Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025
Evolutionary measures show that recurrence of DCIS is distinct from progression to breast cancer.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fortunato Angelo, Mallo Diego, Cisneros Luis, King Lorraine M, Khan Aziz, Curtis Christina, Ryser Marc D, Lo Joseph Y, Hall Allison, Marks Jeffrey R, Hwang E Shelley, Maley Carlo C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Progression from pre-cancers like ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to invasive disease (cancer) is driven by somatic evolution and is altered by clinical interventions. We hypothesized that genetic and/or phenotypic intra-tumor heterogeneity would predict clinical outcomes for DCIS since it serves as the substrate for natural selection among cells.
METHODS: We profiled two samples from two geographically distinct foci from each DCIS in both cross-sectional (n = 119) and longitudinal cohorts (n = 224), with whole exome sequencing, low-pass whole genome sequencing, and a panel of immunohistochemical markers.
RESULTS: In the longitudinal cohorts, the only statistically significant associations with time to non-invasive DCIS recurrence were the combination of treatment (lumpectomy only vs mastectomy or lumpectomy with radiation, HR 12.13, p = 0.003, Wald test with FDR correction), ER status (HR 0.16 for ER+ compared to ER-, p = 0.0045), and divergence in SNVs between the two samples (HR 1.33 per 10% divergence, p = 0.018). SNV divergence also distinguished between pure DCIS and DCIS synchronous with invasive disease in the cross-sectional cohort. In contrast, the only statistically significant associations with time to progression to invasive disease were the combination of the width of the surgical margin (HR 0.67 per mm, p = 0.043) and the number of mutations that were detectable at high allele frequencies (HR 1.30 per 10 SNVs, p = 0.02). No predictors were significantly associated with both DCIS recurrence and progression to invasive disease, suggesting that the evolutionary scenarios that lead to these clinical outcomes are markedly different.
CONCLUSIONS: These results imply that recurrence with DCIS is a clinical and biological process different from invasive progression.
METHODS: We profiled two samples from two geographically distinct foci from each DCIS in both cross-sectional (n = 119) and longitudinal cohorts (n = 224), with whole exome sequencing, low-pass whole genome sequencing, and a panel of immunohistochemical markers.
RESULTS: In the longitudinal cohorts, the only statistically significant associations with time to non-invasive DCIS recurrence were the combination of treatment (lumpectomy only vs mastectomy or lumpectomy with radiation, HR 12.13, p = 0.003, Wald test with FDR correction), ER status (HR 0.16 for ER+ compared to ER-, p = 0.0045), and divergence in SNVs between the two samples (HR 1.33 per 10% divergence, p = 0.018). SNV divergence also distinguished between pure DCIS and DCIS synchronous with invasive disease in the cross-sectional cohort. In contrast, the only statistically significant associations with time to progression to invasive disease were the combination of the width of the surgical margin (HR 0.67 per mm, p = 0.043) and the number of mutations that were detectable at high allele frequencies (HR 1.30 per 10 SNVs, p = 0.02). No predictors were significantly associated with both DCIS recurrence and progression to invasive disease, suggesting that the evolutionary scenarios that lead to these clinical outcomes are markedly different.
CONCLUSIONS: These results imply that recurrence with DCIS is a clinical and biological process different from invasive progression.