TIMP-1 in combination with HER2 and TOP2A for prediction of benefit from adjuvant anthracyclines in high-risk breast cancer patients
- 283 Downloads
HER2 amplification, TOP2A aberrations, and absence of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP-1) expression in breast carcinomas have been shown to be associated with incremental benefit from anthracycline-containing adjuvant chemotherapy, and this study was undertaken to validate these findings in a similar, but independent, randomized clinical trial. TIMP-1 was examined by immunohistochemistry in archival tumor tissue from 403 of 716 premenopausal high-risk patients with known HER2 and TOP2A status who were randomized to cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) or cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) in the MA.5 trial. Ninety-eight (24%) patients had no TIMP-1 staining of tumor cells, 27% were HER2 amplified, and 18% were TOP2A aberrant. Forty-four percentage was classified as HT responsive (HER2 amplified and/or TIMP-1 negative) and 37% as 2T responsive (TOP2A aberrant and/or TIMP-1 negative). There was no heterogeneity in treatment effect of CEF versus CMF according to TIMP-1. In HT-responsive patients, CEF was superior to CMF with an improved RFS (adjusted HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42–0.97), but this was not significant for OS (adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.42–1.04). A significant HT profile versus treatment interaction was detected for OS (P = 0.03). In 2T-responsive patients, CEF seemed to improve RFS compared to CMF (adjusted HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.43–1.03) and improved OS (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36–0.93). A significant 2T profile versus treatment interaction was detected for OS (P = 0.01). With this study, we validate a more substantial reduction in mortality by CEF compared to CMF in patients with an HT- or 2T-responsive profile; however, we could not show a similarly significant reduction in RFS events, where a benefit of CEF over CMF was found irrespective of TIMP-1 status. Further studies are necessary before the HT and 2T profiles may be used to direct the use of anthracyclines.
KeywordsTIMP-1 HER2 TOP2A Prediction Breast cancer NCIC CTG MA.5
Nils Brünner received funding from The Danish Natural Science Foundation and A Race Against Breast Cancer; Pernille Hertel received funding from Breast Friends and The Association of Young Oncologist (FYO) and AstraZeneca’s Grant for Education and Research.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
- 2.Levine MN, Bramwell VH, Pritchard KI et al (1998) Randomized trial of intensive cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil chemotherapy compared with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:2651–2658PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Carpenter JT, Velez-Garcia E, Aron BS et al (1991) Five year results of a adjuvant comparison of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and fluorouracil versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil for node positive breast cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 13:66 abstr 68Google Scholar
- 5.Martin M, Villar A, Sole-Calvo A et al (2003) Doxorubicin in combination with fluorouracil and cyclophosphamide (i.v. FAC regimen, day 1, 21) versus methotrexate in combination with fluorouracil and cyclophosphamide (i.v. CMF regimen, day 1, 21) as adjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer: a study by the GEICAM group. Ann Oncol 14:833–842PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Hutchins LF, Green SJ, Ravdin PM et al (2005) Randomized, controlled trial of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil with and without tamoxifen for high-risk, node-negative breast cancer: treatment results of Intergroup Protocol INT-0102. J Clin Oncol 23:8313–8321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Knoop AS, Knudsen H, Balslev E et al (2005) Retrospective analysis of topoisomerase IIa amplifications and deletions as predictive markers in primary breast cancer patients randomly assigned to cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil or cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil. J Clin Oncol 23:7483–7490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Leo AD, Desmedt C, Bartlett JM et al., HER2/TOP2A Meta-analysis Study Group (2011) HER2 and TOP2A as predictive markers for anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimens as adjuvant treatment of breast cancer: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol 12:1134–1142Google Scholar
- 23.Schrohl AS, Look MP, Meijer-van Gelder ME et al (2009) Tumor tissue levels of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 (TIMP-1) and outcome following adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal lymph node-positive breast cancer patients: a retrospective study. BMC Cancer 9:322PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Levine MN, Pritchard KI, Bramwell VH et al (2005) Randomized trial comparing cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer: update of National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Trial MA5. J Clin Oncol 23:5166–5170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar