Oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive phenotype of invasive breast carcinoma in Japan: re-evaluated using immunohistochemical staining

Estrogen Receptor, Progesterone Receptor, and Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Expression Rates in Invasive Breast Carcinoma: A Study of 21 Institutions

CONTEXT.—

Laboratories performing predictive marker testing for breast carcinoma are encouraged to compare patient results to published benchmarks.

OBJECTIVE.—

To collect expression rates for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in invasive breast carcinoma from multiple laboratories.

DESIGN.—

Participants submitted data from up to 50 primary cases during the study period. Participants reported ER, PgR, and HER2 results in addition to demographic and histologic information. Participants also provided annual institution-level expression rates.

RESULTS.—

A total of 21 institutions submitted data for 687 cases. Aggregate positivity rates for ER and PgR were 85.6% and 75.1%, respectively. Receptor positivity rates were higher in well-differentiated (grade 1) tumors (ER, 97.4%; PgR, 88.0%) compared with moderately differentiated (grade 2) tumors (ER, 92.4%; PgR, 84.0%) and poorly differentiated (grade 3) tumors (ER, 61.8%; PgR, 48.0%). Expression rates were higher in postmenopausal women (ER, 87.2%) than premenopausal women (ER, 79.6%) and higher in lobular carcinomas (ER, 98.7%; PgR, 85.3%) than ductal carcinomas (ER, 84.1%; PgR, 74.5%). The aggregate HER2 positivity (score 3+) rate was 9.0%. The aggregate HER2 equivocal (score 2+) rate was 14.5%. Of 81 equivocal (score 2+) cases, 70 (86.4%) were nonamplified.

CONCLUSIONS.—

The data from this study provide multi-institutional benchmark data to assist laboratories performing periodic comparisons as part of a quality management program. Overall expression rates were generally similar to those of other published reports, with the exception of the ER-negative and HER2-positive rates, both of which were somewhat lower.

Estrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer has distinct characteristics and pathologic complete response rate after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

PURPOSE

The status of hormone receptors (HR) is an independent factor affecting survival and chemotherapy sensitivity in breast cancer (BC) patients, with estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) having the most significant effects. The ER-/PR + phenotype has been controversial in BC, and experts will face many challenges in determining treatment strategies. Herein, we systematically analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics of the ER-/PR + phenotype in BC patients and the response to chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included two cohorts. The first cohort counted the relationship between clinicopathologic data and survival outcomes for 72,666 female patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The second cohort analyzed the relationship between clinicopathological data and pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in 879 patients at the Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital. The classification data were compared by the chi-square test and Fister's exact test of the Logistic regression model, and predictor variables with P < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were included in the multivariate regression analysis. The Kaplan-Meier method evaluated breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) to investigate the relationship between different HR typing and survival and pCR.

RESULTS

In the two cohorts, 704 (0.9%) and 11 (1.3%) patients had the ER-/PR + phenotype, respectively. The clinicopathologic features of patients with the ER-/PR + phenotype are more similar to those of the ER-/PR- phenotype. The ER-/PR + phenotype is more common in younger and premenopausal women, and most ER-/PR + phenotypes exhibit higher histological grades. Survival analysis showed that there were significant differences in OS and BCSS among patients with different HR states (P < 0.001). The survival results of patients with the ER + /PR + phenotype were the best. The prognosis of the ER-/PR + phenotype was similar to that of the ER-/PR- phenotype. On the other hand, we found that HR status was also an independent predictor of post-NAC pCR rate in BC patients. The ER + /PR- and ER-/PR- phenotypes were more sensitive to chemotherapy than the ER + /PR + phenotypes.

CONCLUSION

HR status is the main factor affecting BC's survival outcome and pCR rate. Patients with the ER-/PR + phenotype possess more aggressive biological factors and can benefit significantly from chemotherapy. We need to pay more attention to this group and achieve individualized treatment, which will help us treat BC better and provide new targets and blueprints for our clinical treatment.

