Advertisement

Effects of radiotherapy on plasma energy metabolites in patients with breast cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy

  • M. ArenasEmail author
  • S. Fernández-Arroyo
  • E. Rodríguez-Tomàs
  • S. Sabater
  • Y. Murria
  • M. Gascón
  • K. Amillano
  • M. Melé
  • J. Camps
  • J. Joven
Research Article

Abstract

Purpose

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is employed in patients with breast cancer (BC) with the aim of reducing tumor burden and improving surgical outcomes. We evaluated the levels of energy metabolites pre- and post-radiotherapy (RT) in breast cancer (BC) patients who previously received NACT and investigated the alterations of these metabolites in relation to the patient achieving a pathologic complete response to NACT.

Materials and methods

We included 37 BC patients who were treated with NACT following surgery and analyzed the concentrations of energy balance-related metabolites using targeted metabolomics before and one month after the end of RT. The control group was composed of 44 healthy women.

Results

Pre-radiotherapy, patients had significant decreases in the plasma levels of 12 metabolites. RT corrected these alterations and the improvement was superior in patients with a pathologic complete response.

Conclusion

Our results highlight the importance of metabolism in the outcomes of patients with BC.

Keywords

Breast cancer Energy metabolism Neoadjuvant chemotherapy Radiotherapy 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was funded, in part, by a grant from Associació Oncològica Dr. Amadeu Pelegrí (AODAP/2015; Salou, Spain). The authors thank the members of this Association together with all the volunteers from Salou and the surrounding areas for their enthusiastic support for our research.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee (Institutional Review Board) of the Hospital Universitari de Sant Joan de Reus (project code: CEIM 014/2017).

Informed consent

All patients signed a written informed consent according to the declaration of Helsinki.

References

  1. 1.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), Darby S, McGale P, Correa C, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery on 10-year recurrence and 15-year breast cancer death: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10,801 women in 17 randomised trials. Lancet. 2011;378:1707–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    EBCTCG (Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group), McGale P, Taylor C, Correa C, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after mastectomy and axillary surgery on 10-year recurrence and 20-year breast cancer mor tality: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 8135 women in 22 randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;383:2127–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:778–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaufmann M, von Minckwitz G, Smith R, et al. International expert panel on the use of primary (preoperative) systemic treatment of operable breast cancer: review and recommendations. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:2600–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaufmann M, Hortobagyi GN, Goldhirsch A, et al. Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant (primary) systemic treatment of operable breast cancer: an update. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:1940–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Castaneda SA, Strasser J. Updates in the treatment of breast cancer with radiotherapy. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2017;26:371–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aristei C, Kaidar-Person O, Arenas M, et al. The 2016 assisi think tank meeting on breast cancer: white paper. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;160:211–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arenas M, Montero Á, de Las Peñas MD, et al. The position and current status of radiation therapy after primary systemic therapy in breast cancer: a national survey-based expert consensus statement. Clin Transl Oncol. 2016;18:582–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Warburg O. On the origin of cancer cells. Science. 1956;123:309–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arenas M, Rodríguez E, García-Heredia A, et al. Metabolite normalization with local radiotherapy following breast tumor resection. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0207474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sloan JA, Loprinzi CL, Laurine JA, et al. A simple stratification factor prognostic for survival in advanced cancer: the good/bad/uncertain index. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3539–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bayo E, Herruzo I, Arenas M, et al. Consensus on the regional lymph nodes irradiation in breast cancer. Clin Transl Oncol. 2013;15:766–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Algara M, Arenas M, De Bayo DLPE, et al. Radiation techniques used in patients with breast cancer: results of a survey in Spain. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2012;17:122–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fort-Gallifa I, García-Heredia A, Hernández-Aguilera A, et al. Biochemical indices of oxidative stress and inflammation in the evaluation of peripheral artery disease. Free Radic Biol Med. 2016;97:568–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Riera-Borrull M, Rodríguez-Gallego E, Hernández-Aguilera A, et al. Exploring the process of energy generation in pathophysiology by targeted metabolomics: performance of a simple and quantitative method. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2016;27:168–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grootveld M. Introduction to the applications of chemometric techniques in ‘Omics’ research: Common pitfalls, misconceptions and ‘rights and wrongs’. In: Grootveld M, editor. Metabolic profiling: disease and xenobiotics. Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2014. p. 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chai Y, Wang J, Wang T, et al. Application of 1H NMR spectroscopy-based metabolomics to feces of cervical cancer patients with radiation-induced acute intestinal symptoms. Radiother Oncol. 2015;117:294–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mörén L, Wibom C, Bergström P, Johansson M, Antti H, Bergenheim A. Characterization of the serum metabolome following radiation treatment in patients with high-grade gliomas. Radiat Oncol. 2016;11:51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xiao X, Hu M, Zhang X, Hu JZ. NMR-based metabolomics analysis of liver from C57BL/6 mouse exposed to ionizing radiation. Radiat Res. 2017;188:44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Laiakis EC, Strawn SJ, Brenner DJ, Fornace AJ Jr. Assessment of saliva as a potential biofluid for biodosimetry: a pilot metabolomics study in mice. Radiat Res. 2016;186:92–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Baldini N, De Milito A, Feron O, et al. Annual Meeting of the International Society of Cancer Metabolism (ISCaM): metabolic networks in cancer. Front Pharmacol. 2017;8:411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Argilés JM, López-Soriano FJ, Stemmler B, Busquets S. Novel targeted therapies for cancer cachexia. Biochem J. 2017;474:2663–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Long JP, Li XN, Zhang F. Targeting metabolism in breast cancer: how far we can go? World J Clin Oncol. 2016;7:122–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cao MD, Lamichhane S, Lundgren S, et al. Metabolic characterization of triple negative breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Luo J, Zhou Z, Yang Z, et al. The value of 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging combined with pretherapeutic Ki67 for early prediction of pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95:e2914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Groheux D, Biard L, Giacchetti S, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT for the early evaluation of response to neoadjuvant treatment in triple-negative breast cancer: Influence of the chemotherapy regimen. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:536–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kostakoglu L, Duan F, Idowu MO, et al. A phase II study of 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine PET in the assessment of early response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from ACRIN 6688. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1681–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Federación de Sociedades Españolas de Oncología (FESEO) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, Institut d’Investigació Sanitària Pere VirgiliUniversitat Rovira i VirgiliReusSpain
  2. 2.Unitat de Recerca Biomèdica, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, Institut d’Investigació Sanitària Pere VirgiliUniversitat Rovira i VirgiliReusSpain
  3. 3.Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, Institut d’Investigació Sanitària Pere VirgiliUniversitat Rovira i VirgiliReusSpain

Personalised recommendations