World Journal of Surgical Oncology (Jan 2020)

Assessment of outcomes and novel immune biomarkers in metaplastic breast cancer: a single institution retrospective study

  • Evan Morgan,
  • Anupama Suresh,
  • Akaansha Ganju,
  • Daniel G. Stover,
  • Robert Wesolowski,
  • Sagar Sardesai,
  • Anne Noonan,
  • Raquel Reinbolt,
  • Jeffrey VanDeusen,
  • Nicole Williams,
  • Mathew A. Cherian,
  • Zaibo Li,
  • Gregory Young,
  • Marilly Palettas,
  • Julie Stephens,
  • Joseph Liu,
  • Amanda Luff,
  • Bhuvaneswari Ramaswamy,
  • Maryam Lustberg

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-019-1780-8
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 18, no. 1
pp. 1 – 12

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Metaplastic breast cancer remains poorly characterized given its rarity and heterogeneity. The majority of metaplastic breast cancers demonstrate a phenotype of triple-negative breast cancer; however, differences in clinical outcomes between metaplastic breast cancer and triple-negative breast cancer in the era of third-generation chemotherapy remain unclear. Methods We compared the clinical outcomes between women with metaplastic breast cancer and women with triple-negative breast cancer diagnosed between 1994 and 2014. Metaplastic breast cancer patients were matched 1:3 to triple-negative breast cancer patients by stage and age at diagnosis. Distant disease-free survival (DDFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan Meier methods and Cox proportional hazard regression models. Immune checkpoint markers were characterized by immunohistochemistry in a subset of samples. Results Forty-four metaplastic breast cancer patients (stage I 14%; stage II 73%; stage III 11%; stage IV 2%) with an average age of 55.4 (± 13.9) years at diagnosis. Median follow-up for the included metaplastic breast cancer and triple-negative breast cancer patients (n = 174) was 2.8 (0.1–19.0) years. The DDFS and OS between matched metaplastic breast cancer and triple-negative breast cancer patients were similar, even when adjusting for clinical covariates (DDFS: HR = 1.64, p = 0.22; OS: HR = 1.64, p = 0.26). Metaplastic breast cancer samples (n = 27) demonstrated greater amount of CD163 in the stroma (p = 0.05) and PD-L1 in the tumor (p = 0.01) than triple-negative breast cancer samples (n = 119), although more triple-negative breast cancer samples were positive for CD8 in the tumor than metaplastic breast cancer samples (p = 0.02). Conclusions Patients with metaplastic breast cancer had similar outcomes to those with triple-negative breast cancer based on DDFS and OS. The immune checkpoint marker profile of metaplastic breast cancers in this study may prove useful in future studies attempting to demonstrate an association between immune profile and survival.

Keywords