- Short communication
- Open Access
Do classical oestrogen markers predict for clinical response to endocrine therapy?
© BioMed Central Ltd 2007
- Published: 20 December 2007
- Breast Cancer
- Endocrine Therapy
- Progesterone Receptor
- Breast Cancer Cell Line
Oestrogen may maintain the growth of some breast cancers, and oestrogen deprivation therapy can cause tumour regression. However, even in breast cancers that possess oestrogen receptors (the key transcription factor in oestrogen signalling), response rates to endocrine therapy are only 50% to 60%, hence the interest in identifying additional factors that might predict response/resistance to hormone therapy. In this respect, it had been hoped that molecules that are regulated by oestrogen would be excellent candidates. However, this review makes the case that oestrogen-regulated markers are unlikely to be robust indicators of hormone dependence in breast cancers.
Evidence is based on correlating oestrogen regulated markers (identified on account of having an oestrogen response element [ERE] in the promoter region of their genes and being classically oestrogen regulated in many hormone-sensitive tissues [the example used is the progesterone receptor (PR)], expression being regulated by oestrogen in breast cancer cell lines, and expression being regulated by oestrogen deprivation therapy in primary breast cancers) with clinical response to endocrine therapy either in patients with advanced breast cancer or in the neoadjuvant setting.
Two major randomized trials of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (P024 and IMPACT [Immediate Preoperative Arimidex Compared to Tamoxifen]) and one other large study assessed the relationship of PR status to clinical response to either tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor. All found a higher incidence of PR positivity in clinically responding tumours [1–3] as compared with nonresponders. However, it is clear that a substantial number of PR-negative tumours respond to endocrine therapy, and conversely that many clinical nonresponding tumours possess PR. Consequently, PR is a poor marker of clinical response to endocrine therapy.
It could be argued that rather than measure pretreatment PR expression, it might be more informative to relate change in PR level with clinical response. Treatment with aromatase inhibitors is associated with a reduction in immunohistochemical staining for PR [1–3]. However, this occurs in about 90% of cases irrespective of clinical response. It is clear that downregulation of PR occurs in most clinically nonresponsive tumours.
Many studies have been conducted to determine the effects of oestrogen addition/withdrawal in breast cancer cell lines maintained in culture or as xenografts in immunosuppressed animals; most have used the MCF7 cell line. Five studies published since 2000 [4–8] have been used as a database in which to identify oestrogen-regulated genes. No single gene was listed in all five publications, but two were quoted in four publications and nine in at least three journals. A total of 141 genes were confirmed by publication in two journals. The general lack of consensus probably reflects variables such as the amount of oestrogen used, duration of exposure, different sources of cell lines, conditions of growth and different platforms of assays. These 141 genes were compared with the gene signatures based on a pretreatment tumour analysis from patients with advanced breast cancer and predicting response to tamoxifen, as defined by Janssen and coworkers . The overlap between the genes was minimal. However, such a comparison is based upon change in expression for the cell line gene set and pretreatment expression for the clinical response signature.
A list of genes most significantly influenced by neoadjuvant treatment (at 14 days) with letrozole has been published . However, this has no overlap with genes whose expression is differentially changed between clinical responders and nonresponders at the same time point (unpublished data). The reason for this is that expression levels of oestrogen-regulated genes are changed by therapy per se and are not restricted to clinically responding tumours, and also change in clinically resistant cases. Accurate prediction of clinical response requires a novel gene discovery programme to identify markers that are regulated by oestrogen in clinically responding tumours alone (or conversely in clinically resistant tumours alone).
It is concluded that oestrogen-regulated genes are molecular markers of oestrogen sensitivity (not dependence); that expression profiles and molecular responses to endocrine therapy in clinically resistant tumours may be similar to clinical responders; and, therefore, that most oestrogen-regulated genes are unlikely to be robust markers of clinical response to endocrine therapy.
This article has been published as part of Breast Cancer Research Volume 9 Supplement 2, 2007: Controversies in Breast Cancer. The full contents of the supplement are available online at http://breast-cancer-research.com/supplements/9/S2.
- Ellis MJ, Coop A, Singh B, Mauriac L, Llombert-Cussac A, Janicke F, Miller WR, Evans DB, Dugan M, Brady C, et al: Letrozole is more effective neoadjuvant endocrine therapy than tamoxifen for ErbB-1- and/or ErbB-2-positive, estrogen receptor-positive primary breast cancer: evidence from a phase III randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2001, 19: 3808-3816.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Dowsett M, Ebbs SR, Dixon JM, Skene A, Griffith C, Boeddinghaus I, Salter J, Detre S, Hills M, Ashley S, et al: Biomarker changes during neoadjuvant anastrozole, tamoxifen, or the combination: influence of hormonal status and HER-2 in breast cancer: a study from the IMPACT trialists. J Clin Oncol. 2005, 23: 2477-2492. 10.1200/JCO.2005.07.559.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Miller WR, White S, Dixon JM, Murray J, Renshaw L, Anderson TJ: Proliferation, steroid receptors and clinical/pathological response in breast cancer treated with letrozole. Br J Cancer. 2006, 94: 1051-1056. 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603001.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Charpentier AH, Bednarek AK, Daniel RL, Hawkins KA, Laflin KJ, Gaddis S, MacLeod MC, Aldaz CM: Effects of estrogen on global gene expression: identification of novel targets of estrogen action. Cancer Res. 2000, 60: 5977-5983.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Frasor J, Danes JM, Komm B, Chang KC, Lyttle CR, Katzenellenbogen BS: Profiling of estrogen up- and down-regulated gene expression in human breast cancer cells: insights into gene networks and pathways underlying estrogenic control of proliferation and cell phenotype. Endocrinology. 2003, 144: 4562-4574. 10.1210/en.2003-0567.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Inoue A, Yoshida N, Omoto Y, Oguchi S, Yamori T, Kiyama R, Hayashi S: Development of cDNA microarray for expression profiling of estrogen-responsive genes. J Mol Endocrinol. 2002, 29: 175-192. 10.1677/jme.0.0290175.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Oh DS, Troester MA, Usary J, Hu Z, He X, Fan C, Wu J, Carey LA, Perou CM: Estrogen-regulated genes predict survival in hormone receptor-positive breast cancers. J Clin Oncol. 2006, 24: 1656-1664. 10.1200/JCO.2005.03.2755.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Creighton CJ, Cordero KE, Larios JM, Miller RS, Johnson MD, Chinnaiyan AM, Lippman ME, Rae JM: Genes regulated by estrogen in breast tumor cells in vitro are similarly regulated in vivo in tumor xenografts and human breast tumors. Genome Biol. 2006, 7: R28-10.1186/gb-2006-7-4-r28.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Jansen MP, Foekens JA, van Staveren IL, Dirkzwager-Kiel MM, Ritstier K, Look MP, Meijer-van Gelder ME, Sieuwerts AM, Portengen H, Dorssers LC, et al: Molecular classification of tamoxifen-resistant breast carcinomas by gene expression profiling. J Clin Oncol. 2005, 23: 732-740. 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.145.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Miller WR, Larionov A, Renshaw L, Anderson TJ, White S, Hampton G, Walker JR, Ho S, Krause A, Evans DB, et al: Aromatase inhibitors: gene discovery. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2007, 106: 130-142. 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2007.05.013.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar