Nima
Nabavizadeh‡
ab,
Catherine
Klifa‡
b,
David
Newitt
b,
Ying
Lu
bf,
Yunn-Yi
Chen
c,
Howard
Hsu
d,
Clark
Fisher
a,
Taku
Tokayasu
e,
Adam B.
Olshen
e,
Paul
Spellman
d,
Joe W.
Gray
d,
Nola
Hylton
b and
Catherine C.
Park
*ad
aDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco Comprehensive Cancer Center, 1600 Divisadero Street H1031, San Francisco, CA 94143-1708, USA. E-mail: cpark@radonc.ucsf.edu; Fax: +1-415-353-9883; Tel: +1-415-353-7175
bDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, USA
cDepartment of Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, USA
dLife Sciences Division, Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, USA
eHelen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, USA
fDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, USA
First published on 18th March 2011
In animal and laboratory models, cancer-associated stroma, or elements of the supporting tissue surrounding a primary tumor, has been shown to be necessary for tumor evolution and progression. However, little is understood or studied regarding the properties of intact stroma in human cancer in vivo. In addition, for breast cancer patients, the optimal volume of local tissue to treat surrounding a primary tumor is not clear. Here, we performed an interdisciplinary study of normal-appearing breast tissue using breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), correlative histology and array comparative genomic hybridization to identify a cancer-associated stroma in humans. Using a novel technique for segmenting breast fibroglandular tissue, quantifiable topographic percent enhancement mapping of the stroma surrounding invasive breast cancer was found to be significantly elevated within 2 cm of the tumor edge. This region was also found to harbor increased microvessel density, and genomic changes that were closely associated with host normal breast tissue. These findings indicate that a cancer-associated stroma may be identified and characterized in human breast cancer using non-invasive imaging techniques. Identification of a cancer-associated stroma may be further developed to help guide local therapy to reduce recurrence and morbidity in breast cancer patients.
Insight, innovation, integrationWe describe a novel approach to evaluating cancer-associated stroma in patients with breast cancer. Using an innovative MRI technique to assess normal appearing breast tissue, elevated enhancement was quantified in relationship to proximity to the tumor. On pathologic evaluation of the corresponding tissue, this region was found to harbor significantly increased microvessel density. Despite changes in phenotype, and elevated enhancement on MRI, there were minimal genomic changes detected by array CGH. Our study is the first to integrate molecular biology, pathology and imaging techniques to lend insight into cancer-associated stroma in patients. |
The role of CAS has been shown functionally by studies demonstrating that supportive cells from the CAS are necessary for tumorigenesis in vivo,1 and that the role of CAS in tumor progression may be emulated by wounding,2cytokine overproduction3 or low doses of ionizing radiation.4 Studies of genomic changes in the stroma have indicated that changes do exist.5 However their nature remains controversial based on the technique used to identify them; whether or not genomic changes in the CAS co-evolve with the primary tumor is a debated question.6,7 In addition, specific signals emanating from the extracellular matrix may be targeted to induce malignant cells to revert to their normal phenotype.8 Thus, identifying, characterizing and further understanding the role of CAS in breast cancers may lead to better local therapy and improved targets for treatment.
We have previously shown that stromal enhancement may have predictive value in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer.9 Here, we report a novel integrated approach to identifying and characterizing a CAS phenotype in patients with small primary breast cancers using advanced MRI techniques and correlative histopathologic and genomic studies from the same patients.
Four patients were excluded due to movement during the MRI image acquisition and 2 patients were excluded because their histology was not consistent with invasive breast carcinoma (IBC). The remaining 23 patients comprised the study group, Table 1.
