This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Berns, E. M. J. J. Articles by Klijn, J. G. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Berns, E. M. J. J. Articles by Klijn, J. G. M.

Complete Sequencing of TP53 Predicts Poor Response to Systemic Therapy of Advanced Breast Cancer¹

Department of Medical Oncology, Division of Endocrine Oncology [E. M. J. J. B., J. A. F., S. C. H-L., M. P. L., I. L. v. S., M. E. M-v. G., C. J. C. C., H. P., J. G. M. K.] and Department of Statistics [W. L. J. v. P.], Rotterdam Cancer Institute (Daniel den Hoed Kliniek)/University Hospital Rotterdam, 3008 AE Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Departments of Human and Clinical Genetics [R. V., P. D., B. B.] and Pathology [C. C.], Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden 2300, the Netherlands; and Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Upsala, Sweden [M. I.]

	ABSTRACT

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumor Samples and Patients Statistical Methods RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
TP53 has been implicated in regulation of the cell cycle, DNA repair, and apoptosis. We studied, in primary breast tumors through direct cDNA sequencing of exons 2–11, whether TP53 gene mutations can predict response in patients with advanced disease to either first-line tamoxifen therapy (202 patients, of whom 55% responded) or up-front (poly)chemotherapy (41 patients, of whom 46% responded). TP53 mutations were detected in 90 of 243 (37%) tumors, and one-fourth of these mutations resulted in a premature termination of the protein. The mutations were observed in 32% (65 of 202) of the primary tumors of tamoxifen-treated patients and in 61% (25 of 41) of the primary tumors of the chemotherapy patients. TP53 mutation was significantly associated with a poor response to tamoxifen [31% versus 66%; odds ratio (OR), 0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.12–0.42; P < 0.0001]. Patients with TP53 gene mutations in codons that directly contact DNA or with mutations in the zinc-binding domain loop L3 showed the lowest response to tamoxifen (18% and 15% response rates, respectively). TP53 mutations were related, although not significantly, to a poor response to up-front chemotherapy (36% versus 63%; OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.09–1.24). In multivariate analysis for response including the classical parameters age and menopausal status, disease-free interval, dominant site of relapse, and levels of estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor, TP53 mutation was a significant predictor of poor response in the tamoxifen-treated group (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13–0.63; P = 0.0014). TP53-mutated and estrogen receptor-negative (<10 fmol/mg protein) tumors appeared to be the most resistant phenotype. Interestingly, the response of patients with TP53 mutations to chemotherapy after tamoxifen was not worse than that of patients without these mutations (50% versus 42%; OR, 1.35, nonsignificant). The median progression-free survival after systemic treatment was shorter for patients with a TP53 mutation than for patients with wild-type TP53 (6.6 and 0.6 months less for tamoxifen and up-front chemotherapy, respectively). In conclusion, TP53 gene mutation of the primary tumor is helpful in predicting the response of patients with metastatic breast disease to tamoxifen therapy. The type of mutation and its biological function should be considered in the analyses of the predictive value of TP53.

	INTRODUCTION

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumor Samples and Patients Statistical Methods RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
TP53, a tumor suppressor gene, has been shown to have prognostic value in patients with breast cancer. A few studies with conflicting results on its predictive value have been published. Endocrine treatment and chemotherapy improve the survival of women with (primary or advanced) breast cancer. The antiestrogen tamoxifen is one of the major compounds used for the endocrine treatment of breast cancer. It is effective in about one-third of all patients with metastatic disease and in about 50% of those breast cancer patients that are ER³ positive. Like chemotherapeutic agents, tamoxifen may cause DNA damage (1) . TP53, by regulating response to DNA damage, is a key element in DNA repair. This tumor suppressor gene has also been implicated in the regulation of normal cell growth and division, gene transcription, genomic stability, apoptosis, and senescence. Mutations in the TP53 gene (also known as P53) are the most frequent genetic changes found in human breast cancer. Mutation is often accompanied by deletion of the second allele, resulting in the elimination of wild-type TP53 activity. P53 protein accumulation, which often results from TP53 gene mutation, can be measured with immunological techniques, i.e., IHC or LIA/ELISAs on tumor extracts.

In two studies on patients with metastatic breast cancer (including 92 and 205 patients, respectively), no significant relation between immunohistochemically assessed P53 expression and response to endocrine treatment was observed (2 , 3) , whereas in another study (on 17 patients), P53 overexpression was associated with a poor response to endocrine therapy (4) . Recently, we have shown a significant relation between P53 accumulation, as measured by a LIA, and poor response to tamoxifen therapy in a series of 401 patients (5) . Moreover, the existing data on TP53 do not clarify its capability to predict resistance to chemotherapy for advanced or recurrent breast cancer (6, 7, 8, 9) . Furthermore, the data on its predictive role in the adjuvant setting are conflicting as well (10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16) . Studies on the predictive value of TP53 are hampered by a number of methodological issues including immunological versus molecular biological analyses, use of different cutoff levels in the immunohistochemical analyses, or selection of patient groups.

