Androgen receptor expression inversely correlates with histological grade and N stage in ER+/PgRlow male breast cancer

Aggressive Male Breast Cancer-Clinical and Therapeutic Aspects Correlated with the Histopathological Examination: A Case Report and Literature Review

Breast cancer is often seen as a disease that occurs in women, but it can also appear in men in a very small percentage, below 1%. Men have a minimal amount of breast tissue compared to women, which has the potential to become malignant in a similar way to women, although much less frequently. A patient presented with advanced local invasion due to the low amount of breast tissue, with the tumor quickly invading the adjacent structures. Histopathological and immunohistochemical examinations have an extremely important role in the pathology of breast cancer. Given that male breast cancer is rare and there are not enough surgeons specializing in breast surgery in our country, there is a lack of experience in the management and early diagnosis of this type of cancer, which will be highlighted in this article.

Defining genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, epigenetic, and phenotypic biomarkers with prognostic capability in male breast cancer: a systematic review

Although similar phenotypically, there is evidence that male and female breast cancer differ in their molecular landscapes. In this systematic review, we consolidated all existing prognostic biomarker data in male breast cancer spanning genetics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and epigenetics, and phenotypic features of prognostic value from articles published over a 29-year period (March 16, 1992, to May 1, 2021). We identified knowledge gaps in the existing literature, discussed limitations of the included studies, and outlined potential approaches for translational biomarker discovery and validation in male breast cancer. We also recognised STC2, DDX3, and DACH1 as underexploited markers of male-specific prognostic value in breast cancer. Finally, beyond describing the cumulative knowledge on the extensively researched markers oestrogen receptor-α, progesterone receptor, HER2, androgen receptor, and BRCA2, we highlighted ATM, CCND1, FGFR2, GATA3, HIF1-α, MDM2, TP53, and c-Myc as well studied predictors of poor survival that also aligned with several hallmarks of cancer.

Development and validation of an extended Cox prognostic model for patients with ER/PR+ and HER2- breast cancer: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The purpose of this study was to explore a new estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PR)+ and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)− breast cancer prognostic model, called the extended Cox prognostic model, for determining the cutoff values for multiple continuous prognostic factors and their interaction via the new model concept and variable selection method.

Methods

A total of 335 patients with ER/PR+ and HER2− breast cancer were enrolled for the final analysis. The primary endpoint was breast cancer-specific mortality (BCSM). Prognostic factors (histological grade, histological type, stage, T, N, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), P53, Ki67, ER, PR, and age) were included in this study. The four continuous variables (Ki67, ER, PR, and age) were partitioned into a series of binary variables that were fitted in the multivariate Cox analysis. A smoothly clipped absolute deviation (SCAD) variable selection method was used. Model performance was expressed in discrimination and calibration.

Results

We developed an extended Cox model with a time threshold of 164-week (more than 3 years) postoperation and developed a user-friendly nomogram based on our extended Cox model to facilitate clinical application. We found that the cutoff values for PR, Ki67, and age were 20%, 60%, and 41–55 years, respectively. There was an interaction between age and PR for patients aged ≥ 41 years and PR ≥ 20% at 164-week postoperation: the older the patients with ER/PR+, HER2−, and PR ≥ 20% were, the lower the survival and more likely to recur and metastasize exceeding 164 weeks (more than 3 years) after surgery.

Conclusions

Our study offers guidance on the prognosis of patients with ER/PR+ and HER2− breast cancer in China. The new concept can inform modeling and the determination of cutoff values of prognostic factors in the future.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-022-02790-0.

A Very rare case report of male invasive micropapillary breast carcinoma in China and review of literature

INTRODUCTION

To report a rare case of male breast micropapillary carcinoma (MBMC) with early metastasis of axillary lymph nodes, the molecular characteristics were further studied in both primary and metastatic foci. In addition, we have reviewed similar published cases in the literature and tried to outline the molecular characteristics of this disease.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 63-year-old male patient presented with a painless mass on the medial side of left breast and was pathologically diagnosed with MBMC. Postoperative examination revealed 80 % invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) and 20 % invasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) in the mass, with a histological grade WHO III. There were 25 axillary lymph nodes, 11 of which were metastatic, including 5 macrometastasis and 1 micrometastasis, with a lymph node metastasis rate of 44 % (11/25). Pathological TNM stage: pT2N2M0. Immunohistochemical results in primary foci: AR (90 %, +), HER- 2 (1 +) and ER (90 %, +), PR (60 %, +), E - cadherin (+), EGFR (-), GATA - 3 (90 %, 3 +), Ki - 67 (50 %). Lymph node metastasis: AR (40 %, strong +), HER-2 (2+), ER (90 %, strong +), PR (40 %, strong +), Ki-67 (50 %). AR and Ki-67 were obviously expressed in both primary and metastatic foci. A mixture of IDC and IMPC was found in lymph node metastases, both of which expressed varying degrees of AR and Ki-67.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

MBMC is easy to early metastasized to lymph node. In this case, there was no significant difference between primary and metastatic cancer in molecular results. It is positive for ER and PR, but negative for HER-2 in this patient. There is few data on male HER-2 expression, HER-2 expression is deficient in this case. AR is found to be positive in 50 % of MBMC cases, although their clinical relevance has not been established yet. The significance of EGFR in the prognosis of MBMC remains unclear, however, EGFR positive expression is not found in this patient.

