학술논문

Impact of the menstrual cycle on commercial prognostic gene signatures in oestrogen receptor-positive primary breast cancer
Document Type
Academic Journal
Source
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. November, 2021, Vol. 190 Issue 2, p295, 11 p.
Subject
Genes -- Research
Progesterone -- Research
Menstruation -- Research
Cancer -- Genetic aspects
Estrogen -- Research
Breast cancer -- Research
Epidermal growth factor -- Research
Language
English
ISSN
0167-6806
Abstract
Purpose Changes occur in the expression of oestrogen-regulated and proliferation-associated genes in oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast tumours during the menstrual cycle. We investigated if Oncotype® DX recurrence score (RS), Prosigna® (ROR) and EndoPredict® (EP/EPclin) prognostic tests, which include some of these genes, vary according to the time in the menstrual cycle when they are measured. Methods Pairs of test scores were derived from 30 ER-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative tumours sampled at two different points of the menstrual cycle. Menstrual cycle windows were prospectively defined as either W1 (days 1-6 and 27-35; low oestrogen and low progesterone) or W2 (days 7-26; high oestrogen and high or low progesterone). Results The invasion module score of RS was lower (- 10.9%; p = 0.098), whereas the ER (+ 16.6%; p = 0.046) and proliferation (+ 7.3%; p = 0.13) module scores were higher in W2. PGR expression was significantly increased in W2 (+ 81.4%; p = 0.0029). Despite this, mean scores were not significantly different between W1 and W2 for any of the tests and the two measurements showed high correlation (r = 0.72-0.93). However, variability between the two measurements led to tumours being assigned to different risk categories in the following proportion of cases: RS 22.7%, ROR 27.3%, EP 13.6% and EPclin 13.6%. Conclusion There are significant changes during the menstrual cycle in the expression of some of the genes and gene module scores comprising the RS, ROR and EP/EPclin scores. These did not affect any of the prognostic scores in a systematic fashion, but there was substantial variability in paired measurements.
Author(s): Ben P. Haynes [sup.1], Gene Schuster [sup.1] [sup.2], Richard Buus [sup.1] [sup.2], Anastasia Alataki [sup.1] [sup.2], Ophira Ginsburg [sup.3] [sup.4], Le Hong Quang [sup.5], Pham Thi Han [sup.6], Pham [...]