About 20% of the TP53 gene mutations do not result in p53 protein accumulation, whereas, on the other hand, p53 accumulation may also occur without a gene mutation. Therefore we have studied TP53 gene mutations in a relatively large series of 243 patients with advanced disease. Analysis of the various mutations allowed us to investigate the biological significance of particular mutations, which may eventually aid in selecting those aberrations that could be of predictive value in breast cancer. We show that TP53 gene mutations predict a poor response to first-line tamoxifen therapy and probably to chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. In an exploratory subset analysis, we also observed that mutations in one zinc-binding domain, i.e., loop L3, or in codons that directly contact DNA were related with an even poorer response to tamoxifen.

	PATIENTS AND METHODS

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumor Samples and Patients Statistical Methods RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Assays of Cell Biological Factors
Sequence-based Analysis of TP53.
cDNA-based sequencing was used essentially as described by Bergh et al. (14) , Sjögren et al. (17) , Kressner et al. (19) and Falette et al. (20) . Frozen untreated primary tumor samples were verified histologically for the presence of tumor cells, and only those samples containing more than 20% tumor cells were included in our study. mRNA was prepared from the frozen samples under stringent conditions to avoid degradation and contamination, and cDNA was generated. TP53 was amplified from the tumor cDNA by PCR using four sets of overlapping primers (one primer in each pair was biotin-labeled) to cover the complete protein coding region (exons 2–11) of the TP53 cDNA. Solid-phase sequencing was carried out using Autoload solid-phase sequencing combs and T7 DNA polymerase (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Samples were analyzed on an automated laser fluorescence DNA sequencer (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Sequence gels and sequences were evaluated with Sequence Evaluator and Mutation Analyzer software (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). All mutations were confirmed by reamplifying the relevant cDNAs and sequencing the new PCR products.

Assays of ER and PgR.
ER and PgR levels were determined in cytoplasmic extracts (cytosols) prepared routinely according to procedures recommended by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer Cooperative Group with ligand binding assays or enzyme immunoassays (ER-EIA and PgR-EIA; Abbott Laboratories, IL), as described previously (20) .

	Tumor Samples and Patients

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumor Samples and Patients Statistical Methods RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
To evaluate the clinical significance of TP53 gene alterations in advanced disease, 265 primary breast tumor specimens were analyzed. Sequence data (protein coding exons 2–11 of the TP53 gene) were successfully obtained from 243 tumors (92%; Table 1 ). In five cases, the sequence analysis was incomplete, although a mutation was observed; these samples were included. For nine cases, the sequence analysis was incomplete, but no gene mutation was observed; these nine samples were not included because mutations could not be excluded. In 13 cases (5%), no PCR product could be generated (in two separate experiments). Consequently, the analysis with respect to TP53 mutation and response to systemic therapy was performed on 243 breast cancer patients who developed recurrent disease. The patient group in the present study is not identical to the population described previously, i.e., 165 patients were described previously (5) . A total of 202 patients (83%) received first-line tamoxifen therapy, whereas 41 (17%) patients, especially younger women with ER-negative tumors, received first-line chemotherapy for advanced disease.

	Statistical Methods

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumor Samples and Patients Statistical Methods RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

	RESULTS

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumor Samples and Patients Statistical Methods RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
TP53 Gene Mutations.
We have sequenced the entire open reading frame of the TP53 gene (exons 2–11). Mutations were detected in 90 of the 243 (37%) samples, 9 of which (10%) were observed outside the sequence-specific DNA binding domain (codons 102–292). Fifty of these 90 mutations (56%) were restricted to the conserved region. Within the zinc-binding domain regions L2 and L3 (residues 163–195 and 236–251, respectively), 31 (34%) mutations were found. Moreover, we observed 15 mutations in four of the seven amino acids important in direct DNA binding (i.e., codons 241, 248, 273, and 280). As expected, the majority of the mutations were transitions, and the amino acid arginine was altered most frequently. Of all 90 mutations, 62 (69%) were missense mutations, including 3 complex mutations and 1 tandem mutation. In total, these amount to 42 different changes. The remaining 28 mutations (referred to as non-missense mutations) were 5 in-frame deletions/insertions, 11 nonsense mutations leading to a stop codon, and 12 out-of-frame deletions/insertions causing a premature stop codon. These latter "null mutations" were localized mainly in exon 6. These results imply that one-fourth of the mutations detected in this study would not result in an increased expression of the TP53 protein, i.e., false negatives.

Patient and tumor characteristics are summarized in Table 1 . The prevalence of TP53 gene mutations is highest in tumors from younger women (<40 years of age), in patients who experienced a shorter disease-free interval, and in ER- or PgR-negative (<10 fmol/mg protein) tumors. The median ER levels are about 10 times lower in the tumors with mutations than in those without a TP53 gene mutation (15 versus 144 fmol/mg protein, respectively). Menopausal status and prior adjuvant therapy were not significantly related to TP53 gene mutation. Interestingly, if the primary tumor had a TP53 mutation, the metastases more often developed in soft tissue (50%) or visceral tissues (46%) than in bone (26%) as the dominant site of disease. In an exploratory analysis, we observed a relatively low ratio between missense and nonmissense mutations in the primary tumor of patients who developed a relapse in soft tissue (ratio, 1.4) when compared with the ratios in patients who relapsed to bone or visceral tissues (ratios, 3 and 3.5, respectively) as the first site of relapse.

TP53 Gene Mutations and Response to Tamoxifen.
We observed a mutation in 65 of 202 (32%) primary tumor samples, and this resulted in a premature termination of the protein in 13 of these 65 samples (20%). Of the 202 patients, 55% responded to first-line tamoxifen therapy (10 CRs, 25 PRs, and 76 cases of stable disease). Very young patients (<40 years) tended to have a lower response rate (33%; Table 2 ). Furthermore, the presence of bone or visceral metastasis, a short disease-free interval after primary surgery, and low ER and PgR levels were significantly associated with low response rates to tamoxifen, whereas prior adjuvant therapy showed no relation with response (Table 2) . Sixty-six percent of the patients without a TP53 mutation responded to tamoxifen, whereas only 31% of the patients with a TP53 mutation responded to tamoxifen therapy (OR, 0.22; P < 0.0001; Table 2 ). There was no significant difference between the response percentages of either missense or nonmissense mutations (29% and 38%, respectively). The TP53 gene mutations were stratified according to the type of mutation, i.e., mutations in the zinc-binding domains L2 and L3 of the protein, or by residues that directly contact DNA in an exploratory analysis. Five of 12 (42%) patients with mutations in L2 but only 2 of 13 (15%) patients with mutations in L3 or 2 of 11 (18%) patients with mutations in codons that directly contact DNA showed a response compared to a response of 66% in patients with a wild-type TP53 gene.

Multivariate Analysis for Response to Tamoxifen.
The independent relationship of the variables with response to tamoxifen therapy for advanced disease was studied using multivariate logistic regression analysis. TP53 gene mutation status (as a dichotomized variable) was added to the classical variables (see Table 2 ). Disease-free interval, dominant site of relapse, and ER and TP53 status were significant in this multivariate analysis. There was no statistically significant interaction between TP53 mutation and ER levels.

Response in Clinically Relevant Subsets of Patients Stratified by ER and PgR Status.
We explored the association of TP53 gene status with response to tamoxifen therapy in clinically relevant subgroups. Subsets of tumors from patients with low ER levels (<10 fmol/mg protein, median survival of the patients = 16 months; see Table 2 ), intermediate ER levels (10 fmol/mg protein but <75 fmol/mg protein, median survival of the patients = 23 months), and high ER levels (>75 fmol/mg protein, median survival of the patients = 30 months) were created. In all three subgroups, according to ER status, the response rate was better in patients with wild-type TP53 in their primary tumors. The worst overall response was observed in patients with ER-negative and TP53-mutated tumors (n = 23), of whom only 22% responded. The best response was observed in the patients with high ER levels and wild-type TP53 in their primary tumors (n = 90), of whom 73% responded.

Relationship Between P53 Mutation and PFS after the Start of Treatment.
Duration of response is perhaps as important as time to treatment failure because the duration of response contributes directly to the quality and duration of life. Using Cox univariate regression analysis, we observed that the presence of a TP53 gene mutation was significantly associated with a shorter duration of response (16 versus 11 months; P = 0.0006) in 111 patients who responded to tamoxifen. However, TP53 mutation was not significantly associated with survival after the start of treatment (40 versus 31 months) in the responders.

The median PFS was shorter for patients with a TP53 mutation as compared with those with wild-type TP53 (3.0 versus 9.6 months). Patients with TP53 gene mutation in their primary tumors experienced a shorter PFS and an earlier death (relative hazard rate, 2.61 and 1.99, respectively, both P < 0.001) than those with TP53 wild-type tumors (see Fig. 1 , ALL). In addition (see Table 2 ), younger patients (age < 40 years) and those with visceral metastasis, a short disease-free interval, low ER or PgR levels, or TP53 mutation showed a shorter median overall postrelapse survival after the start of tamoxifen treatment. In the multivariate analysis for survival after the start of tamoxifen treatment, the presence of a TP53 mutation was associated with decreased survival (RHR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.94–2.07; P = 0.10).

View larger version (27K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. PFS (left) and survival after the start of tamoxifen treatment (right) as a function of TP53 gene status in all patients (ALL), patients with high ER (>75 fmol/mg protein; ER-high), patients with intermediate ER (10 > ER <75 fmol/mg protein; ER-medium), and patients with low ER (<10 fmol/mg protein; ER-low). The number of patients below the X axis represents the number at risk over total patients in the wild-type and mutated subgroups, respectively.

TP53 Gene Mutations and Response to Chemotherapy.
Of the 113 patients that were evaluable for chemotherapy after tamoxifen therapy in this study, 51 (45%) responded to chemotherapy (1 CR, 19 PRs, and 31 cases of stable disease). When compared with bone metastasis and soft tissue, patients with visceral metastasis had the worst response to chemotherapy after tamoxifen treatment (OR, 0.66). As shown in Table 3 , patients with TP53 mutations did not respond differently to chemotherapy after tamoxifen therapy than did patients without mutations. Stratification according to domain L3 of the protein or by residues that directly contact DNA (see above) revealed that three of five patients with mutations in L3 and two of seven patients with mutations in codons that directly contact DNA showed a response when compared with an overall response of 42% of patients with the wild-type TP53 gene.