CONCLUSIONS

MBMC is a rare disease characterized by early lymph node metastasis, high histological grade, positive ER and PR, and generally negative HER-2. The molecular biological characteristics and prognostic significance of MBMC need to be further studied in order to develop the optimal treatment strategy.

Androgen receptor blockade promotes response to BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy

Treatment with therapy targeting BRAF and MEK (BRAF/MEK) has revolutionized care in melanoma and other cancers; however, therapeutic resistance is common and innovative treatment strategies are needed^1,2. Here we studied a group of patients with melanoma who were treated with neoadjuvant BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy ( NCT02231775 , n = 51) and observed significantly higher rates of major pathological response (MPR; ≤10% viable tumour at resection) and improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) in female versus male patients (MPR, 66% versus 14%, P = 0.001; RFS, 64% versus 32% at 2 years, P = 0.021). The findings were validated in several additional cohorts^2-4 of patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma who were treated with BRAF- and/or MEK-targeted therapy (n = 664 patients in total), demonstrating improved progression-free survival and overall survival in female versus male patients in several of these studies. Studies in preclinical models demonstrated significantly impaired anti-tumour activity in male versus female mice after BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy (P = 0.006), with significantly higher expression of the androgen receptor in tumours of male and female BRAF/MEK-treated mice versus the control (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0025). Pharmacological inhibition of androgen receptor signalling improved responses to BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy in male and female mice (P = 0.018 and P = 0.003), whereas induction of androgen receptor signalling (through testosterone administration) was associated with a significantly impaired response to BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy in male and female patients (P = 0.021 and P < 0.0001). Together, these results have important implications for therapy.

Is it time to consider the Androgen receptor as a therapeutic target in breast cancer?

Breast cancer (BC) is a heterogeneous disease and the most prevalent malignant tumor in women worldwide. The majority of BC cases are positive for estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR), both known to be involved in cancer pathogenesis, progression, and invasion. In line with this, hormonal deprivation therapy appears to be a useful tool and an effective treatment for these BC subtypes. Unfortunately, prognosis among patients with hormone-negative tumors or therapy-refractory and metastatic patients remains poor. Novel biomarkers are urgently needed in order to predict the course of the disease, make better therapy decisions and improve the overall survival of patients. In this respect, the androgen receptor (AR), a member of the hormonal nuclear receptor superfamily and ER and PgR, emerges as an interesting feature widely expressed in human BCs. Despite the advances, the precise tumorigenic mechanism of AR and the role of its endogenous ligands are yet not well-understood. In this review, we aim to elaborate on the prognostic impact of AR expression and current AR-targeting approaches based on previous studies investigating AR's role in different BC subtypes.

Lost but Not Least-Novel Insights into Progesterone Receptor Loss in Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer

Estrogen receptor α (ERα) and progesterone receptor (PgR) are crucial prognostic and predictive biomarkers that are usually co-expressed in breast cancer (BC). However, 12-24% of BCs present ERα(+)/PgR(-) phenotype at immunohistochemical evaluation. In fact, BC may either show primary PgR(-) status (in chemonaïve tumor sample), lose PgR expression during neoadjuvant treatment, or acquire PgR(-) phenotype in local relapse or metastasis. The loss of PgR expression in ERα(+) breast cancer may signify resistance to endocrine therapy and poorer outcomes. On the other hand, ERα(+)/PgR(-) BCs may have a better response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy than double-positive tumors. Loss of PgR expression may be a result of pre-transcriptional alterations (copy number loss, mutation, epigenetic modifications), decreased transcription of the PGR gene (e.g., by microRNAs), and post-translational modifications (e.g., phosphorylation, sumoylation). Various processes involved in the down-regulation of PgR have distinct consequences on the biology of cancer cells. Occasionally, negative PgR status detected by immunohistochemical analysis is paradoxically associated with enhanced transcriptional activity of PgR that might be inhibited by antiprogestin treatment. Identification of the mechanism of PgR loss in each patient seems challenging, yet it may provide important information on the biology of the tumor and predict its responsiveness to the therapy.