Characteristic | Value |
---|---|
Values are expressed as number of patients unless otherwise indicated. Numbers in parentheses indicate value range. | |
Mean patient age | 54 years (32–77) |
Mean pre-treatment tumor size | 1.3 cm (0.2–2.5) |
Pathological tumor type | |
Invasive ductal | 18 |
Invasive lobular | 2 |
Invasive ductal and lobular | 2 |
Mucinous carcinoma | 1 |
Scharff-Bloom-Richardson grade | |
1 | 7 |
2 | 10 |
3 | 4 |
Unknown | 2 |
DCIS in Ipsilateral breast? | |
Yes | 14 |
No | 6 |
Unknown | 3 |
Nodal status | |
Positive | 8 |
Negative | 12 |
Unknown | 3 |
Estrogen receptor status | |
Positive | 20 |
Negative | 2 |
Unknown | 1 |
Progesterone receptor status | |
Positive | 19 |
Negative | 3 |
Unknown | 1 |
HER2 /neu Status | |
Positive | 6 |
Negative | 10 |
Unknown | 7 |
![]() | ||
Fig. 1 Tumor voxels are separated from normal-appearing breast following segmentation of fibroglandular breast tissue. (Left) Mid-sagittal cuts from pre- and post- contrast images are shown from a malignant tumor-bearing breast. (Middle) A fuzzy c-means based algorithm is applied to segment the fibroglandular breast tissue compartment. (Right) Voxels that represent malignant tumor are further segmented from normal-appearing fibroglandular breast tissue by percent enhancement threshold of >70%. |
A tumor “proximity map” for the normal-appearing breast tissue was created which quantified the 3-dimensional distance from each normal-appearing breast tissue voxel to the nearest tumor voxel. Values of enhancement of each voxel were then recorded at specific distances around the tumor voxels. All voxels within 6 cm of a malignant voxel were analyzed. Pair-wise comparisons with Tukey's adjusted p-values were made between voxels the edge of the tumor and those at farther distance intervals.
All sections were subjected to routine deparaffinization using xylene and rehydrated through decreasing concentrations of ethanol before treatment with a hydrogen peroxide solution to block endogenous peroxidase activity. Antigen retrieval was performed in 10 mM citrate buffer at pH 6.0 and non-specific binding was blocked with normal horse serum in phosphate buffered saline. Tissue sections were incubated overnight at 4 °C with a primary antibody and then incubated for 30 min with a biotinylated secondary antibody. Next, the avidin–biotin complex was applied for 30 min. Subsequently, diaminobenzadine was used as the chromogen. Sections were then counterstained with hematoxylin, dehydrated through increasing concentrations of ethanol, cleared in xylene, and mounted. Primary anti-CD31 antibodies (clone JC70A, Dako, 1:
50 dilution) and the appropriate positive and negative controls were run for each batch of slides.
Eight consecutive 10 micron sections from formalin fixed paraffin embedded blocks were cut and placed onto standard slides. The microdissection slides were stained with methyl green. Slides were deparaffinized in xylene washes (2 × 3 min each) followed by rehydration for 2 min each through a decreasing ethanol gradient (100%, 95%, 70%, 50%, dH2O). Slides were then stained in 0.1% methyl green for 15 s, washed for 5 min in dH2O and air-dried.
Breast pathologist, Y.Y.C., reviewed and marked representative H&E stained slides for areas of tumor, cancer-associated non-epithelial stroma, cancer-associated epithelium, normal epithelium and normal non-epithelial stroma. Microdissection was performed manually using #15 and #11 scalpel blades under direct visualization using a Leica dissecting microscope. For each slide, the non-epithelial stromal components were dissected and collected first. Epithelial components were collected next into separate tubes. Finally, tumor cells were collected into separate tubes. Blades were changed for the dissection of each cell type.
Proteinase K (Sigma) was added to a final concentration of 0.4 μg μL−1 in sample buffer and the samples were incubated at 55 °C in a shaking water bath. Samples underwent digestion for 3–4 days with daily addition of fresh proteinase K until the pellets were dissolved. The proteinase K was inactivated by heating the samples to 95 °C for 10 min prior to DNA purification.