	DISCUSSION

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumor Samples and Patients Statistical Methods RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
The onset and progression of breast cancer is accompanied by multiple genetic alterations that result in quantitative and qualitative changes in the expression of these genes. Mutations in the TP53 gene are the most frequent genetic changes in human cancer, and, depending on the method of detection, the frequencies of TP53 mutations reported in invasive breast cancer range from 12–46% (24) . In recent years, numerous reports have appeared on the relation between TP53 status and (disease-free) survival, and conflicting conclusions were reached on the prognostic value of TP53 in breast cancer. The lack of unanimity between authors may be explained by: (a) differences in techniques used for the analyses of p53 status (e.g., immunohistochemical analyses with different antibodies on frozen or paraffin-embedded tissues using different cutoff levels, ELISA/LIA, PCR-single-strand conformational polymorphism/constant denaturing gel electrophoresis analyses of primarily exons 5–8, or cDNA sequencing of the entire gene); (b) patient sample size; (c) subset analyses; (d) retrospective nature of the studies; (e) different (adjuvant) treatments of the patient population; (f) different (modern) prognostic covariates used in the multivariate analyses; (g) the subjectivity inherent to some approaches; and (h) publication bias.

Moreover, the relapse tumor could be dissimilar to the primary tumor because it was shown that TP53 mutations found in the primary tumors can be absent in the metastasis.

In the present study, we evaluated the predictive value of TP53 gene mutations, as estimated through cDNA sequencing of the entire coding sequence of the TP53 gene, in a relatively large series of breast cancer patients who were treated with tamoxifen or chemotherapy for advanced disease. We observed TP53 gene mutations in 32% of the 202 primary tumors of tamoxifen-treated patients and in 61% of the 41 patients (with mainly ER-negative tumors) treated with up-front chemotherapy. The observed prevalence is slightly higher than the mean percentage of 25% [range, 15–71%; examined in 1425 breast tumor samples worldwide; reviewed by Hartmann et al. (25) ] and a prevalence of 29% [range, 15–71%; examined in 16 populations by Soussi (26) ]. This difference can be explained by the fact that the entire coding sequence of TP53 was investigated and that only those patients who developed advanced disease were included in the present study. TP53 gene mutation was related with a poor response to up-front chemotherapy in our small series of patients (OR, 0.34) and was similarly but significantly related with a poor response to first-line tamoxifen treatment in both univariate analysis (OR, 0.22; P < 0.0001) and multivariate analysis. In contrast, patients with mutated TP53 in their primary tumors may respond better to chemotherapy (50% versus 42%) after tamoxifen treatment, but they did show a shorter PFS and duration of response.

When evaluating only those reports that have covered TP53 alterations in relationship with the efficacy of various treatments in breast cancer, we noticed that there is no agreement on the significance of the predictive value of TP53. The summary of these 26 studies on almost 6000 breast cancer patients is listed in Table 4 . In 15 reports, there was no significant relation between TP53 status and type of response (2 , 3 , 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 , 15 , 28 , 30, 31, 32, 33) , 7 reports described resistance (Refs. 5 , 6 , 14 , 16 , 27 and 29 and this study), whereas the other 4 studies reported sensitivity (13 , 34, 35, 36) . However, this survey indicates that the TP53 genotype, not the immunohistochemical results, is predictive of response in breast cancer patients: all 5 studies that used DNA analysis showed a predictive value of TP53, whereas this was only true in 6 of the 21 immunohistochemical studies, i.e., 2 studies showed sensitivity, and 4 showed resistance. Both studies on radiotherapy showed sensitivity to this form of treatment (34 , 36) .

The mechanisms that underlie the relationship of p53 alterations and a poor response to tamoxifen are not clear. Tamoxifen acts as an antiestrogen via the ER, but some of its effects are thought to be mediated through the activation of transforming growth factor ß and by decreasing plasma insulin-like growth factor I levels. Previous data suggest that the mutant forms of TP53 inhibit the antiproliferative effect of transforming growth factor ß by interfering with its signaling pathway. In addition, wild-type TP53 can repress the insulin receptor and the insulin-like growth factor I receptor promotor in other cell types. Although the exact mechanisms are unclear, this complex interplay provides a link between the TP53 gene and signaling pathways in breast cancer cells (discussed in Ref. 5 ). Our finding on the relationship between TP53 gene mutation and poor response to tamoxifen treatment of advanced disease is well in line with our previous study on p53 protein levels by LIA in 401 patients with advanced disease (5) but disagrees with the studies of Archer et al. (2) and Elledge et al. (3) , who assessed p53 expression immunohistochemically and found no relationship with response to endocrine treatment. Bergh et al. (14) and Silvestrini et al. (32) showed that tamoxifen also appears to be of less benefit in patients with TP53 gene mutations or overexpression, respectively, in the adjuvant setting (see Table 4 ). The relationship of TP53 gene status with PFS is most apparent in the high ER (>10 fmol/mg protein) subgroups of our patients. In contrast to our findings, Elledge et al. (3) , who studied the accumulation of p53 using IHC in mainly ER-positive metastatic breast cancer, did not observe a relation between p53 status and response to tamoxifen therapy, although they stated that breast tumors with altered p53 protein are inherently more aggressive, even after they have metastasized. These conflicting outcomes may again be explained by the different techniques and study designs.

