» Articles » PMID: 22262870

A Three-gene Model to Robustly Identify Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes

Overview
Specialty Oncology
Date 2012 Jan 21
PMID 22262870
Citations 163
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Single sample predictors (SSPs) and Subtype classification models (SCMs) are gene expression-based classifiers used to identify the four primary molecular subtypes of breast cancer (basal-like, HER2-enriched, luminal A, and luminal B). SSPs use hierarchical clustering, followed by nearest centroid classification, based on large sets of tumor-intrinsic genes. SCMs use a mixture of Gaussian distributions based on sets of genes with expression specifically correlated with three key breast cancer genes (estrogen receptor [ER], HER2, and aurora kinase A [AURKA]). The aim of this study was to compare the robustness, classification concordance, and prognostic value of these classifiers with those of a simplified three-gene SCM in a large compendium of microarray datasets.

Methods: Thirty-six publicly available breast cancer datasets (n = 5715) were subjected to molecular subtyping using five published classifiers (three SSPs and two SCMs) and SCMGENE, the new three-gene (ER, HER2, and AURKA) SCM. We used the prediction strength statistic to estimate robustness of the classification models, defined as the capacity of a classifier to assign the same tumors to the same subtypes independently of the dataset used to fit it. We used Cohen κ and Cramer V coefficients to assess concordance between the subtype classifiers and association with clinical variables, respectively. We used Kaplan-Meier survival curves and cross-validated partial likelihood to compare prognostic value of the resulting classifications. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results: SCMs were statistically significantly more robust than SSPs, with SCMGENE being the most robust because of its simplicity. SCMGENE was statistically significantly concordant with published SCMs (κ = 0.65-0.70) and SSPs (κ = 0.34-0.59), statistically significantly associated with ER (V = 0.64), HER2 (V = 0.52) status, and histological grade (V = 0.55), and yielded similar strong prognostic value.

Conclusion: Our results suggest that adequate classification of the major and clinically relevant molecular subtypes of breast cancer can be robustly achieved with quantitative measurements of three key genes.

Citing Articles

HDAC inhibitors modulate Hippo pathway signaling in hormone positive breast cancer.

Lin T, Tseng Y, Dong M, Lin C, Chung W, Liu C Clin Epigenetics. 2025; 17(1):37.

PMID: 40012020 PMC: 11863526. DOI: 10.1186/s13148-025-01834-y.


The Breast Cancer Classifier refines molecular breast cancer classification to delineate the HER2-low subtype.

Turova P, Kushnarev V, Baranov O, Butusova A, Menshikova S, Yong S NPJ Breast Cancer. 2025; 11(1):19.

PMID: 39979291 PMC: 11842814. DOI: 10.1038/s41523-025-00723-0.


The spatially informed mFISHseq assay resolves biomarker discordance and predicts treatment response in breast cancer.

Paul E, Huraiova B, Valkova N, Matyasovska N, Gabrisova D, Gubova S Nat Commun. 2025; 16(1):226.

PMID: 39747865 PMC: 11696812. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-55583-2.


Assessing the causal relationships between circulating metabolic biomarkers and breast cancer by using mendelian randomization.

Wang B, Ling Y, Zhang H, Yang M Front Genet. 2025; 15:1448748.

PMID: 39744067 PMC: 11688392. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2024.1448748.


Prognostic and predictive implications of sterile alpha motif and HD domain-containing protein 1 (SAMHD1) expression in breast cancer.

Kouvaraki M, Zerdes I, Sifakis E, Sarafidis M, Matikas A, Tzoras E Int J Cancer. 2024; 156(8):1621-1633.

PMID: 39729390 PMC: 11826144. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.35319.


References
1.
Pusztai L, Broglio K, Andre F, Fraser Symmans W, Hess K, Hortobagyi G . Effect of molecular disease subsets on disease-free survival in randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trials for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26(28):4679-83. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.17.2544. View

2.
Bonnefoi H, Potti A, Delorenzi M, Mauriac L, Campone M, Tubiana-Hulin M . Validation of gene signatures that predict the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a substudy of the EORTC 10994/BIG 00-01 clinical trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007; 8(12):1071-1078. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70345-5. View

3.
Zhang Y, Sieuwerts A, McGreevy M, Casey G, Cufer T, Angelo Paradiso . The 76-gene signature defines high-risk patients that benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008; 116(2):303-9. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-008-0183-2. View

4.
Lu X, Lu X, Wang Z, Iglehart J, Zhang X, Richardson A . Predicting features of breast cancer with gene expression patterns. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008; 108(2):191-201. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-007-9596-6. View

5.
Loi S, Haibe-Kains B, Desmedt C, Lallemand F, Tutt A, Gillet C . Definition of clinically distinct molecular subtypes in estrogen receptor-positive breast carcinomas through genomic grade. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25(10):1239-46. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.1522. View