Elsevier

The Breast

Volume 24, Supplement 2, 1 November 2015, Pages S26-S35
The Breast

Original article
Clinical implications of the intrinsic molecular subtypes of breast cancer

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2015.07.008Get rights and content

Abstract

Gene-expression profiling has had a considerable impact on our understanding of breast cancer biology. During the last 15 years, 5 intrinsic molecular subtypes of breast cancer (Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2-enriched, Basal-like and Claudin-low) have been identified and intensively studied. In this review, we will focus on the current and future clinical implications of the intrinsic molecular subtypes beyond the current pathological-based classification endorsed by the 2013 St. Gallen Consensus Recommendations. Within hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative early breast cancer, the Luminal A and B subtypes predict 10-year outcome regardless of systemic treatment administered as well as residual risk of distant recurrence after 5 years of endocrine therapy. Within clinically HER2-positive disease, the 4 main intrinsic subtypes can be identified and dominate the biological and clinical phenotype. From a clinical perspective, patients with HER2+/HER2-enriched disease seem to benefit the most from neoadjuvant trastuzumab, or dual HER2 blockade with trastuzumab/lapatinib, in combination with chemotherapy, and patients with HER2+/Luminal A disease seem to have a relative better outcome compared to the other subtypes. Finally, within triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), the Basal-like disease predominates (70–80%) and, from a biological perspective, should be considered a cancer-type by itself. Importantly, the distinction between Basal-like versus non-Basal-like within TNBC might predict survival following (neo)adjvuvant multi-agent chemotherapy, bevacizumab benefit in the neoadjuvant setting (CALGB40603), and docetaxel vs. carboplatin benefit in first-line metastatic disease (TNT study). Overall, this data suggests that intrinsic molecular profiling provides clinically relevant information beyond current pathology-based classifications.

Introduction

Despite that breast cancer mortality has been moderately reduced by current treatments, more than 450,000 estimated deaths due to breast cancer are expected annually worldwide [1]. The most plausible explanation for this scenario is that we lack a complete picture of the biologic heterogeneity of breast cancers. Importantly, this complexity is not fully reflected by the main clinical parameters and pathological markers (oestrogen receptor [ER], progesterone receptor [PR] and human epidermal growth factor 2 [HER2]), all of which are routinely used in the clinic to stratify patients for prognostic predictions, to select treatments and to include patients in clinical trials.

Gene expression profiling has had a considerable impact on our understanding of breast cancer biology. During the last 15 years, we and others have extensively characterized 5 intrinsic molecular subtypes of breast cancer (Luminal A, Luminal B, HER-2 enriched, Basal-like and Claudin-low) and a normal breast-like group [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. These entities have shown significant differences in terms of their incidence, risk factors, prognosis and treatment sensitivity. Regarding prognosis, the Luminal A subtype has shown repeatedly to have a better outcome than the rest of subtypes across many datasets of patients with early breast cancer, including 6 phase III clinical trials (TransATAC, GEICAM9906, CALGB9741, ABCSG08, NCIC-CTG MA.5 and NCIC-CTG MA.12), where patients received various adjuvant systemic treatments.

A particular piece of data that highlights the importance of intrinsic subtyping in breast cancer comes from one of the most complete molecular characterization studies that have ever been performed in breast cancer. In this study, led by The Cancer Genome Atlas Project (TCGA), more than 500 primary breast cancers were extensively profiled at the DNA (i.e. methylation, chromosomal copy-number changes and somatic and germline mutations), RNA (i.e. miRNA and mRNA expression) and protein (i.e. protein and phosphor-protein expression) levels using the most recent technologies [6]. In a particular analysis of over 300 primary tumours (i.e. shown in Figure 2 of that publication [6]), 5 different data-types (i.e. all except DNA mutations) were combined together in a cluster of clusters in order to identify how many biological homogenous groups of tumours one can identify in breast cancer. The consensus clustering results showed the presence of 4 main entities of breast cancer but, more importantly, these 4 entities were found to be very well recapitulated by the 4 main intrinsic subtypes (Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2-enriched and Basal-like) as defined by mRNA expression only [7]. Overall, these results suggest that intrinsic subtyping captures the vast majority of the biological diversity occurring in breast cancer.

Since 2011, the St. Gallen international expert consensus panel adopted an intrinsic subtype-based approach for recommending adjuvant systemic therapies (i.e. endocrine, chemotherapy and anti-HER2 therapy) in early breast cancer [8]. Although the panel acknowledged the superior accuracy and reproducibility of multi-gene expression molecular assays, these assays are not readily available for all our patients. Thus, over the years, we and others have proposed pathology-based surrogate definitions especially for distinguishing Luminal A from B tumours [9], [10], [11]. However, despite important efforts to improve the various pathology-based surrogate definitions of the intrinsic subtypes, these continue to be suboptimal.

