Affiliations of authors: P. de Cremoux (Department of Pathology and Universite Paris 7), A. V. Salomon, B. Bouchind'homme, X. Sastre-Garau (Department of Pathology), S. Liva, E. Martin (Department of Translational Research), R. Dendale, A. Fourquet (Department of Radiotherapy), H. Magdelenat (Departments of Pathology and Translational Research), T. Soussi (Unité Mixte de Recherche 218, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique), Institut Curie, Paris, France.
Correspondence to: Patricia de Cremoux, M.D., Ph.D., Department of Pathology, Institut Curie, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75248, Paris cedex 05, France (e-mail: Patricia.De-Cremoux{at}curie.fr).
Medullary carcinoma is a poorly differentiated breast cancer tumor with a high histologic grade and a paradoxically good prognosis. It accounts for only 5% of all breast cancers (1-3). Thus far, only histologic criteria are used to define this tumor type; no genetic characteristics have been identified. An alteration in the p53 gene (also known as TP53) is found in 20%-40% of invasive breast cancers, but its status in medullary breast cancer is poorly documented. Immunochemical detection of a stable mutant p53 in nuclei of tumor cells is the most convenient assay, but the correlation of the results from such an assay with results from molecular analysis, such as sequencing, is not totally in agreement (4). The frequency of p53 mutations in breast cancer is around 20%, but immunohistochemical analysis detects p53 accumulation in 30%-40% of tumors (5,6).
In the present study, we demonstrate that typical medullary breast carcinomas have a high frequency of p53 alterations (100%). We found excellent agreement between the results of the different analytical techniques that we used.
We obtained specimens from 23 medullary breast carcinomas from the Institut Curie tumor bank; these carcinomas were initially registered (during the period from 1989 to 1995) as medullary carcinomas. All specimens were selected on the basis of the availability of blocks and frozen material, and two trained pathologists (B. Bouchind'homme and A. V. Salomon), who were blinded to the status of the specimens, independently reviewed each specimen during the study. As defined by Rapin et al. (3), typical medullary carcinomas display at least 75% syncytial architecture, a well-defined border, diffuse lymphoplasmocytic infiltrate, moderate or marked anisonucleosis, and absence of tubular differentiation and/or an intraductal component (2,3) (15 of our 23 specimens). Atypical medullary carcinomas (eight of our 23 specimens) have a syncytial architecture and two or three of the above criteria.
We assessed the status of the p53 gene by using molecular and immunohistochemical
techniques (8) (Fig. 1). For the molecular
analysis, we combined direct sequencing of genetic material from tumors with a functional assay,
developed by Flaman et al. (7), to ensure that all molecular changes
detected were deleterious for p53 function (true mutations). Seventy-four percent (17 of 23) of
tumors had a p53 mutation (Table 1).
Immunohistochemical analysis
showed that p53 accumulated in the 14 tumors that contained a missense mutation, one in-frame
codon deletion (patient 7), or a long truncated protein (patient 3) (Table 1
). Tumors expressing short truncated p53 (tumors in patients 2, 10, and 15) did not accumulate
p53, since such proteins are rather unstable (Table 1
).
|
|
As defined by Rapin et al. (3), eight tumors were atypical medullary
breast carcinomas and 15 tumors were typical medullary breast carcinomas. It is interesting that
all typical medullary carcinomas harbored a p53 alteration (Table 1)
(95% confidence interval [CI] = 78%-100%). In the eight
atypical medullary carcinomas examined, only two mutations were detected, giving a frequency
of 25% (95% CI = 3%-65%), a frequency similar to that in
invasive breast carcinomas.
Our results indicate that medullary breast carcinoma is a distinct genetic subtype of breast cancer. The observations of a high incidence of p53 alterations and an unambiguous pattern of p53 staining suggest that the genetic pathway leading to this subtype of cancer is different from that of common infiltrating breast carcinoma. To our knowledge, this is the first time that a genetic defect is able to specifically distinguish medullary breast carcinoma. It has recently been shown (13,14) that medullary breast carcinoma is found at a very high frequency (up to 20%) in patients with BRCA1-associated breast cancers. The observation that BRCA1-associated tumors also have a high frequency of p53 mutation (15) suggests that there may be a relationship between alterations in the BRCA1 gene and medullary breast carcinoma, supporting the notion that a specific genetic pathway leads to this tumor type.
Medullary breast carcinomas usually have a much more favorable prognosis than the poorly differentiated common invasive cancers. This behavior is paradoxical compared with the behavior of sporadic invasive breast cancer but not with the behavior of BRCA1-associated tumors. It has been proposed (16,17) that substantial heterogeneity exists in the behavior of the various p53 mutants toward both the biologic activity of p53 and their specific association with some cancer types or various clinical parameters. In our study, we did not find any distinctive particularities in the various p53 mutations. The fact that tumor cells harbor a multitude of genetic defects usually associated with a given type of cancer suggests that survival or response to therapy is not associated with a single genetic defect but may result from a combination of various defects. The present data indicate that p53 alteration is an important factor in typical medullary carcinoma but probably combines with other known or unknown specific genetic defects in order to explain the paradoxically increased sensitivity to treatment of this subtype of tumor. The fact that p53 and BRCA1 are both associated with DNA repair is a strong argument in favor of such a hypothesis.