It is known that some chemotherapeutic agents and ionizing radiation act by inducing apoptosis in tumor cells. Lowe et al. (37) showed that cells expressing mutant TP53 were totally resistant to apoptosis on treatment, whereas cells expressing the wild-type gene were sensitive to these therapeutic agents. In the present study, TP53 gene mutations were related, although not significantly, to a poor response to up-front chemotherapy (36% versus 63%; OR, 0.34). However, the number of patients receiving first-line chemotherapy was small, the regimen is heterogeneous, and the follow-up was relatively short. Based on this, it is not possible to draw firm conclusions. Furthermore, we suspect a better response to chemotherapy after tamoxifen treatment.

Three reported molecular analyses also revealed that TP53 gene mutations predict a response to chemotherapy or adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer patients (6 , 33 , 35) . In contrast, all 4 reports on metastatic disease and 7 of 10 reports in the adjuvant setting revealed no predictive value of TP53 when using immunohistochemical analyses.

Various mutations can alter the TP53 protein distinctly and lead to different biological characteristics and tumorigenic potential (38 , 39) . L2 and L3 loops of the TP53 gene contain residues involved in direct DNA contact as well as protein stabilization. In the present study, those patients with TP53 gene mutations in codons that directly contact DNA or with mutations in the zinc-binding domain loop L3 showed the lowest response to tamoxifen (18% and 15% response rates, respectively). Survival analyses showed a significantly reduced survival rate for patients with mutations affecting the zinc-binding domains L2 and L3 compared with patients with mutations outside these regions or with no mutations (40) or for patients with mutations affecting the direct DNA contact (41) . Moreover, Aas et al. (6) showed that mutants affecting the L3 loop were significantly associated with de novo resistance to doxorubicin monotherapy in small subsets of patients. Extending the analysis of these various mutations allows us to focus attention on the biological significance of particular mutations that may assist the selection of residues that could be of predictive value in breast cancer.

IHC is not able to detect every TP53 alteration. In the present study, we have shown that one-fourth of TP53 mutations found are "null mutations" that do not lead to TP53 accumulation. Furthermore, IHC does not us allow to distinguish the heterogeneity of TP53 mutants. Based on the data from the literature and the present results, we conclude that the presence of mutation and the type of mutation have predictive value for response to tamoxifen treatment. Therefore, we reason that, if tissue resources permit, the TP53 mutation status should preferably be included in the daily practice of treatment of metastatic breast cancer patients.

The main conclusion of this study is that TP53 mutation is significantly associated with a poor response to tamoxifen treatment in patients with advanced breast cancer. Based on the present results and the data reviewed, it is tempting to hypothesize that the TP53 genotype in particular and, to a lesser degree, the immunohistochemical analysis are predictive of response to therapy in breast cancer. Prospective studies should be performed to support this conclusion. Besides mutation analyses, a direct functional assay (42) or the measurement of downstream components of the TP53 pathway such as p21 or MDM2 may confirm the TP53 integrity.

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 
We thank Esfir Lôfman and Nigel Tooke (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) and J. Bolt-de Vries, S. E. Binnendijk-Noordegraaf, and H. Peters (Division of Endocrine Oncology, University Hospital Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands) for excellent technical assistance.

	FOOTNOTES

 
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

¹ Supported in part by Grant DDHK 96-1234 from the Dutch Cancer Society.

² To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Department of Medical Oncology, Josephine Nefkens Institute, Room Be 424, P. O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Phone: 31-10-4088370; Fax: 31-10-4088377/365. E-mail: Berns{at}bidh.azr.nl

³ The abbreviations used are: ER, estrogen receptor; PgR, progesterone receptor; OR, odds ratio, CI, confidence interval; LIA, luminometric assay; CMF, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil; CAF, cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin, and 5-fluoro-uracil; CR, complete remission; PR, partial remission; PFS, progression-free survival; IHC, immunohistochemistry.

Received 10/12/99. Accepted 2/17/00.

	REFERENCES

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumor Samples and Patients Statistical Methods RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 