DNA was purified from the samples by water extraction using Millipore Microcon Ultracel YM-30 columns. Double-deionized water (ddH20) was added to the columns and centrifuged at 12000 × g at room temperature to wet the columns. DNA samples were applied to the columns and centrifuged at 12
000 × g at room temperature to load the DNA into the columns. Two washes were performed with ddH2O and centrifugation at 12
000 × g at room temperature. The columns were inverted into collecting tubes and centrifuged at 13
000 × g to elute the DNA in water.
Quantitative real-time PCR (Taqman) was performed on 1 μL of the samples diluted serially up to 1:
2000 in nuclease free water. Threshold cycles were compared to known DNA concentration standards in order to quantify sample DNA concentrations.
Two statistical analyses on array CGH data were performed. The first consisted of identifying gains and losses for each sample. To facilitate this, circular binary segmentation was used to segment the log ratios from each into regions of estimated equal copy number.12 Segments greater than 0.25 standard deviations (SDs) from the median estimated copy number were considered gains, and those less than 0.25 SDs from the same were considered losses. The second analysis was pair-wise, but otherwise similar to the first. The log ratios of the second were subtracted from the log ratios of the first, after which the same segmentation and calling of gains and losses was performed. Because the subtraction considerably reduced the variability, the cutoff for alteration was increased to 0.5 SDs.
![]() | ||
Fig. 2 A 3-dimensional topographic map was created based on the proximity of each normal breast tissue voxel from its nearest neighboring tumor voxel. (A) Tumor voxels, identified by PE > 70%, are shown in red, while normal breast tissue voxels, identified by PE < 70%, are shown in green. Numbers written in each green box in the schema show the distance in millimetres of the green voxel to its closest red voxel. (B) Mean percent enhancement was significantly higher at the tumor edge, and decreased with distance through the fibroglandular breast tissue. Pairwise comparisons with Tukey's adjusted p-values indicated that the mean enhancement at 0–1 cm (p = <0.0001) and at 1–2 cm (p = 0.006) from the edge of the MBL was significantly higher than farther distance intervals. |
![]() | ||
Fig. 3 Microvessel density quantified by CD31 immunohistochemistry was compared between tissue sections close (within 2 cm) and far (>2 cm) of the tumor edge. Micrograph showing CD 31 immunohistochemistry in (a) near and (b) far tissue sections. (c) The mean MVD for breast tissue <2 cm from the IBC (80 vessels mm−2, 95% CI: 61–98) was found to be significantly higher than the mean MVD in breast tissue >2 cm from the IBC (54 vessels mm−2, 95% CI: 36–72, p = 0.04 for two-sided t-test). |
![]() | ||
Fig. 4 Thin sections from near and far tissue blocks were microdissected for genomic array analysis. (A) A hematoxylin and eosin stained section shows tumor (black outline) and surrounding stroma. (B) Cresyl green stain showing stromal elements. (C) Non-epithelial normal tissue was microdissected. (D) Normal epithelium was isolated from all other stromal elements. |
We found that the percentage of the genome altered, either gained or lost, was substantially higher in two of the three tumor samples than it was in any of the other samples. It was 42.7% altered in tumor from case “A” and 34.7% altered in tumor from case “B”. In the third case “C”, tumor was only 5.9% altered. The non-tumor samples were altered between 0.1% and 2.9% for all three cases, and therefore most alterations in the tumors were not replicated elsewhere, representative case shown in Fig. 5.
![]() | ||
Fig. 5 Array comparative genomic hybridization was performed on tumor, adjacent stroma and stroma far from the tumor in 3 cases. Representative genome wide changes are depicted with mean values in yellow, gains in blue and losses in red. Compared to tumor, stroma adjacent to and far from the tumor harbored significantly less chromosomal changes than that in the tumor. |
We also examined pair-wise differences between CAS and NS samples. To do this, we compared CAS epithelium to NS epithelium and CAS non-epithelial stroma to NS non-epithelial stroma. Overall, we found that the percentage of the genome differentially altered was minimal, ranging from 0.0% to 0.6%. We also analyzed pair-wise differences between non-tumor epithelium and stroma. Specifically, we compared CAS non-tumor epithelium to CAS stroma and NS non-tumor epithelium to NS stroma. Here the percentage of the genome differentially altered was never more than 0.1%. The lower rates of alterations in the pair-wise analyses suggested that alterations in the non-tumor samples, whatever the causes, were repeated across the different types of samples.
We previously showed that global enhancement levels in the entire breast could have predictive value in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer.9 In this exploratory study, we addressed patients with small tumors to determine whether enhancement in the normal appearing breast tissue could be informative. The patterns or “steps” of how the stroma becomes supportive for cancer growth are not well understood. However, studies indicate that in situ cancers are able to elicit angiogenesis, even without an invasive component, and that cancer cells can elaborate and induce extensive stromal remodeling.13 Although initial studies indicate that stromal gene expression can be a potent predictor of outcomes, the extent of remodeling has not been correlated with clinical breast cancer behavior.7 The ability to detect the extent of abnormal stroma that could increase risk for recurrence is potentially an important clinical tool. Breast cancer is often approached using surgery and radiation in order to preserve the breast, and avoid mastectomy. However, the degree of surgical excision, and targeted radiation, either as a boost or in the context of partial breast radiotherapy, are variable in practice. The optimal amount of normal tissue to treat surrounding a tumor is debatable and varies among institutions. Therefore, a tool that could guide local therapy to optimally reduce cancer recurrence risk could potentially avoid re-excision surgeries that are often necessary, and decrease unneeded treatment.
Our results also give insight into the underlying genomic underpinnings of the cancer-associated stroma. Whether the stroma co-evolves genomically with the tumor, or whether its involvement is predominantly epigenetic is not well understood.7 Several studies have shown that loss of heterozygosity, and specific mutations including p53 and PTEN, are identifiable in the stroma of breast cancers.18,19 However, others have not found significant genetic alterations in stroma.6 Array CGH revealed that genomic changes in the cancer-associated stroma were congruent with that of normal tissue, and not the tumor. Thus, phenotypic changes such as increased angiogenesis and evidence for stromal remodeling, may be primarily driven through epigenetic mechanisms, and may be targetable. Further investigations along these lines would be important.
Finally, we use an empirically derived 70% PE threshold to identify invasive lesions visualized on MRI. Although there is no direct radiology–pathology correlation, we have found excellent correlation between invasive tumor size measured by MRI using the 70% threshold, and pathologic tumor size.20 In fact, MRI has been shown to overestimate the size of tumor, not underestimate;21–23 thus, it is unlikely that the stromal measurements (<70% PE) are within the tumor. In the cases selected for the present study, patients did receive surgery soon after MRI, and all cases were carefully reviewed for size and extent of DCIS surrounding the tumor periphery.
We would like to acknowledge the limitations of this retrospective study. One, a pathologic correlation of the size of lesions seen on MRI has not been established. Although others have shown that MRI tends to overestimate tumor size,21–23 our empiric approach to identifying tumor boundaries has not been validated pathologically. In addition, the small numbers in our study overall may limit whether our results can be generalized. Despite this, to our knowledge, our study is the first to identify and characterize a cancer-associated stroma in breast cancer patients using evaluation of enhancement patterns on MRI. We have integrated a biological concept with novel application of imaging tools and corresponding pathologic and genomic tissue analysis. Future studies are necessary to further evaluate and validate the clinical utility of these findings.
Footnotes |
† Published as part of an Integrative Biology themed issue in honour of Mina J. Bissell: Guest Editor Mary Helen Barcellos-Hoff. |
‡ NN and CK contributed equally to this work. |
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011 |