Expression of Cyclins A, E and Topoisomerase II α correlates with centrosome amplification and genomic instability and influences the reliability of cytometric S-phase determination

BACKGROUND: The progression of normal cells through the cell cycle is meticulously regulated by checkpoints guaranteeing the exact replication of the genome during S-phase and its equal division at mitosis. A prerequisite for this achievement is synchronized DNA-replication and centrosome duplication. In this context the expression of cyclins A and E has been shown to play a principal role. RESULTS: Our results demonstrated a correlation between centrosome amplification, cell cycle fidelity and the level of mRNA and protein expression of cyclins A and E during the part of the cell cycle defined as G1-phase by means of DNA content based histogram analysis. It is shown that the normal diploid breast cell line HTB-125, the genomically relatively stable aneuploid breast cancer cell line MCF-7, and the genomically unstable aneuploid breast cancer cell line MDA-231 differ remarkably concerning both mRNA and protein expression of the two cyclins during G1-phase. In MDA-231 cells the expression of e.g. cyclin A mRNA was found to be ten times higher than in MCF-7 cells and about 500 times higher than in HTB-125 cells. Topoisomerase II α showed high mRNA expression in MDA compared to MCF-7 cells, but the difference in protein expression was small. Furthermore, we measured centrosome aberrations in 8.4% of the MDA-231 cells, and in only 1.3% of the more stable aneuploid cell line MCF-7. MDA cells showed 27% more incorporation of BrdU than reflected by S-phase determination with flow cytometric DNA content analysis, whereas these values were found to be of the same size in both HTB-125 and MCF-7 cells. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the breast cancer cell lines MCF-7 and MDA-231, although both DNA-aneuploid, differ significantly regarding the degree of cell cycle disturbance and centrosome aberrations, which partly could explain the different genomic stability of the two cell lines. The results also question the reliability of cytometric DNA content based S-phase determination in genomically unstable tumor cell populations

Intrinsic molecular signature of breast cancer in a population-based cohort of 412 patients

BACKGROUND: Molecular markers and the rich biological information they contain have great potential for cancer diagnosis, prognostication and therapy prediction. So far, however, they have not superseded routine histopathology and staging criteria, partly because the few studies performed on molecular subtyping have had little validation and limited clinical characterization. METHODS: We obtained gene expression and clinical data for 412 breast cancers obtained from population-based cohorts of patients from Stockholm and Uppsala, Sweden. Using the intrinsic set of approximately 500 genes derived in the Norway/Stanford breast cancer data, we validated the existence of five molecular subtypes – basal-like, ERBB2, luminal A/B and normal-like – and characterized these subtypes extensively with the use of conventional clinical variables. RESULTS: We found an overall 77.5% concordance between the centroid prediction of the Swedish cohort by using the Norway/Stanford signature and the k-means clustering performed internally within the Swedish cohort. The highest rate of discordant assignments occurred between the luminal A and luminal B subtypes and between the luminal B and ERBB2 subtypes. The subtypes varied significantly in terms of grade (p < 0.001), p53 mutation (p < 0.001) and genomic instability (p = 0.01), but surprisingly there was little difference in lymph-node metastasis (p = 0.31). Furthermore, current users of hormone-replacement therapy were strikingly over-represented in the normal-like subgroup (p < 0.001). Separate analyses of the patients who received endocrine therapy and those who did not receive any adjuvant therapy supported the previous hypothesis that the basal-like subtype responded to adjuvant treatment, whereas the ERBB2 and luminal B subtypes were poor responders. CONCLUSION: We found that the intrinsic molecular subtypes of breast cancer are broadly present in a diverse collection of patients from a population-based cohort in Sweden. The intrinsic gene set, originally selected to reveal stable tumor characteristics, was shown to have a strong correlation with progression-related properties such as grade, p53 mutation and genomic instability

Genome instability, gene expression and prognosis in breast cancer

Aneuploid cancers are regarded as being more malignant than tumors of other ploidy categories, and they are characterized by increased genomic instability. Our investigations resulted in the characterization of an aneuploid subtype of breast carcinoma that proved to be genomically stable. In image cytometric DNA histograms this subtype possessed a low percentage (<8.8%) of nonmodal DNA values as measured by the stemline scatter index (SSI), which is defined as sum of the percentage of cells in the S-phase region, the G2 exceeding rate and the coefficient of variation of the tumor stemline. The cut point of SSI - 8.8% (p=0.03) enabled us to also subdivide diploid and tetraploid tumors into genomically stable and unstable variants. One possible reason for aneuploidy or genomic instability in general is impaired distribution of chromosomes at mitosis, caused by numerical or structural centrosome aberrations. Cyclin A and E seem to be involved in centrosome duplication. We measured significant upregulation of cyclin A and E mRNA levels in genomically unstable diploid (Dgu) and aneuploid (Agu) breast cancer ploidy subtypes, as well as cyclin A protein overexpression. Furthermore, we assessed a high percentage of cells with centrosomal aberrations in Agu breast tumors but not in the genomically stable aneuploid (Ags) and diploid (Dgs) subtypes. In a follow-up study comprising 890 patients with primary breast adenocarcinoma, and an average follow-up period of 8.9 years, we measured significantly better overall and distant metastasis free survival for patients with gs breast carcinomas as compared to patients with gu tumors. Furthermore we identified proteins significantly differentially expressed between stable and unstable breast carcinomas as well as between benign breast lesions and all subtypes of breast carcinomas