Here, we review the current and the potential future clinical implications of the intrinsic molecular subtypes of breast cancer beyond the pathological-based surrogate classification endorsed by the 2013 St Gallen Consensus Recommendations [8].

Section snippets

Intrinsic subtyping based on gene expression versus histopathology

To date, numerous studies have evaluated and compared the classification of tumours based on the PAM50 gene expression predictor with the pathology-based surrogate definitions [6], [10], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26]. To better understand the concordance between the 2 classification methods, we have combined the data from all of these studies for a total of 5994 independent samples (Table 1). Of note, the vast majority of these studies

Main molecular features of the intrinsic subtypes

Four main intrinsic molecular subtypes of breast cancer (Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2-enriched and Basal-like) have been characterized over the last 15 years. At the RNA and protein level, Luminal A and B subtypes are largely distinguished by the expression of two main biological processes: proliferation/cell cycle-related and luminal/hormone-regulated pathways (Fig. 1). Compared to Luminal A tumours, Luminal B tumours have higher expression of proliferation/cell cycle-related genes or proteins

Basal-like versus not classification: biological and epidemiological implications

The TCGA comprehensive molecular characterization of breast cancer confirmed that among all the intrinsic subtypes, the Basal-like is the most distinct [6]. This observation fits with previous molecular studies and with clinical data that shows that triple-negative breast cancer tends to affect young women, is associated with BRCA1 mutations and is a highly aggressive disease [37]. However, how different is Basal-like disease from the rest of breast cancer subtypes?

Two recent studies have

Prognostic implications

Within HR+/HER2-negative breast cancer, 90–95% of tumours fall into the Luminal A and B subtypes. In early breast cancer, Luminal B disease has worse baseline distant recurrence-free survival at 5- and 10-yrs regardless of adjuvant systemic therapy compared to Luminal A disease. This has now been observed in multiple retrospective datasets, including 6 phase III clinical trials (i.e. CALGB9741 [45], GEICAM9906 [46], TransATAC [19], ABCSG-08 [20], MA.5 [47] and MA.12 [17] trials) coming from

Distribution and biology of the intrinsic subtypes

Similarly as the other pathology-based groups, all the intrinsic molecular subtypes can be identified within clinically HER2-positive disease albeit with different proportions. In our combined analysis of 831 HER2+ tumours (Table 1), 44.6%, 26.8%, 17.6% and 11.0% were identified as HER2-enriched, Luminal B, Luminal A and Basal-like. Interestingly, HR-status by IHC does not fully recapitulate the intrinsic subtypes since 20.9% (1 out of 5 patients) of HER2+/HR+ tumours will be identified as

Distribution and biology of the intrinsic subtypes

In the past, we have used the word TN and Basal-like interchangeably. However, within TN disease, all the intrinsic molecular subtypes can be identified, although the vast majority fall into the Basal-like subtype (86%; range 56%–95%, depending from the study). In our combined analysis of 868 TN tumours (Table 1), 86.1%, 9.1%, 3.2% and 1.6% were identified as Basal-like, HER2-enriched, Luminal B and Luminal A, respectively. Although the correlation between pathological and gene expression

Conclusions

Breast cancer is a clinically and biologically heterogeneous disease. However, the vast majority of the biological diversity coming from the DNA, miRNAs and proteins is captured by the 4 main intrinsic subtypes defined by gene expression-only. At the same time, and contrary to popular belief, intrinsic biology is not sufficiently captured by standard clinical-pathological variables. In this review, we have argued how intrinsic biology identified by gene expression analyses provides, today and

Conflict of interest statement

Aleix Prat has served in an uncompensated advisory role to Nanostring Technologies. There are no other potential conflicts of interest.

References (93)

  • E. de Azambuja et al.

    Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): survival outcomes of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial and their association with pathological complete response

    Lancet Oncol

    (2014)
  • L. Gianni et al.

    Neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (NOAH): follow-up of a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort

    Lancet Oncol

    (2014)
  • M. Untch et al.

    Estimating the magnitude of trastuzumab effects within patient subgroups in the HERA trial

    Ann Oncol

    (2008)
  • L. Gianni et al.

    Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial

    Lancet Oncol

    (2012)
  • S. Loi et al.

    Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes are prognostic in triple negative breast cancer and predictive for trastuzumab benefit in early breast cancer: results from the FinHER trial

    Ann Oncol

    (2014)
  • H.R. Ali et al.

    Association between CD8+ T-cell infiltration and breast cancer survival in 12 439 patients

    Ann Oncol

    (2014)
  • G. von Minckwitz et al.

    Neoadjuvant carboplatin in patients with triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer (GeparSixto; GBG 66): a randomised phase 2 trial

    Lancet Oncol

    (2014)
  • C.M. Perou et al.

