[History of the anatomical and clinical autopsy]

The history of the autopsy is naturally also a part of the history of anatomy and pathology and spans over about 2300 years. The first documented autopsies were conducted in about 300 B.C. Thereafter, due to the prohibition of dissections due to religious, social, or hygienic reasons, a long period of stagnation took place. With the onset of the Renaissance in the 15th and 16th century, interest in the ancient sciences such as anatomy began to rise and consequently an increasing number of dissections for anatomical studies were conducted. Nevertheless, it took nearly 200 years until clinical symptoms and/or causes of disease and death were correlated with anatomical findings. In the second half of the 19th century, the clinical autopsy based on the combination of macroscopic and microscopic findings became more and more important as a precondition for the systematic description of diseases. Based on autopsy findings and together with several new techniques, modern pathology could be established at the beginning of the 20th century as a source of scientific knowledge for the clinical medicine and as a theoretical discipline of its own.

Prognostic and Predictive Impact of Expression of the Angiogenic Markers CD105 and CD31 Expression in Patients with High Risk Breast Cancer (HRBC)

Purpose: Several angiogenic factors have been reported to influence prognosis of breast cancer and spread to regional lymph nodes. CD105 (Endoglin) is expressed by human vascular endothelial cells and plays a major role in angiogenesis. Similarly, CD31 is a platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule involved in normal and pathologic vessel function. In the prospective randomized WSG-AM-01 trial HRBC patients with more than 9 positive lymph nodes derived particular benefit from tandem high-dose (HD) rather than dose-dense (DD) chemotherapy with regard to both event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS), particularly among tumors carrying a basal-like or HER2 molecular phenotype. The goal of the present study was to examine the interaction between angiogenic factors and efficacy of different dose intensification strategies in the WSG-AM-01 trial among both unselected patients as well as among distinct molecular disease subtypes.Methods: Immunohistochemical staining for CD31 (n=128) and CD105 (n=130) was performed to assess vascular surface area (VSA) separately for both factors using the Chalkley count method.Expression of estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR), HER2, Ki67, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) was analyzed immunohistochemically using tissue microarrays, allowing for stratification into molecular breast cancer subclasses (k-clustering k=5 by expression of 24 proteins). Correlation analysis between CD31 and CD105 expression and molecular subtypes was carried out using Pearson correlations. Univariate survival estimates were determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis and tested for significance by log rank statistics. Multivariate survival modeling was performed by a generalized Cox model, with linear proportional hazards terms in the first block and time-varying interactions in the second block.Results: Both VSA/CD 31 and VSA/CD105 showed significantly higher expression among HER-2 and basal-like breast cancer subtypes (p=0.007), as well as among cases wit increased Ki67 (p=0.005).Increased VSA/CD105 (above a median of 1.295) was associated with significantly decreases in both EFS (p=0.01) and OS (p=0.02). In multivariate analysis (including therapy, tumor size, age and grade as well as expression of ER, PR, HER-2 and Ki-67) increased VSA/CD 105 was an independent prognostic factor for decreased EFS (HR=1.68, p=0.05). Dose intensification showed significantly increased efficacy (for OS and EFS) only among patients with low VSA/CD105 tumors.Discussion: Expression of angiogenic markers may mirror/confer resistance to chemotherapy among patients with breast cancer, particularly in the context of dose intensified chemotherapy and may explain differences observed among distinct molecular breast cancer phenotypes. The correlation observed between angiogenic markers and distinct molecular subtypes may serve as a rationale for exploring antiangiogenic treatment options in patients carrying these tumors.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 2154.

YB-1 expression and effectiveness of different dose-intensification strategies in high-risk breast cancer: Five-year follow-up results of prospective randomized WSG-AM-01 trial

563

Background: Y-box binding protein (YB-1), known as oncogenic transcription factor, is associated with up-regulation of MDR1, alters p53 function, and induces growth of an aggressive phenotype. In high-risk breast cancer, the prospective randomized WSG-AM-01 trial has reported significantly better event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) for tandem high-dose (HD) vs. dose-dense (DD) chemotherapy, especially in basal-like und HER2 subgroups. The present study examines the interaction of a drug resistant phenotype induced by YB-1 within the WSG-AM-01 collective at 5-year follow-up. Methods: 236 tumors (116 HD/120 DD) of 403 randomized patients (60%) were available for construction of tissue microarrays and determination of molecular classification by k-clustering of expression of 34 protein markers. Immunostaining of YB-1 by specific peptide antibody was scored semiquatitatively by intensity. Associations of YB-1 staining with other protein expression factors were studied by Pearson correlations. Univariate survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and tested by log rank statistics. Multivariate survival modeling was performed by a generalized Cox model, with linear proportional hazards terms in the first block and time-varying interactions in the second block. Results: At a median follow-up of 61.7 months, the WSG-AM-01 confirms a significant EFS and OS benefit for HD in HRBC. In 60% of tumors, there was strong YB-1 expression. YB-1 was significantly associated with several proliferation and drug resistance markers, such as p53, EGFR, S6 and with basal-like/Her2 subtypes.YB-1 expression was highly predictive for response to HD: both EFS (HR=0.29, p=0.001) and OS (HR=0.16, p=0.0001) were significantly improved by HD compared to DD for YB-1 positive tumors; these favorable time-varying hazard ratios signify decreases in early (≤3 years) relapses and deaths, respectively. Conclusions: Among all investigated markers, only YB-1 expression was significantly associated by time- varying interaction analysis with efficacy of HD. The results suggest YB-1 as a potential stratification criterion for future trials as well as a target for treatment of drug resistant HRBC.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

