Abstract

The efforts to personalize treatment for patients with breast cancer have led to a focus on the deeper characterization of genotypic and phenotypic heterogeneity among breast cancers. Traditional pathology utilizes microscopy to profile the morphologic features and organizational architecture of tumor tissue for predicting the course of disease, and is the first-line set of guiding tools for customizing treatment decision-making. Currently, clinicians use this information, combined with the disease stage, to predict patient prognosis to some extent. However, tumoral heterogeneity stubbornly persists among patient subgroups delineated by these clinicopathologic characteristics, as currently used methodologies in diagnostic pathology lack the capability to discern deeper genotypic and subtler phenotypic differences among individual patients. Recent advancements in molecular pathology, however, are poised to change this by joining forces with multiple-omics technologies (genomics, transcriptomics, epigenomics, proteomics, and metabolomics) that provide a wealth of data about the precise molecular complement of each patient’s tumor. In addition, these technologies inform the drivers of disease aggressiveness, the determinants of therapeutic response, and new treatment targets in the individual patient. The tumor architecture information can be integrated with the knowledge of the detailed mutational, transcriptional, and proteomic phenotypes of cancer cells within individual tumors to derive a new level of biologic insight that enables powerful, data-driven patient stratification and customization of treatment for each patient, at each stage of the disease. This review summarizes the prognostic and predictive insights provided by commercially available gene expression-based tests and other multivariate or clinical -omics-based prognostic/predictive models currently under development, and proposes a more inclusive multiplatform approach to tackling the challenging heterogeneity of breast cancer to individualize its management. “The future is already here—it’s just not very evenly distributed.”-William Ford Gibson

Highlights

  • It has become increasingly apparent over the past few decades that in order to grasp and effectively combat the heterogeneity that typifies breast cancer (BC), high-granularity tumor biomarker profiling is not merely desirable, but indispensable

  • A multicenter study observed an improved stratification of patients with metastatic BC upon adding circulating tumor cells (CTCs) status as measured by CELLSEARCH to that by EPISPOT, and found that a combination of both assays was the strongest predictor of OS [94]

  • Pathology has always been a driver behind precision medicine, and a H and E-stained slide is the touchstone of a pathologic analysis, especially when the tissue amounts are insufficient for molecular analysis [135]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It has become increasingly apparent over the past few decades that in order to grasp and effectively combat the heterogeneity that typifies breast cancer (BC), high-granularity tumor biomarker profiling is not merely desirable, but indispensable. The discovery and validation of definitive genetic and phenotypic prognostic testing that can be used to parse patients with BC into subgroups and risk categories for biomarkers have emerged as the cornerstone of predictive andpatient’s prognostic testing that canprofile be used analysis, helping to identify targeted treatments for each unique molecular by to parse patients with. The Nottingham prognostic index (NPI) calculated using the tumor size, lymph-node stage, and pathological grade is considered the standard [1]. The Van Nuys prognostic index (VNPI) is a scoring system (based on the tumor size, margin width, grade, comedonecrosis and age) that assists the treatment decision making in ductal carcinoma in situ patients (DCIS) [4]. The clinicopathologic variables in harness with the gene and protein-based biomarkers can provide far superior and robust prognostication

Immunohistochemistry-Based Prognostic Assays for Breast Cancer
Gene-Centered Biomarkers
Number of Risk Categories
Gene-Based Prognostic Assays
Liquid Biopsy Holds Promise for Guiding Breast Cancer Management
Serum Protein Markers
Circulating microRNAs
Metabolomics in Breast Cancer Prognosis
Tumor Microenvironment-Based Biomarkers
Neoantigens as Biomarkers of Treatment Response
Digital Pathology and Tissue Phenome Analysis
10. Scoring Centrosome Amplification
10.2. CA20: A Transcriptomic Signature
11. Prognostic Breast Cancer Staging
12. Future Perspectives
13. Conclusions
Findings
Results

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.