risk of basal-like, but not luminal A, breast cancer. Elevated waist-hip ratio was associated with increased risk of luminal A in postmenopausal women, and increased risk of basal-like breast cancer in pre- and postmenopausal women. The prevalence of basal-like breast cancer was highest among premenopausal African-American women, who also showed the highest prevalence of basal-like risk factors. Among younger African-American women, we estimate that up to 68% of basal-like breast cancer could be prevented by promoting breastfeeding and reducing abdominal adiposity.