Erratum to: Breast cancer subtype predictors revisited: from consensus to concordance?

An Improved, Assay Platform Agnostic, Absolute Single Sample Breast Cancer Subtype Classifier

While intrinsic molecular subtypes provide important biological classification of breast cancer, the subtype assignment of individuals is influenced by assay technology and study cohort composition. We sought to develop a platform-independent absolute single-sample subtype classifier based on a minimal number of genes. Pairwise ratios for subtype-specific differentially expressed genes from un-normalized expression data from 432 breast cancer (BC) samples of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were used as inputs for machine learning. The subtype classifier with the fewest number of genes and maximal classification power was selected during cross-validation. The final model was evaluated on 5816 samples from 10 independent studies profiled with four different assay platforms. Upon cross-validation within the TCGA cohort, a random forest classifier (MiniABS) with 11 genes achieved the best accuracy of 88.2%. Applying MiniABS to five validation sets of RNA-seq and microarray data showed an average accuracy of 85.15% (vs. 77.72% for Absolute Intrinsic Molecular Subtype (AIMS)). Only MiniABS could be applied to five low-throughput datasets, showing an average accuracy of 87.93%. The MiniABS can absolutely subtype BC using the raw expression levels of only 11 genes, regardless of assay platform, with higher accuracy than existing methods.

How Different Are the Molecular Mechanisms of Nodal and Distant Metastasis in Luminal A Breast Cancer?

Simple Summary

Lymph node status is one of the best prognostic factors in breast cancer, however, its association with distant metastasis is not straightforward. Here we compare molecular mechanisms of nodal and distant metastasis in molecular subtypes of breast cancer, with major focus on luminal A patients. Our results indicate that lymph node positivity is associated with NF-κB and Src pathways and is related to high risk of distant metastasis in luminal A patients. Distant metastasis of lymph node negative tumors is related to cell proliferation control and thrombolysis, whereas distant metastasis of lymph node positive tumors is associated mostly to immune response. These mechanisms vary in other molecular subtypes. Our data indicate that the management of breast cancer and prevention of distant metastasis requires stratified approach based on targeted strategies.

Abstract

Lymph node status is one of the best prognostic factors in breast cancer, however, its association with distant metastasis is not straightforward. Here we compare molecular mechanisms of nodal and distant metastasis in molecular subtypes of breast cancer, with major focus on luminal A patients. We analyze a new cohort of 706 patients (MMCI_706) as well as an independent cohort of 836 primary tumors with full gene expression information (SUPERTAM_HGU133A). We evaluate the risk of distant metastasis, analyze targetable molecular mechanisms in Gene Set Enrichment Analysis and identify relevant inhibitors. Lymph node positivity is generally associated with NF-κB and Src pathways and is related to high risk (OR: 5.062 and 2.401 in MMCI_706 and SUPERTAM_HGU133A, respectively, p < 0.05) of distant metastasis in luminal A patients. However, a part (≤15%) of lymph node negative tumors at the diagnosis develop the distant metastasis which is related to cell proliferation control and thrombolysis. Distant metastasis of lymph node positive patients is mostly associated with immune response. These pro-metastatic mechanisms further vary in other molecular subtypes. Our data indicate that the management of breast cancer and prevention of distant metastasis requires stratified approach based on targeted strategies.