1. Shibutani S., Shaw P. M., Suzuki N., Dasaradhi L., Duffel M. W., Terashima I. Sulfation of -hydroxytamoxifen catalyzed by human hydroxysteroid sulfotransferase results in tamoxifen-DNA adducts. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 19: 2007-2011, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Archer S. G., Eliopoulos A., Spandidos D., Barnes D., Ellis I. O., Blamey R. W., Nicholson R. I., Robertson J. F. R. Expression of ras p21, p53 and c-erbB-2 in advanced breast cancer and response to first line hormonal therapy. Br. J. Cancer, 72: 1259-1266, 1995.[Medline]
3. Elledge R. M., Green S., Howes L., Clark G., Berardo M., Allred D. G., Pugh R., Ciocca D., Ravdin P., O’Sullivan J., Rivkin J., Martino S., Osborne C. K. bcl-2, p53, and response to tamoxifen in estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group study. J. Clin. Oncol., 15: 1916-1922, 1997.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. Horne G. M., Anderson J. J., Tiniakos D. G., McIntoch G. C., Thomas M. D., Angus B., Henry J. A., Lennard T. W. J., Horne C. H. W. p53 protein as a prognostic indicator in breast carcinoma: a comparison of four antibodies for immunohistochemistry. Br. J. Cancer, 73: 29-35, 1996.[Medline]
5. Berns E. M. J. J., Klijn J. G. M., van Putten W. L. J., de Witte H. H., Look M. P., Meijer-van Gelder M. E., Willman K., Portengen H., Benraad T., Foekens J. A. p53 protein accumulation predicts poor response to tamoxifen therapy of patients with recurrent breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol., 16: 121-127, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Aas T., Børresen A-L., Geisler S., Smith-Sørensen B., Johnsen H., Varhaug J. E., Akslen L. A., Lønning P. E. Specific P53 mutations are associated with de novo resistance to doxorubicin in breast cancer patients. Nat. Med., 2: 811-814, 1997.
7. Niskanen E., Blomqvist C., Franssila K., Hietanen P., Wasenius V-M. Predictive value of c-erbB-2, p53, cathepsin-D, and histology of the primary tumour in metastatic breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer, 76: 917-922, 1997.[Medline]
8. Järvinen T. A. H., Holli K., Kuukasjärvi T., Isola J. J. Predictive value of topoisomerase II- and other prognostic factors for epirubicin chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer, 77: 2297-2273, 1998.
9. Rozan S., Vincent-Salomon A., Zafrani B., Validire P., de Cremoux P., Bernoux A., Nieruchalski M., Fourquet A., Clough K., Dieras V., Pouillart P., Sastre-Garau X. No significant predictive value of c-erbB-2 or p53 expression regarding sensitivity to primary chemotherapy or radiotherapy in breast cancer. Int. J. Cancer, 29: 27-33, 1998.
10. Muss H. B., Thor A. D., Berry D. A., Kute T., Liu E. T., Koerner F., Cirrincione C. T., Budman D. R., Wood W. C., Marcos M., Henderson I. C. c-erbB-2 expression and response to adjuvant therapy in women with node-positive early breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med., 330: 1260-1266, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11. Jacquemier J., Penault-Llorca F., Viens P., Houvenaeghel G., Hassoun J., Torrente M., Adelaide J., Birnbaum D. Breast cancer response to adjuvant chemotherapy in correlation with erbB2 and p53 expression. Anticancer Res., 14: 2773-2778, 1994.[Medline]
12. Elledge R. M., Gray R., Mansour E., Yu Y., Clark G. M., Ravdin P., Osborne C. K., Gilchrist K., Davidson N. E., Robert N., Tormey D., Allred D. G. Accumulation of p53 protein as a possible predictor of response to adjuvant combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil, and prednisone for breast cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 87: 1254-1256, 1995.[Free Full Text]
13. Ståhl O., Stenmark A. M., Wingren S., Rutqvist L. E., Skoog L., Ferraud L., Sullivan S., Carstensen J., Nordenskjold B. P53 expression and the result of adjuvant therapy of breast cancer. Acta Oncol., 34: 767-770, 1995.[Medline]
14. Bergh J., Norberg T., Sjögren S., Lindgren A., Holmberg L. Complete sequencing of the p53 gene provides prognostic information in breast cancer patients, particularly in relation to adjuvant systemic therapy and radiotherapy. Nat. Med., 1: 1029-1034, 1995.[Medline]
15. Degeoges A., de Roquancourt A., Extra J. M., Espie M., Bourstyn E., de Cremoux P., Soussi T., Marty M. Is p53 a protein that predicts the response to chemotherapy in node negative breast cancer?. Breast Cancer Res. Treat., 47: 47-55, 1998.[Medline]
16. Clahsen P. C., van de Velde C. J. H., Duval C., Pallud C., Mandard A-M., Delobelle-Deroide A., van den Broek L., Sahmoud T. M., van de Vijver M. J. p53 protein accumulation and response to adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal women with node-negative early breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol., 16: 470-479, 1998.[Abstract]
17. Sjögren S., Inganäs M., Norberg T., Lindgren H., Holmberg L., Bergh J. The p53 gene in breast cancer: prognostic value of complementary DNA sequencing versus immunohistochemistry. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 88: 173-182, 1996.
