Somatic Mutation, Copy Number and Transcriptomic Profiles of Primary and Matched Metastatic Estrogen Receptor-positive Breast Cancers
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Background: Estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancers (BCs) constitute the most frequent BC subtype. The molecular landscape of ER+ relapsed disease is not well characterized. In this study, we aimed to describe the genomic evolution between primary (P) and matched metastatic (M) ER+ BCs after failure of adjuvant therapy.
Materials And Methods: A total of 182 ER+ metastatic BC patients with long-term follow-up were identified from a single institution. P tumor tissue was available for all patients, with 88 having matched M material. According to the availability of tumor material, samples were characterized using a 120 mutational hotspot qPCR, a 29 gene copy number aberrations (CNA) and a 400 gene expression panels. ESR1 mutations were assayed by droplet digital PCR. Molecular alterations were correlated with overall survival (OS) using the Cox proportional hazards regression models.
Results: The median follow-up was 6.4 years (range 0.5-26.6 years). Genomic analysis of P tumors revealed somatic mutations in PIK3CA, KRAS, AKT1, FGFR3, HRAS and BRAF at frequencies of 41%, 6%, 5%, 2%, 1% and 2%, respectively, and CN amplification of CCND1, ZNF703, FGFR1, RSF1 and PAK1 at 23%, 19%, 17%, 12% and 11%, respectively. Mutations and CN amplifications were largely concordant between P and matched M (>84%). ESR1 mutations were found in 10.8% of the M but none of the P. Thirteen genes, among which ESR1, FOXA1, and HIF1A, showed significant differential expression between P and M. In P, the differential expression of 18 genes, among which IDO1, was significantly associated with OS (FDR < 0.1).
Conclusions: Despite the large concordance between P and matched M for the evaluated molecular alterations, potential actionable targets such as ESR1 mutations were found only in M. This supports the importance of characterizing the M disease. Other targets we identified, such as HIF1A and IDO1, warrant further investigation in this patient population.
Liver Metastasis in Cancer: Molecular Mechanisms and Management.
Xu W, Xu J, Liu J, Wang N, Zhou L, Guo J MedComm (2020). 2025; 6(3):e70119.
PMID: 40027151 PMC: 11868442. DOI: 10.1002/mco2.70119.
Araya C, Mino B, Le Cerf P, Gaete F, Armisen R, Carvajal-Hausdorf D Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(22).
PMID: 39596311 PMC: 11594956. DOI: 10.3390/ijms252212246.
Kontogiannis A, Karaviti E, Karaviti D, Lanitis S, Gomatou G, Syrigos N Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(22).
PMID: 39594781 PMC: 11593237. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16223826.
Zhu X, Ying X, Liu Y, Wang Y, Chen L, Shao Z Cancer Biol Med. 2024; 21(9).
PMID: 38752685 PMC: 11414218. DOI: 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2024.0009.
Rosin J, Svegrup E, Valachis A, Zerdes I Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2023; 201(2):161-169.
PMID: 37392328 PMC: 10361863. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-023-07010-1.