The Clinical and Biological Significance of Estrogen Receptor-Low Positive Breast Cancer

Estrogen receptor (ER) status in breast cancer (BC) is determined using immunohistochemistry (IHC) with nuclear expression in ≥1% of cells defined as ER-positive. BC with 1%-9% expression (ER-low-positive), is a clinically and biologically unique subgroup. In this study, we hypothesized that ER-low-positive BC represents a heterogeneous group with a mixture of ER-positive and ER-negative tumor, which may explain their divergent clinical behavior. A large BC cohort (n = 8171) was investigated and categorized into 3 groups: ER-low-positive (1%-9%), ER-positive (≥10%), and ER-negative (<1%) where clinicopathological and outcome characteristics were compared. A subset of ER-low-positive cases was further evaluated using IHC, RNAscope, and RT-qPCR. PAM50 subtyping and ESR1 mRNA expression levels were assessed in ER-low-positive cases within The Cancer Genome Atlas data set. The reliability of image analysis software in assessment of ER expression in the ER-low-positive category was also assessed. ER-low-positive tumors constituted <2% of BC cases examined and showed significant clinicopathological similarity to ER-negative tumors. Most of these tumors were nonluminal types showing low ESR1 mRNA expression. Further validation of ER status revealed that 45% of these tumors were ER-negative with repeated IHC staining and confirmed by RNAscope and RT-qPCR. ER-low-positive tumors diagnosed on needle core biopsy were enriched with false-positive ER staining. BCs with 10% ER behaved similar to ER-positive, rather than ER-negative or low-positive BCs. Moderate concordance was found in assessment of ER-low-positive tumors, and this was not improved by image analysis. Routinely diagnosed ER-low-positive BC includes a proportion of ER-negative cases. We recommend repeat testing of BC showing 1%-9% ER expression and using a cutoff ≥10% expression to define ER positivity to help better inform treatment decisions.

Single progesterone receptor-positive phenotype has the similar clinicopathological features and outcome as triple-negative subtype in metastatic breast cancer

Objective

The same clinicopathological features and prognosis have been reported between single progesterone receptor-positive (sPR-positive) and triple-negative phenotype in early-stage breast cancer, but such similarity has not been studied in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to estimate the difference between sPR-positive phenotype and other phenotypes in MBC.

Methods

Patients with HER-2-negative MBC were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database. Pearson's χ2 test was used to compare the difference of clinicopathologic factors between sPR-positive phenotype and other phenotypes. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the effects of hormone receptor (HoR) phenotypes and other clinicopathologic factors on the cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

Overall, 10877 patients including 7060 patients (64.9%) with double HoR-positive (dHoR-positive), 1533 patients (14.1%) with single estrogen receptor-positive (sER-positive), 126 patients (1.2%) with sPR-positive and 2158 patients (19.8%) with double HoR-negative (dHoR-negative) were analyzed. The patients with sPR-positive or dHoR-negative were more likely to be younger, higher grade and tumor stage, visceral and brain metastasis than ER-positive phenotypes (P<0.001). MBC with sPR-positive had the similar CSS (HR: 1.135, 95%CI: 0.909-1.417, P=2.623) and OS (HR: 1.141, 95%CI: 0.921-1.413, P=0.229) as dHoR-negative, but worse outcome than ER-positive phenotypes. Chemotherapy significantly improved the survival for MBC, especially for sPR-positive MBC (CSS, HR: 0.39, 95%CI: 0.213-0.714, P=0.002; OS, HR: 0.366, 95%CI: 0.203-0.662, P=0.001).

Conclusions

Patients with sPR-positive and triple-negative have similar biological behavior and prognosis in MBC. Chemotherapy may be a preferred recommendation for MBC with sPR-positive.