18. Foekens J. A., Portengen H., van Putten W. L. J., Trapman A. M., Reubi J. C., Alexieva J., Klijn J. G. M. Prognostic value of estrogen and progesterone receptors measured by enzyme immunoassays in human breast cancer. Cancer Res., 49: 5823-5828, 1989.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19. Kressner U., Inganas M., Byding S., Blikstad I., Pahlman L., Glimelius B., Lindmark G. Prognostic value of p53 genetic changes in colorectal cancer. J. Clin. Oncol., 17: 593-599, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20. Falette N., Paperin M. P., Treilleux I., Gratadour A. C., Peloux N., Mignotte H., Tooke N., Lofman E., Inganas M., Bremond A., Ozturk M., Puisieux A. Prognostic value of P53 gene mutations in a large series of node-negative breast cancer patients. Cancer Res., 58: 1451-1455, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Foekens J. A., Look M. P., Peters H. A., van Putten W. L. J., Portengen H., Klijn J. G. M. Urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and its inhibitor PAI-1 predict poor response to tamoxifen therapy in recurrent breast cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 87: 751-756, 1995.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. Elledge R. M., Lock-Lim S., Allred D. C., Hilsenbeck S. G., Cordner L. p53 mutation and tamoxifen resistance in breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res., 1: 1203-1208, 1995.[Abstract]
23. Kaplan E. L., Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observation. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 53: 457-481, 1958.
24. Andersen T. I., Borresen A. L. Alterations of the TP53 gene as potential prognostic marker in breast carcinomas. Diagnostics Mol. Pathol., 4: 203-211, 1995.
25. Hartmann A., Blaszyk H., Kovach J. S., Sommer S. S. The molecular epidemiology of p53 gene mutations in human breast cancer. Trends Genet., 13: 27-33, 1997.[Medline]
26. Soussi, T. The p53 tumour suppressor gene: from molecular biology to clinical investigation. In: J. G. M. Klijn (ed.), European School of Oncology Scientific Updates, Vol. 1, Prognostic and Predictive Value of p53, pp. 3–21. The Netherlands: Elsevier Science, 1997.
27. Silvestrini R., Benini E., Veneroni S., Daidone M. G., Tomasic G., Squicciarini P., Salvadori B. p53 and bcl-2 expression correlates with clinical outcome in a series of node-positive breast cancer patients. J. Clin. Oncol., 14: 1604-1610, 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Markris A., Powles T. J., Dowsett M., Osborne C. K., Trott P. A., Fernando I. N., Ashley S. E., Ormerod M. G., Titley J. C., Gregory R. K., Allred D. C. Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy in primary breast carcinomas. Clin. Cancer Res., 3: 593-600, 1997.[Abstract]
29. Faille A., Cremoux P., Extra J. M., Linares G., Espie M., Bourstyn E., De Rocquancourt A., Giacchetti S., Marty M., Calvo F. p53 mutations and overexpression in locally advanced breast cancers. Br. J. Cancer, 69: 1145-1150, 1994.[Medline]
30. MacGrogan G., Mauriac L., Durand M., Bonichon F., Trojani M., de Mascarel I., Coindre J. M. Primary chemotherapy in breast invasive carcinoma: predictive value of the immunohistochemical detection of hormonal receptors, p53, c-erbB2, MiB1, pS2 and GST-. Br. J. Cancer, 74: 1458-1465, 1996.[Medline]
31. Linn S. C., Pinedo H. M., van Ark-Otte J., van der Valk P., Hoekman K., Honkoop A. H., Vermorken J. B., Giaccone G. Expression of drug resistance proteins in breast cancer, in relation to chemotherapy. Int. J. Cancer, 71: 787-795, 1997.[Medline]
32. Dublin E. A., Miles D. W., Rubens R. D., Smith P., Barnes D. M. p53 immunohistochemical staining and survival after adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Int. J. Cancer, 74: 605-608, 1997.[Medline]
33. Bonetti A., Zaninelli M., Leone R., Cetto G. L., Pelosi G., Biolo S., Menghi A., Manfrin A., Bonetti F., Piubello Q. bcl-2 but not p53 expression is associated with resistance to chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res., 4: 2331-2336, 1998.[Abstract]
34. Jansson T., Inganas M., Sjogren S., Norberg T., Lindgren A., Holmberg L., Bergh J. p53 status predicts survival in breast cancer patients treated with or without postoperative radiotherapy: a novel hypothesis based on clinical findings. J. Clin. Oncol., 13: 2745-2751, 1995.[Abstract]
35. Thor A. D., Berry D. A., Budman D. R., Muss H. B., Kute T., Henderson I. C., Barcos M., Cirrincione C., Edgerton S., Allred C., Norton L., Liu E. T. erbB-2, p53, and efficacy of adjuvant therapy in lymph node-positive breast cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 90: 1346-1360, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
36. Silvestrini R., Veneroni S., Benini E., Daidone M. G., Luisi A., Leutner M., Maucione A., Kenda R., Zucali R., Veronesi U. Expression of p53, glutathione S-transferase-, and Bcl-2 proteins and benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 89: 639-645, 1997.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
37. Lowe S. W., Ruley H. E., Housman D. E. p53-dependent apoptosis modulates the cytotoxicity of anticancer agents. Cell, 74: 957-967, 1993.[Medline]
38. Prives C. How loops, ß sheets, and helices help us to understand p53. Cell, 78: 543-546, 1994.[Medline]
39. Friend S. A glimpse at the puppet behind the shadow play. Science (Washington DC), 265: 334-335, 1994.[Free Full Text]
40. Borresen A. L., Andersen T. I., Eyford J. E., Cornelis R. S., Thorlacius S., Borg A., Johansson U., Theillet C., Scherneck S., Hartman S. TP53 mutations and breast cancer prognosis: particularly poor survival rates for cases with mutations in the zinc-binding domains. Genes Chromosomes Cancer, 14: 71-75, 1995.[Medline]