    Molecular portraits of human breast tumours

    Nature

    (2000)
  • A. Prat et al.

    PAM50 assay and the three-gene model for identifying the major and clinically relevant molecular subtypes of breast cancer

    Breast Cancer Res Treat

    (2012)
  • A. Prat et al.

    Phenotypic and molecular characterization of the claudin-low intrinsic subtype of breast cancer

    Breast Cancer Res

    (2010)
  • N. Cancer Genome Atlas

    Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours

    Nature

    (2012)
  • J.S. Parker et al.

    Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes

    J Clin Oncol

    (2009)
  • P. Maisonneuve et al.

    Proposed new clinicopathological surrogate definitions of luminal A and luminal B (HER2-negative) intrinsic breast cancer subtypes

    Breast Cancer Res

    (2014)
  • A. Prat et al.

    Prognostic significance of progesterone receptor-positive tumor cells within immunohistochemically defined luminal A breast cancer

    J Clin Oncol

    (2013)
  • M.C.U. Cheang et al.

    Ki67 Index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast Cancer

    J Natl Cancer Inst

    (2009)
  • A. Prat et al.

    Predicting response and survival in chemotherapy-treated triple-negative breast cancer

    Br J Cancer

    (2014)
  • W. Sikov et al.

    Impact of intrinsic subtype by PAM50 and other gene signatures on pathologic complete response (pCR) rates in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT)+/− carboplatin (Cb) or bevacizumab (Bev): CALGB 40603/150709 (Alliance)

    San Ant Breast Cancer Symp

    (2014)
  • R.R. Bastien et al.

    PAM50 breast cancer subtyping by RT-qPCR and concordance with standard clinical molecular markers

    BMC Med Genomics

    (2012)
  • A. Prat et al.

    Molecular characterization of basal-like and non-basal-like triple-negative breast cancer

    Oncologist

    (2013)
  • S.K. Chia et al.

    A 50-Gene intrinsic subtype classifier for prognosis and prediction of benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen

    Clin Cancer Res

    (2012)
  • M.J. Ellis et al.

    Randomized phase II neoadjuvant comparison between letrozole, anastrozole, and exemestane for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor–rich stage 2 to 3 breast cancer: clinical and biomarker outcomes and predictive value of the baseline PAM50-based intrinsic subtype—ACOSOG Z1031

    J Clin Oncol

    (2011)
  • M. Dowsett et al.

    Comparison of PAM50 risk of recurrence score with oncotype DX and IHC4 for predicting risk of distant recurrence after endocrine therapy

    J Clin Oncol

    (2013)
  • M. Martín et al.

    Prospective study of the impact of the Prosigna™ assay on adjuvant clinical decision-making in women with estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer: a GEICAM study

    San Ant Breast Cancer Symp

    (2014)
  • T.O. Nielsen et al.

    A comparison of PAM50 intrinsic subtyping with immunohistochemistry and clinical prognostic factors in tamoxifen-treated estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer

    Clin Cancer Res

    (2010)
  • A. Prat et al.

    Molecular features and survival outcomes of the intrinsic subtypes within HER2-positive breast cancer

    J Natl Cancer Inst

    (2014)
  • C. Curtis et al.

    The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups

    Nature

    (2012)
  • A. Prat et al.

    Research-based PAM50 subtype predictor identifies higher responses and improved survival outcomes in HER2-positive breast cancer in the NOAH study

    Clin Cancer Res

    (2014)
  • L. Carey et al.

    Clinical and translational results of CALGB 40601: a neoadjuvant phase III trial of weekly paclitaxel and trastuzumab with or without lapatinib for HER2-positive breast cancer

    Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol

    (2013)
  • A. Prat et al.

    Practical implications of gene-expression-based assays for breast oncologists

    Nat Rev Clin Oncol

    (2012)
  • M. Dowsett et al.

    Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the international Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group

    J Natl Cancer Inst

    (2011 Nov 16)
  • M.E.H. Hammond et al.

    American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer

    J Clin Oncol

    (2010)
  • A.C. Wolff et al.

    Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update

    J Clin Oncol

    (2013)
  • A. McCullough et al.

    Central pathology laboratory review of HER2 and ER in early breast cancer: an ALTTO trial [BIG 2-06/NCCTG N063D (Alliance)] ring study

    Breast Cancer Res Treat

    (2014)
  • A. Prat et al.

    Prognostic significance of progesterone receptor–positive tumor cells within immunohistochemically defined luminal A breast cancer

    J Clin Oncol

    (2013)
  • S.A. Roberts et al.

    An APOBEC cytidine deaminase mutagenesis pattern is widespread in human cancers

    Nat Genet

    (2013)
  • K.J. Kuong et al.

    APOBEC3B mutagenesis in cancer

    Nat Genet

    (2013)
  • Cited by (705)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text