A controversial ER negative PR positive molecular subtype of breast carcinoma-Report of two cases

ER-/PR+ is a controversial subtype and is not formally recognised as molecular subtype of breast carcinoma. Few studies concluded that this subtype does not exist and is due to technical errors, however, in contrast others consider it to be distinct entity with different response to therapy and clinical outcome. It is also essential to know whether this subtype shows any distinct histomorphological features or prognosis.Therefore, the present two cases of controversial subtype ER-/PR+ breast cancer is being reported with both the cases showing neuroendocrinal differentiation.

High expression of progesterone receptor may be an adverse prognostic factor in oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer: results of comprehensive re-evaluation of multi-institutional case series

Oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative (-) progesterone receptor (PgR)-positive (+) is the least common combination of steroid receptor expression observed in breast cancer. There are many controversies regarding the actual existence of ER-/PgR+ phenotype. In the current study, we aimed to perform comprehensive immunohistochemical re-evaluation of ER-/PgR+ breast cancers from multiple institutions. A total of 135 cases of ER-/PgR+ breast cancer were collected from 11 institutions from the period 2006-2020 and subsequently stained with three clinically validated anti-ER antibody clones: SP1 (Roche), 1D5 (Dako), and EP1 (Dako), and two anti-PgR antibody clones: 636 (Dako), and 1E2 (Roche). Clinicopathological characteristics of confirmed and re-categorised cases were analysed. Seventy-six cases retained the original ER-/PgR+ phenotype, including 21 HER2+ and 55 HER2- tumours. Forty-seven cases were ER+ with at least one anti-ER antibody, and 12 cases were re-categorised as double-negatives across all anti-ER and anti-PgR antibodies. No significant differences in survival were observed between groups in the HER2+ category. In the HER2- cohort, confirmed ER-/PgR+, ER+ tumours with discrepant ER staining, and triple negatives had inferior overall survival compared to concordant ER+ cases. Progesterone receptor expression in >20% of cells was identified as an adverse prognostic factor in ER-/PgR+/HER2- breast cancer in a multivariable model adjusted by stage (HR 5.0, 95% CI 1.3-19.2, p=0.019). We performed one of the largest validation studies so far on ER-/PgR+ breast cancer and confirmed the existence of this subgroup. Moreover, we identified high PgR expression as an adverse prognostic factor.

The Prognosis of Single Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Stratified by HER2 Status

Single estrogen receptor (ER)+ and progesterone receptor (PR)+ tumors account for about10% of all breast cancers. However, the prognosis of these single hormone receptor-positive (HR+) tumor remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the characteristics of single HR+ breast tumors according to HER2 status in order to improve the treatment of patients with single HR+. Patients from the SEER program (2010-2016) were divided into ER+PR-, ER-PR+, ER+PR+ and ER-PR- molecular subtypes stratified by HER2 status. Overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were compared by Kaplan–Meier curves after propensity score matching (PSM). A total of 203,406 patients were enrolled. Single ER+ and PR+ tumors account for 11.9% of the total population. For HER2- subtype, patients with ER+PR- (n = 16906 pairs) and ER-PR+ (n = 1395 pairs) had worse prognoses than those with ER+PR+ with hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.52 (1.41-1.64) and 2.25 (1.76-2.88) for OS; and 1.94 (1.76-2.14) and 2.57 (1.94-3.40) for BCSS, respectively; ER+PR- showed a better prognosis than ER-PR+ (n = 1394 pairs) and ER-PR- (n = 9626 pairs) with HR (95% CI) of 1.32 (1.06-1.65) and 1.44 (1.33-1.55) for OS, and 1.32 (1.03-1.69) and 1.46 (1.34-1.60) for BCSS, respectively; ER-PR+ had a similar prognosis relative to ER-PR- (n = 1395 pairs) after PSM. For HER2+ subtype, patients with ER-PR+, ER+PR-, and ER-PR- had similar OS and BCSS; ER+PR+ showed a similar prognosis compare with ER-PR+ (n = 535 pairs), but had better OS and BCSS than ER+PR- (n = 5376 pairs) and ER-PR- (n = 8143 pairs) after PSM. In addition, ER+PR+HER2+ showed similar OS and better BCSS compared with ER+PR+HER2- after PSM. In conclusion, single PR+ patients experienced poorer prognoses than single ER+ patients, and may be treated as ER-PR- patients in HER2- subtype. In HER2+ patients, both single ER+ and single PR+ cases showed similar prognoses compared with ER-PR- cases, and may be treated as ER-PR- patients.