41. Berns E. M. J. J., van Staveren I. L., Look M. P., Smid M., Klijn J. G. M., Foekens J. A. Mutations in residues of TP53 that directly contact DNA predict poor outcome in human primary breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer, 77: 1130-1136, 1998.[Medline]
42. Flaman J. M., Frebourg T., Moreau V., Charbonnier F., Martin C., Chappuis P., Sappino A. P., Limacher I. M., Bron L., Benhatter J. A simple p53 functional assay for screening cell lines, blood, and tumors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 92: 3963-3967, 1995.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F.-C. Bidard, M.-C. Matthieu, P. Chollet, I. Raoefils, C. Abrial, J. Domont, M. Spielmann, S. Delaloge, F. Andre, and F. Penault-Llorca p53 status and efficacy of primary anthracyclines/alkylating agent-based regimen according to breast cancer molecular classes Ann. Onc., July 1, 2008; 19(7): 1261 - 1265. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R A Walker Immunohistochemical markers as predictive tools for breast cancer J. Clin. Pathol., June 1, 2008; 61(6): 689 - 696. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Xue, M. Haber, C. Flemming, G. M. Marshall, R. B. Lock, K. L. MacKenzie, K. V. Gurova, M. D. Norris, and A. V. Gudkov p53 Determines Multidrug Sensitivity of Childhood Neuroblastoma Cancer Res., November 1, 2007; 67(21): 10351 - 10360. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. G. Burdelya, E. A. Komarova, J. E. Hill, T. Browder, N. D. Tararova, L. Mavrakis, P. E. DiCorleto, J. Folkman, and A. V. Gudkov Inhibition of p53 Response in Tumor Stroma Improves Efficacy of Anticancer Treatment by Increasing Antiangiogenic Effects of Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy in Mice Cancer Res., October 1, 2006; 66(19): 9356 - 9361. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. W. Watters and C. J. Roberts Developing gene expression signatures of pathway deregulation in tumors. Mol. Cancer Ther., October 1, 2006; 5(10): 2444 - 2449. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Dahl, G. Kristiansen, K. Gottlob, I. Klaman, E. Ebner, B. Hinzmann, K. Hermann, C. Pilarsky, M. Durst, M. Klinkhammer-Schalke, et al. Molecular Profiling of Laser-Microdissected Matched Tumor and Normal Breast Tissue Identifies Karyopherin {alpha}2 as a Potential Novel Prognostic Marker in Breast Cancer. Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2006; 12(13): 3950 - 3960. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Lacroix, R.-A. Toillon, and G. Leclercq p53 and breast cancer, an update. Endocr. Relat. Cancer, June 1, 2006; 13(2): 293 - 325. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. W. Tolcher, D. Hao, J. de Bono, A. Miller, A. Patnaik, L. A. Hammond, L. Smetzer, J. Van Wart Hood, J. Merritt, E. K. Rowinsky, et al. Phase I, Pharmacokinetic, and Pharmacodynamic Study of Intravenously Administered Ad5CMV-p53, an Adenoviral Vector Containing the Wild-Type p53 Gene, in Patients With Advanced Cancer J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2006; 24(13): 2052 - 2058. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Olivier, A. Langerod, P. Carrieri, J. Bergh, S. Klaar, J. Eyfjord, C. Theillet, C. Rodriguez, R. Lidereau, I. Bieche, et al. The Clinical Value of Somatic TP53 Gene Mutations in 1,794 Patients with Breast Cancer Clin. Cancer Res., February 15, 2006; 12(4): 1157 - 1167. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. D. Miller, J. Smeds, J. George, V. B. Vega, L. Vergara, A. Ploner, Y. Pawitan, P. Hall, S. Klaar, E. T. Liu, et al. From The Cover: An expression signature for p53 status in human breast cancer predicts mutation status, transcriptional effects, and patient survival PNAS, September 20, 2005; 102(38): 13550 - 13555. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Andersson, L. Larsson, S. Klaar, L. Holmberg, J. Nilsson, M. Inganas, G. Carlsson, J. Ohd, C.-M. Rudenstam, B. Gustavsson, et al. Worse survival for TP53 (p53)-mutated breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant CMF Ann. Onc., May 1, 2005; 16(5): 743 - 748. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Daftarian, G.-Y. Song, S. Ali, M. Faynsod, J. Longmate, D. J. Diamond, and J. D. I. Ellenhorn Two Distinct Pathways of Immuno-Modulation Improve Potency of p53 Immunization in Rejecting Established Tumors Cancer Res., August 1, 2004; 64(15): 5407 - 5414. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. J. Wild, A. Reichle, R. Andreesen, G. Rockelein, W. Dietmaier, J. Ruschoff, H. Blaszyk, F. Hofstadter, and A. Hartmann Microsatellite Instability Predicts Poor Short-Term Survival in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer after High-Dose Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation Clin. Cancer Res., January 15, 2004; 10(2): 556 - 564. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Geisler, A.-L. Borresen-Dale, H. Johnsen, T. Aas, J. Geisler, L. A. Akslen, G. Anker, and P. E. Lonning TP53 Gene Mutations Predict the Response to Neoadjuvant Treatment with 5-Fluorouracil and Mitomycin in Locally Advanced Breast Cancer Clin. Cancer Res., November 15, 2003; 9(15): 5582 - 5588. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Phelps, M. Darley, J. N. Primrose, and J. P. Blaydes p53-independent Activation of the hdm2-P2 Promoter through Multiple Transcription Factor Response Elements Results in Elevated hdm2 Expression in Estrogen Receptor {alpha}-positive Breast Cancer Cells Cancer Res., May 15, 2003; 63(10): 2616 - 2623. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]