4.8 Article

Aromatase inhibition remodels the clonal architecture of estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancers

Journal

Nature Communications
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms12498

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health [U10CA180821, U10CA180882, 5U10CA180833, 5U10CA180858]
  2. National Human Genome Research Institute [U54HG003079]
  3. National Cancer Institute [R01-CA095614, U24-CA114736, U10-CA076001, U01-CA114722]
  4. Breast Cancer Research Foundation
  5. Komen Promise Grant, a Komen St Louis Affiliate Clinical Trials Grant [PG12220321]
  6. Pfizer [Z1031]
  7. Novartis [Z1031]
  8. Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas [RR140033]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Resistance to oestrogen-deprivation therapy is common in oestrogen-receptor- positive (ER + ) breast cancer. To better understand the contributions of tumour heterogeneity and evolution to resistance, here we perform comprehensive genomic characterization of 22 primary tumours sampled before and after 4 months of neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor (NAI) treatment. Comparing whole-genome sequencing of tumour/normal pairs from the two time points, with coincident tumour RNA sequencing, reveals widespread spatial and temporal heterogeneity, with marked remodelling of the clonal landscape in response to NAI. Two cases have genomic evidence of two independent tumours, most obviously an ER- 'collision tumour', which was only detected after NAI treatment of baseline ER + disease. Many mutations are newly detected or enriched post treatment, including two ligand-binding domain mutations in ESR1. The observed clonal complexity of the ER + breast cancer genome suggests that precision medicine approaches based on genomic analysis of a single specimen are likely insufficient to capture all clinically significant information.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available