Phenotypic discordance between primary and metastatic breast cancer in the large-scale real-life multicenter French ESME cohort

Expression of hormone receptor (HR) for estrogens (ER) and progesterone (PR) and HER2 remains the cornerstone to define the therapeutic strategy for breast cancer patients. We aimed to compare phenotypic profiles between matched primary and metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in the ESME database, a National real-life multicenter cohort of MBC patients. Patients with results available on both primary tumour and metastatic disease within 6 months of MBC diagnosis and before any tumour progression were eligible for the main analysis. Among the 16,703 patients included in the database, 1677 (10.0%) had available biopsy results at MBC diagnosis and on matched primary tumour. The change rate of either HR or HER2 was 27.0%. Global HR status changed (from positive = either ER or PR positive, to negative = both negative; and reverse) in 14.2% of the cases (expression loss in 72.5% and gain in 27.5%). HER2 status changed in 7.8% (amplification loss in 45.2%). The discordance rate appeared similar across different biopsy sites. Metastasis to bone, HER2+ and RH+/HER2- subtypes and previous adjuvant endocrine therapy, but not relapse interval were associated with an HR discordance in multivariable analysis. Loss of HR status was significantly associated with a risk of death (HR adjusted = 1.51, p = 0.002) while gain of HR and HER2 discordance was not. In conclusion, discordance of HR and HER2 expression between primary and metastatic breast cancer cannot be neglected. In addition, HR loss is associated with worse survival. Sampling metastatic sites is essential for treatment adjustment.

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Update

PURPOSE.—

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS.—

A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.

RECOMMENDATIONS.—

The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: ASCO/CAP Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Time resolved gene expression analysis during tamoxifen adaption of MCF-7 cells identifies long non-coding RNAs with prognostic impact

Acquired tamoxifen resistance is a persistent problem for the treatment of estrogen receptor positive, premenopausal breast cancer patients and predictive biomarkers are still elusive. We here analyzed gene expression changes in a cellular model to identify early and late changes upon tamoxifen exposure and thereby novel prognostic biomarkers. Estrogen receptor positive MCF-7 cells were incubated with 4OH-tamoxifen (10 nM) and gene expression analyzed by array hybridization during 12 weeks. Array results were confirmed by nCounter- and qRT-PCR technique. Pathway enrichment analysis revealed that early responses concerned mainly amine synthesis and NRF2-related signaling and evolved into a stable gene expression pattern within 4 weeks characterized by changes in glucuronidation-, estrogen metabolism-, nuclear receptor- and interferon signaling pathways. As a large number of long non coding RNAs was subject to regulation, we investigated 5 of these (linc01213, linc00632 linc0992, LOC101929547 and XR_133213) in more detail. From these, only linc01213 was upregulated but all were less abundant in estrogen-receptor negative cell lines (MDA-MB 231, SKBR-3 and UACC3199). In a web-based survival analysis linc01213 and linc00632 turned out to have prognostic impact. Linc01213 was investigated further by plasmid-mediated over-expression as well as siRNA down-regulation in MCF-7 cells. Nevertheless, this had no effect on proliferation or expression of tamoxifen regulated genes, but migration was increased. In conclusion, the cellular model identified a set of lincRNAs with prognostic relevance for breast cancer. One of these, linc01213 although regulated by 4OH-tamoxifen, is not a central regulator of tamoxifen adaption, but interferes with the regulation of migration.