Expression Profiles Can Predict Both General Chemotherapy and Gemcitabine-Specific Responses in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Therapy

D. S. Oh,L. A. Carey,C. Fan,L. Sawyer,Z. Hu,D. Ma,C. Perou
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.10008
IF: 45.3
2006-01-01
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Abstract:10008 Background: The identification of markers predictive of neoadjuvant chemotherapy response would be an important advance. Therefore, we sought to identify gene expression profiles predictive of neoadjuvant response and evaluated their drug specificity. Methods: DNA microarray analysis was performed on pre-treatment core biopsies from two different locally advanced breast cancer patient sets receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy; the first set (L9819) was treated with 4 cycles of doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by 4 cycles of paclitaxel (T) or paclitaxel + trastuzumab (TH). The second patient set (S329) received 4 cycles of gemcitabine + doxorubicin followed by 4 cycles of gemcitabine + cisplatin. Clinical response was based on RECIST criteria. Results: We obtained successful microarrays on 44 (L9819) and 46 (S329) of the patients enrolled. Ten-fold cross-validated supervised analyses separately performed on each dataset identified gene expression patterns that accurately predicted (75–85% accuracy) response (clinical complete responders vs. others) evaluated on those patients that completed all 8 cycles of chemotherapy. The predictive expression patterns from the L9819 trial were significantly enriched for apoptosis genes, while the predictive gene set from the S329 trial was enriched for nucleotide metabolism genes. The L9819 predictor was able to accurately predict (75% accuracy) response for the S329 patients, however, the S329 predictor was not able to predict response on the L9819 trial (50% accuracy). We speculate that the L9819 predictor was able to predict response on the S329 dataset (despite the fact that only doxorubicin was common to both trials) because this profile was enriched for apoptosis genes that may reflect a general mechanism of chemotherapy response/resistance, while the S329 predictor was more tuned to gemcitabine’s specific mechanism of action. Conclusions: This study may provide the means to predict response to AC-T(H) and GA-GC neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The ability of one predictor to work on the other dataset, but not vise versa, suggests that both general chemotherapy and drug specific response profiles may have been identified. [Table: see text]
What problem does this paper attempt to address?