Finally, if confirmed by independent studies, our results indicate that p53 status is an important component in typical medullary breast carcinoma, and a determination of the status of p53 in the tumor should be included in its diagnosis.
NOTES
Supported by grants from the Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer (Comité de Paris and Comité Nationale), the Association pour la Recherche contre le Cancer, Mutuelle Générale de l'Éducation Nationale, Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale, Fédération des Groupements d'Entreprises dans la Lutte contre le Cancer, and Commission de Recherche Clinique of Institut Curie.
We thank Dr. G. Contesso and Dr. J. Bram for their critical reading of the manuscript, J. P. Laborde for iconography, and C. Rouillon for technical assistance.
REFERENCES
1 Moore OS, Foste FW. The relatively favorable prognosis of medullary carcinomas of the breast. Cancer 1949;2:635-42.
2 Ridolfi RL, Rosen PP, Port A, Kinne D, Mike V. Medullary carcinoma of the breast: a clinicopathologic study with 10 year follow-up. Cancer 1977;40:1365-85.[Medline]
3 Rapin V, Contesso G, Mouriesse H, Bertin F, Lacombe MJ, Piekarski JD, et al. Medullary breast carcinoma. A reevaluation of 95 cases of breast cancer with inflammatory stroma. Cancer 1988;61:2503-10.[Medline]
4 Sjogren S, Ignanas M, Holmberg L, Norberg T, Nordgren H, Lindgren A, et al. Re: the p53 gene in breast cancer: prognostic value of complementary DNA sequencing versus immunohistochemistryresponse [letter]. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;88:1500.
5 Soussi T. The p53 tumor suppressor gene: from molecular biology to clinical investigation. In: Klijn JG, editor. Prognostic and predictive value of p53. Amsterdam (The Netherlands): Elsevier; 1997. p. 3-22.
6 Andersen TI, Holm R, Nesland JM, Heimdal KR, Ottestad L, Borresen AL. Prognostic significance of TP53 alterations in breast carcinoma. Br J Cancer 1993;68:540-8.[Medline]
7
Flaman JM, Frebourg T, Moreau V, Charbonnier F, Martin C,
Chappuis P, et al. A simple p53 functional assay for screening cell lines, blood, and tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1995;92:3963-7.
8 Tenaud C, Negoescu A, Labat-moleur F, Legros Y, Soussi T, Brambilla E. p53 immunolabeling in archival paraffin-embedded tissues: optimal protocol based on microwave heating for eight antibodies on lung carcinomas. Mod Pathol 1994;7:853-9.[Medline]
9 Rozan S, Vicent-Salomon A, Zafrani B, Validire P, de Cremoux P, Bernoux A, et al. No significant predictive value of c-erbB-2 or p53 expression regarding sensitivity to primary chemotherapy or radiotherapy in breast cancer. Int J Cancer 1998;79:27-33.[Medline]
10 Domagala W, Harezga B, Szadowska A, Markiewski M, Weber K, Osborn M. Nuclear p53 protein accumulates preferentially in medullary and high-grade ductal but rarely in lobular breast carcinomas. Am J Pathol 1993;142:669-74.[Abstract]
11 Marchetti A, Buttitta F, Pellegrini S, Campani D, Diella F, Cecchetti D, et al. p53 mutations and histological type of invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer Res 1993;53:4665-9.[Abstract]
12 Seshadri R, Leong AS, McCaul K, Firgaira FA, Setlur V, Horsfall DJ. Relationship between p53 gene abnormalities and other tumour characteristics in breast-cancer prognosis [published erratum appears in Int J Cancer 1996;69:354]. Int J Cancer 1996;69:135-41.[Medline]
13 Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Pathology of familial breast cancer: differences between breast cancers in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and sporadic cases. Lancet 1997;349:1505-10.[Medline]
14 Eisinger F, Jacquemier J, Charpin C, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Bressac-de Paillerets B, Peyrat JP, et al. Mutations at BRCA1: the medullary breast carcinoma revisited. Cancer Res 1998;58:1588-92.[Abstract]
15 Crook T, Crossland S, Crompton MR, Osin P, Gusterson BA. p53 mutations in BRCA1-associated familial breast cancer [letter]. Lancet 1997;350:638-9.[Medline]
16 Bergh J, Norberg T, Sjogren 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 1995;1: 1029-34.[Medline]
17 Goh HS, Yao J, Smith DR. p53 point mutation and survival in colorectal cancer patients. Cancer Res 1995;55:5217-21.[Abstract]
Manuscript received September 28, 1998; revised January 22, 1999; accepted February 1, 1999.
This article has been cited by other articles in HighWire Press-hosted journals:
![]() |
||||
|
Oxford University Press Privacy Policy and Legal Statement |