Cargando…

Clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND: Molecular classification of tumour clonality is currently not evaluated in multiple invasive breast carcinomas, despite evidence suggesting common clonal origins. There is no consensus about which type of data (e.g. copy number, mutation, histology) and especially which statistical metho...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Biermann, Jana, Parris, Toshima Z., Nemes, Szilárd, Danielsson, Anna, Engqvist, Hanna, Werner Rönnerman, Elisabeth, Forssell-Aronsson, Eva, Kovács, Anikó, Karlsson, Per, Helou, Khalil
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6085699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30092821
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13058-018-1022-y
_version_ 1783346387248742400
author Biermann, Jana
Parris, Toshima Z.
Nemes, Szilárd
Danielsson, Anna
Engqvist, Hanna
Werner Rönnerman, Elisabeth
Forssell-Aronsson, Eva
Kovács, Anikó
Karlsson, Per
Helou, Khalil
author_facet Biermann, Jana
Parris, Toshima Z.
Nemes, Szilárd
Danielsson, Anna
Engqvist, Hanna
Werner Rönnerman, Elisabeth
Forssell-Aronsson, Eva
Kovács, Anikó
Karlsson, Per
Helou, Khalil
author_sort Biermann, Jana
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Molecular classification of tumour clonality is currently not evaluated in multiple invasive breast carcinomas, despite evidence suggesting common clonal origins. There is no consensus about which type of data (e.g. copy number, mutation, histology) and especially which statistical method is most suitable to distinguish clonal recurrences from independent primary tumours. METHODS: Thirty-seven invasive breast tumour pairs were stratified according to laterality and time interval between the diagnoses of the two tumours. In a multi-omics approach, tumour clonality was analysed by integrating clinical characteristics (n = 37), DNA copy number (n = 37), DNA methylation (n = 8), gene expression microarray (n = 7), RNA sequencing (n = 3), and SNP genotyping data (n = 3). Different statistical methods, e.g. the diagnostic similarity index (SI), were used to classify the tumours as clonally related recurrences or independent primary tumours. RESULTS: The SI and hierarchical clustering showed similar tendencies and the highest concordance with the other methods. Concordant evidence for tumour clonality was found in 46% (17/37) of patients. Notably, no association was found between the current clinical guidelines and molecular tumour features. CONCLUSIONS: A more accurate classification of clonal relatedness between multiple breast tumours may help to mitigate treatment failure and relapse by integrating tumour-associated molecular features, clinical parameters, and statistical methods. Guidelines need to be defined with exact thresholds to standardise clonality testing in a routine diagnostic setting. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13058-018-1022-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6085699
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60856992018-08-16 Clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients Biermann, Jana Parris, Toshima Z. Nemes, Szilárd Danielsson, Anna Engqvist, Hanna Werner Rönnerman, Elisabeth Forssell-Aronsson, Eva Kovács, Anikó Karlsson, Per Helou, Khalil Breast Cancer Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Molecular classification of tumour clonality is currently not evaluated in multiple invasive breast carcinomas, despite evidence suggesting common clonal origins. There is no consensus about which type of data (e.g. copy number, mutation, histology) and especially which statistical method is most suitable to distinguish clonal recurrences from independent primary tumours. METHODS: Thirty-seven invasive breast tumour pairs were stratified according to laterality and time interval between the diagnoses of the two tumours. In a multi-omics approach, tumour clonality was analysed by integrating clinical characteristics (n = 37), DNA copy number (n = 37), DNA methylation (n = 8), gene expression microarray (n = 7), RNA sequencing (n = 3), and SNP genotyping data (n = 3). Different statistical methods, e.g. the diagnostic similarity index (SI), were used to classify the tumours as clonally related recurrences or independent primary tumours. RESULTS: The SI and hierarchical clustering showed similar tendencies and the highest concordance with the other methods. Concordant evidence for tumour clonality was found in 46% (17/37) of patients. Notably, no association was found between the current clinical guidelines and molecular tumour features. CONCLUSIONS: A more accurate classification of clonal relatedness between multiple breast tumours may help to mitigate treatment failure and relapse by integrating tumour-associated molecular features, clinical parameters, and statistical methods. Guidelines need to be defined with exact thresholds to standardise clonality testing in a routine diagnostic setting. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13058-018-1022-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-08-09 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6085699/ /pubmed/30092821 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13058-018-1022-y Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Biermann, Jana
Parris, Toshima Z.
Nemes, Szilárd
Danielsson, Anna
Engqvist, Hanna
Werner Rönnerman, Elisabeth
Forssell-Aronsson, Eva
Kovács, Anikó
Karlsson, Per
Helou, Khalil
Clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients
title Clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients
title_full Clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients
title_fullStr Clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients
title_full_unstemmed Clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients
title_short Clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients
title_sort clonal relatedness in tumour pairs of breast cancer patients
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6085699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30092821
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13058-018-1022-y
work_keys_str_mv AT biermannjana clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients
AT parristoshimaz clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients
AT nemesszilard clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients
AT danielssonanna clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients
AT engqvisthanna clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients
AT wernerronnermanelisabeth clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients
AT forssellaronssoneva clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients
AT kovacsaniko clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients
AT karlssonper clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients
AT heloukhalil clonalrelatednessintumourpairsofbreastcancerpatients