[Prognostic and predictive impact of protein expression profiling in high risk breast cancer patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy]

The prognostic and predictive impact of protein expression profiles was analyzed in high-risk breast cancer patients who had previously been shown to benefit from high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) in comparison to dose-dense chemotherapy (DDCT). Using tissue microarrays, the expression of 34 protein markers was evaluated in 236 patients who had received either HDCT or DDCT (in the WSG AM01 trial). 1) 24 protein markers of the initial panel of 34 markers were sufficient to identify five profile clusters by K-means clustering: luminal A (27%), luminal B (12%), HER-2 (21%), basal-like (13%) cluster and a so called 'multiple marker negative'=MMN cluster (27%) characterized by the absence of specifying markers. 2) After DDCT, HER-2 and basal-like groups had significantly worse event-free survival (EFS) (HR 3.6 (95% CI, 1.65-8.18; p = 0.001) and HR 3.7 (95% CI, 1.68-8.48); p < 0.0001), respectively) when compared to both luminal groups. 3) After HDCT, the hazard ratio was 1.5 (95% CI, 0.76-3.05) for EFS in the HER-2 subgroups and 1.1 (95% CI, 0.37-3.32) in the basal-like subgroups which indicates a better outcome for patients in the HER-2 and basal-like subgroups who received HDCT. Protein expression profiling in high-risk breast cancers identified 5 subtypes, which differed with respect to survival and response to chemotherapy: In contrast to luminal A and B subtypes, HER-2 and basal-like subgroups had a significant predictive benefit from HDCT when compared to DDCT.

Retrospective analysis of WSG AM01 tandem high dose chemotherapy trial in high risk primary breast cancer: A hypothesis generating study

665

Background: The WSG AM 01 trial is the first one to report superiority of HDC in terms of DFS and OS in patients with >9 positive axillary lymph nodes. Retrospectively we tried to identify patient subgroups with maximum benefit from HDC. Methods: 403 patients were randomized to tandem HDC or to dose-dense conventional chemotherapy (DD). 236 tumors were available for central pathologic review (117/119). A panel of 34 markers were determined by IHC in TMA. Kaplan-Meier, Log rank and Cox proportional hazard models were used for uni- and multivariate analysis. We choose K-means clustering with K=5 and using Manhattan distance as similarity measure. Results: Pts: n=236 (HDC/DD): mean age 47.3/47.4 yrs, mean tumor sizes 3.5/3.4cm, mean positive lymph nodes 17.2/17.0, HR+ 55%/53%, G3 44%/35%. HDC was superior to DD (p=0.02). Multivariate analysis demonstrated a significant correlation for grading, tumor size, PR+. HR > 2 were reported for the following markers: Her2neu+, p53+, bcl2−, Ck 5/6 and 17+, Ck8−, c-kit+, vimentin+, ETR 1/2, BCRP+. Triple negative tumors (TN) (31%) had a large benefit from HDC (HR DD vs. HD: 3.06, 95%CI:1.41–6.06). Groups identified by K-means clustering could be attributed to luminal-A-(31%), luminal-B-(27%), her2-(11%), basal like-(11%) type and a so far undefined proliferative group (20%) characterized mainly by the absence of specifying markers. Interestingly, the proportion of the above mentioned molecular subtypes within of high risk populations very similar to those reported for less selected populations. Her2, basal-like and the undefined proliferative group had significantly worse outcome when compared to luminal tumors (p<0.01). Very poor prognosis if treated by conventional CT was observed in basal like (HR DD vs HD=2.66 95%CI: 0.9–7.9) und the undefined group (HR=1,72, 95%CI:0.92–3.21), where most of the TN tumors were found. Conclusions: Tandem HDC is superior to DD conventional CT for treatment of HRBC. The largest benefit from high dose chemotherapy was reported for younger patients with TN poor differentiated tumors, >2cm. Negative hormone receptor status, p53+, bcl2−, MIB/p16+ and BCRP+ predicted benefit from dose intensification. Subgroups are small and may help to generate further hypothesises.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.