Cargando…

Mixed ductal‐lobular carcinomas: evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology

Mixed ductal–lobular carcinomas (MDLs) show both ductal and lobular morphology, and constitute an archetypal example of intratumoural morphological heterogeneity. The mechanisms underlying the coexistence of these different morphological entities are poorly understood, although theories include that...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McCart Reed, Amy E, Kutasovic, Jamie R, Nones, Katia, Saunus, Jodi M, Da Silva, Leonard, Newell, Felicity, Kazakoff, Stephen, Melville, Lewis, Jayanthan, Janani, Vargas, Ana Cristina, Reid, Lynne E, Beesley, Jonathan, Chen, Xiao Qing, Patch, Anne-Marie, Clouston, David, Porter, Alan, Evans, Elizabeth, Pearson, John V, Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia, Cummings, Margaret C, Waddell, Nicola, Lakhani, Sunil R, Simpson, Peter T
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5873281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29344954
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/path.5040
_version_ 1783310014060953600
author McCart Reed, Amy E
Kutasovic, Jamie R
Nones, Katia
Saunus, Jodi M
Da Silva, Leonard
Newell, Felicity
Kazakoff, Stephen
Melville, Lewis
Jayanthan, Janani
Vargas, Ana Cristina
Reid, Lynne E
Beesley, Jonathan
Chen, Xiao Qing
Patch, Anne-Marie
Clouston, David
Porter, Alan
Evans, Elizabeth
Pearson, John V
Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia
Cummings, Margaret C
Waddell, Nicola
Lakhani, Sunil R
Simpson, Peter T
author_facet McCart Reed, Amy E
Kutasovic, Jamie R
Nones, Katia
Saunus, Jodi M
Da Silva, Leonard
Newell, Felicity
Kazakoff, Stephen
Melville, Lewis
Jayanthan, Janani
Vargas, Ana Cristina
Reid, Lynne E
Beesley, Jonathan
Chen, Xiao Qing
Patch, Anne-Marie
Clouston, David
Porter, Alan
Evans, Elizabeth
Pearson, John V
Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia
Cummings, Margaret C
Waddell, Nicola
Lakhani, Sunil R
Simpson, Peter T
author_sort McCart Reed, Amy E
collection PubMed
description Mixed ductal–lobular carcinomas (MDLs) show both ductal and lobular morphology, and constitute an archetypal example of intratumoural morphological heterogeneity. The mechanisms underlying the coexistence of these different morphological entities are poorly understood, although theories include that these components either represent ‘collision’ of independent tumours or evolve from a common ancestor. We performed comprehensive clinicopathological analysis of a cohort of 82 MDLs, and found that: (1) MDLs more frequently coexist with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) than with lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS); (2) the E‐cadherin–catenin complex was normal in the ductal component in 77.6% of tumours; and (3) in the lobular component, E‐cadherin was almost always aberrantly located in the cytoplasm, in contrast to invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), where E‐cadherin is typically absent. Comparative genomic hybridization and multiregion whole exome sequencing of four representative cases revealed that all morphologically distinct components within an individual case were clonally related. The mutations identified varied between cases; those associated with a common clonal ancestry included BRCA2, TBX3, and TP53, whereas those associated with clonal divergence included CDH1 and ESR1. Together, these data support a model in which separate morphological components of MDLs arise from a common ancestor, and lobular morphology can arise via a ductal pathway of tumour progression. In MDLs that present with LCIS and DCIS, the clonal divergence probably occurs early, and is frequently associated with complete loss of E‐cadherin expression, as in ILC, whereas, in the majority of MDLs, which present with DCIS but not LCIS, direct clonal divergence from the ductal to the lobular phenotype occurs late in tumour evolution, and is associated with aberrant expression of E‐cadherin. The mechanisms driving the phenotypic change may involve E‐cadherin–catenin complex deregulation, but are yet to be fully elucidated, as there is significant intertumoural heterogeneity, and each case may have a unique molecular mechanism. © 2018 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5873281
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58732812018-03-31 Mixed ductal‐lobular carcinomas: evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology McCart Reed, Amy E Kutasovic, Jamie R Nones, Katia Saunus, Jodi M Da Silva, Leonard Newell, Felicity Kazakoff, Stephen Melville, Lewis Jayanthan, Janani Vargas, Ana Cristina Reid, Lynne E Beesley, Jonathan Chen, Xiao Qing Patch, Anne-Marie Clouston, David Porter, Alan Evans, Elizabeth Pearson, John V Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia Cummings, Margaret C Waddell, Nicola Lakhani, Sunil R Simpson, Peter T J Pathol Original Papers Mixed ductal–lobular carcinomas (MDLs) show both ductal and lobular morphology, and constitute an archetypal example of intratumoural morphological heterogeneity. The mechanisms underlying the coexistence of these different morphological entities are poorly understood, although theories