J Breast Cancer.  2011 Mar;14(1):33-38. 10.4048/jbc.2011.14.1.33.

The 70-Gene Prognostic Signature for Korean Breast Cancer Patients

• Na KY
• Kim KS
• Lee JE
• Kim HJ
• Yang JH
• Ahn SH
• Moon BI
• Kim RM
• Ko SM
• Jung YS

• KMID: 2175640
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2011.14.1.33

Abstract

PURPOSE
A 70-gene prognostic signature has prognostic value in patients with node-negative breast cancer in Europe. This diagnostic test known as "MammaPrint(TM) (70-gene prognostic signature)" was recently validated and implementation was feasible. Therefore, we assessed the 70-gene prognostic signature in Korean patients with breast cancer. We compared the risk predicted by the 70-gene prognostic signature with commonly used clinicopathological guidelines among Korean patients with breast cancer. We also analyzed the 70-gene prognostic signature and clinicopathological feature of the patients in comparison with a previous validation study.
METHODS
Forty-eight eligible patients with breast cancer (clinical T1-2N0M0) were selected from four hospitals in Korea. Fresh tumor samples were analyzed with a customized microarray for the 70-gene prognostic signature. Concordance between the risk predicted by the 70-gene prognostic signature and risk predicted by commonly used clinicopathological guidelines (St. Gallen guidelines, National Institutes of Health [NIH] guideline, and Adjuvant! Online) was evaluated.
RESULTS
Prognosis signatures were assessed in 36 patients. No significant differences were observed in the clinicopathological features of patients compared with previous studies. The 70-gene prognosis signature identified five (13.9%) patients with a low-risk prognosis signature and 31 (86.1%) patients with a high-risk prognosis signature. Clinical risk was concordant with the prognosis signature for 29 patients (80.6%) according to the St. Gallen guidelines; 30 patients (83.4%) according to the NIH guidelines; and 23 patients (63.8%) according to the Adjuvant! Online. Our results were different from previous validation studies in Europe with about a 40% low-risk prognosis and about a 60% high-risk prognosis. The high incidence in the high-risk group was consistent with data in Japan.
CONCLUSION
The results of 70-gene prognostic signature of Korean patients with breast cancer were somewhat different from those identified in Europe. This difference should be studied as whether there is a gene disparity between Asians and Europeans. Further large-scale studies with a follow-up evaluation are required to assess whether the use of the 70-gene prognostic signature can predict the prognosis of Korean patients with breast cancer.

Keyword

Breast neoplasms; Gene expression profiling; Korea

MeSH Terms

Asian Continental Ancestry Group
Breast
Breast Neoplasms
Diagnostic Tests, Routine
Europe
Follow-Up Studies
Gene Expression Profiling
Genes, vif
Humans
Incidence
Korea
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Prognosis

Reference

1. National Cancer Center. Korea Central Cancer Registry. 2006 Annual Report of the Korea Central Cancer Registry. 2007. Seoul: Ministry of Health and Welfare;1–114.

2. Korea Breast Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts and Figures 2006-2008. 2008. Seoul: Korean Breast Cancer Society.

3. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 1998. 351:1451–1467.

4. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 1998. 352:930–942.

5. Korean Breast Cancer Society. Nationwide Korean breast cancer data of 2004 using breast canser registration program. J Breast Cancer. 2006. 9:151–161.

6. van't Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Hart AA, Mao M, et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature. 2002. 415:530–536.

7. Buyse M, Loi S, van't Veer L, Viale G, Delorenzi M, Glas AM, et al. Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006. 98:1183–1192.

8. Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, Linn SC, Keijzer R, Wesseling J, Nuyten DS, van Krimpen C, et al. Validation of 70-gene prognosis signature in node-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009. 117:483–495.

9. Mook S, Schmidt MK, Viale G, Pruneri G, Eekhout I, Floore A, et al. The 70-gene prognosis-signature predicts disease outcome in breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes in an independent validation study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009. 116:295–302.

10. van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van't Veer LJ, Dai H, Hart AA, Voskuil DW, et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002. 347:1999–2009.

11. Ishitobi M, Goranova TE, Komoike Y, Motomura K, Koyama H, Glas AM, et al. Clinical utility of the 70-gene MammaPrint profile in a Japanese population. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2010. 40:508–512.

12. Elston CW, 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. 1991. 19:403–410.

13. Hauser-Kronberger C, Dandachi N. Comparison of chromogenic in situ hybridization with other methodologies for HER2 status assessment in breast cancer. J Mol Histol. 2004. 35:647–653.

14. Glas AM, Floore A, Delahaye LJ, Witteveen AT, Pover RC, Bakx N, et al. Converting a breast cancer microarray signature into a high-throughput diagnostic test. BMC Genomics. 2006. 7:278.

15. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Thurlimann B, Senn HJ. Meeting highlights: updated international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003. 21:3357–3365.

16. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Panel. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference statement: adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. November 1-3, 2000. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2001. (30):5–15.

17. Hellekson KL. NIH statement on adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Am Fam Physician. 2001. 63:1857–1855. 1861

18. Olivotto IA, Bajdik CD, Ravdin PM, Speers CH, Coldman AJ, Norris BD, et al. Population-based validation of the prognostic model ADJUVANT! for early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005. 23:2716–2725.

19. Ravdin PM, Siminoff LA, Davis GJ, Mercer MB, Hewlett J, Gerson N, et al. Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001. 19:980–991.

20. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005. 365:1687–1717.

21. Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, van Harten WH, Retel VP, van't Veer LJ, van Dam FS, Karsenberg K, et al. Use of 70-gene signature to predict prognosis of patients with node-negative breast cancer: a prospective community-based feasibility study (RASTER). Lancet Oncol. 2007. 8:1079–1087.

22. Wittner BS, Sgroi DC, Ryan PD, Bruinsma TJ, Glas AM, Male A, et al. Analysis of the MammaPrint breast cancer assay in a predominantly postmenopausal cohort. Clin Cancer Res. 2008. 14:2988–2993.

23. Straver ME, Glas AM, Hannemann J, Wesseling J, van de Vijver MJ, Rutgers EJ, et al. The 70-gene signature as a response predictor for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010. 119:551–558.

24. Botha JL, Bray F, Sankila R, Parkin DM. Breast cancer incidence and mortality trends in 16 European countries. Eur J Cancer. 2003. 39:1718–1729.