include that these components either represent ‘collision’ of independent tumours or evolve from a common ancestor. We performed comprehensive clinicopathological analysis of a cohort of 82 MDLs, and found that: (1) MDLs more frequently coexist with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) than with lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS); (2) the E‐cadherin–catenin complex was normal in the ductal component in 77.6% of tumours; and (3) in the lobular component, E‐cadherin was almost always aberrantly located in the cytoplasm, in contrast to invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), where E‐cadherin is typically absent. Comparative genomic hybridization and multiregion whole exome sequencing of four representative cases revealed that all morphologically distinct components within an individual case were clonally related. The mutations identified varied between cases; those associated with a common clonal ancestry included BRCA2, TBX3, and TP53, whereas those associated with clonal divergence included CDH1 and ESR1. Together, these data support a model in which separate morphological components of MDLs arise from a common ancestor, and lobular morphology can arise via a ductal pathway of tumour progression. In MDLs that present with LCIS and DCIS, the clonal divergence probably occurs early, and is frequently associated with complete loss of E‐cadherin expression, as in ILC, whereas, in the majority of MDLs, which present with DCIS but not LCIS, direct clonal divergence from the ductal to the lobular phenotype occurs late in tumour evolution, and is associated with aberrant expression of E‐cadherin. The mechanisms driving the phenotypic change may involve E‐cadherin–catenin complex deregulation, but are yet to be fully elucidated, as there is significant intertumoural heterogeneity, and each case may have a unique molecular mechanism. © 2018 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2018-03-09 2018-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5873281/ /pubmed/29344954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/path.5040 Text en © 2018 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Papers
McCart Reed, Amy E
Kutasovic, Jamie R
Nones, Katia
Saunus, Jodi M
Da Silva, Leonard
Newell, Felicity
Kazakoff, Stephen
Melville, Lewis
Jayanthan, Janani
Vargas, Ana Cristina
Reid, Lynne E
Beesley, Jonathan
Chen, Xiao Qing
Patch, Anne-Marie
Clouston, David
Porter, Alan
Evans, Elizabeth
Pearson, John V
Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia
Cummings, Margaret C
Waddell, Nicola
Lakhani, Sunil R
Simpson, Peter T
Mixed ductal‐lobular carcinomas: evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology
title Mixed ductal‐lobular carcinomas: evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology
title_full Mixed ductal‐lobular carcinomas: evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology
title_fullStr Mixed ductal‐lobular carcinomas: evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology
title_full_unstemmed Mixed ductal‐lobular carcinomas: evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology
title_short Mixed ductal‐lobular carcinomas: evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology
title_sort mixed ductal‐lobular carcinomas: evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology
topic Original Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5873281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29344954
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/path.5040
work_keys_str_mv AT mccartreedamye mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT kutasovicjamier mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT noneskatia mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT saunusjodim mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT dasilvaleonard mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT newellfelicity mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT kazakoffstephen mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT melvillelewis mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT jayanthanjanani mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT vargasanacristina mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT reidlynnee mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT beesleyjonathan mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT chenxiaoqing mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT patchannemarie mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT cloustondavid mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT porteralan mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT evanselizabeth mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT pearsonjohnv mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT chenevixtrenchgeorgia mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT cummingsmargaretc mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT waddellnicola mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT lakhanisunilr mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology
AT simpsonpetert mixedductallobularcarcinomasevidenceforprogressionfromductaltolobularmorphology