Many cases of hereditary breast cancer are due to mutations in either the BRCA1 or the BRCA2 gene. The histopathological changes in these cancers are often characteristic of the mutant gene. We hypothesized that the genes expressed by these two types of tumors are also distinctive, perhaps allowing us to identify cases of hereditary breast cancer on the basis of gene-expression profiles. RNA from samples of primary tumors from seven carriers of the BRCA1 mutation, seven carriers of the BRCA2 mutation, and seven patients with sporadic cases of breast cancer was compared with a microarray of 6512 complementary DNA clones of 5361 genes. Statistical analyses were used to identify a set of genes that could distinguish the BRCA1 genotype from the BRCA2 genotype. Permutation analysis of multivariate classification functions established that the gene-expression profiles of tumors with BRCA1 mutations, tumors with BRCA2 mutations, and sporadic tumors differed significantly from each other. An analysis of variance between the levels of gene expression and the genotype of the samples identified 176 genes that were differentially expressed in tumors with BRCA1 mutations and tumors with BRCA2 mutations. Given the known properties of some of the genes in this panel, our findings indicate that there are functional differences between breast tumors with BRCA1 mutations and those with BRCA2 mutations. Significantly different groups of genes are expressed by breast cancers with BRCA1 mutations and breast cancers with BRCA2 mutations. Our results suggest that a heritable mutation influences the gene-expression profile of the cancer.

Cytotoxic T cells infiltrating tumors are thought to utilize HIF transcription factors during adaptation to the hypoxic tumor microenvironment. Deletion analyses of the two key HIF isoforms found that HIF-1α, but not HIF-2α, was essential for the effector state in CD8+ T cells. Furthermore, loss of HIF-1α in CD8+ T cells reduced tumor infiltration and tumor cell killing, and altered tumor vascularization. Deletion of VEGF-A, an HIF target gene, in CD8+ T cells accelerated tumorigenesis while also altering vascularization. Analyses of human breast cancer showed inverse correlations between VEGF-A expression and CD8+ T cell infiltration, and a link between T cell infiltration and vascularization. These data demonstrate that the HIF-1α/VEGF-A axis is an essential aspect of tumor immunity.

Cancer cells have aberrant patterns of DNA methylation including hypermethylation of gene promoter CpG islands and global demethylation of the genome. Genes that cause familial cancer, as well as other genes, can be silenced by promoter hypermethylation in sporadic tumors, but the methylation of these genes in tumors from kindreds with inherited cancer syndromes has not been well characterized. Here, we examine CpG island methylation of 10 genes (hMLH1, BRCA1, APC, LKB1, CDH1, p16^INK4a, p14^ARF, MGMT, GSTP1 and RARβ2) and 5-methylcytosine DNA content, in inherited (n = 342) and non-inherited (n = 215) breast and colorectal cancers. Our results show that singly retained alleles of germline mutated genes are never hypermethylated in inherited tumors. However, this epigenetic change is a frequent second ‘hit’, associated with the wild-type copy of these genes in inherited tumors where both alleles are retained. Global hypomethylation was similar between sporadic and hereditary cases, but distinct differences existed in patterns of methylation at non-familial genes. This study demonstrates that hereditary cancers ‘mimic’ the DNA methylation patterns present in the sporadic tumors.

In the decade since their discovery, the two major breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 , have been shown conclusively to be involved in a significant fraction of families segregating breast and ovarian cancer. However, it has become equally clear that a large proportion of families segregating breast cancer alone are not caused by mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Unfortunately, despite intensive effort, the identification of additional breast cancer predisposition genes has so far been unsuccessful, presumably because of genetic heterogeneity, low penetrance, or recessive/polygenic mechanisms. These non- BRCA1/2 breast cancer families (termed BRCAx families) comprise a histopathologically heterogeneous group, further supporting their origin from multiple genetic events. Accordingly, the identification of a method to successfully subdivide BRCAx families into recognizable groups could be of considerable value to further genetic analysis. We have previously shown that global gene expression analysis can identify unique and distinct expression profiles in breast tumors from BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Here we show that gene expression profiling can discover novel classes among BRCAx tumors, and differentiate them from BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumors. Moreover, microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) to cDNA arrays revealed specific somatic genetic alterations within the BRCAx subgroups. These findings illustrate that, when gene expression-based classifications are used, BRCAx families can be grouped into homogeneous subsets, thereby potentially increasing the power of conventional genetic analysis.

Clinical oncology is advancing toward a more personalized treatment orientation, making the need to understand the biology of metastasis increasingly acute. Dissecting the complex molecular, genetic and clinical phenotypes underlying the processes involved in the development of metastatic disease, which remains the principal cause of cancer-related deaths, could lead to the identification of more effective prognostication and targeted approaches to prevent and treat metastases. The past decade has witnessed significant progress in the field of cancer metastasis research. Clinical and technological milestones have been reached which have tremendously enriched our understanding of the complex pathways undertaken by primary tumors to progress into lethal metastases and how some of these processes might be amenable to therapy. The aim of this review article is to highlight the recent advances toward unraveling the clinical and molecular complexity of breast cancer metastases. We focus on genes mediating breast cancer metastases and organ-specific tropism, and discuss gene signatures for prediction of metastatic disease. The challenges of translating this information into clinically applicable tools for improving the prognostication of the metastatic potential of a primary breast tumor, as well as for therapeutic interventions against latent and active metastatic disease are addressed.

Introduction: Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare and inadequately characterized disease. The aim of the present study was to characterize MBC tumors transcriptionally, to classify them into comprehensive subgroups, and to compare them with female breast cancer (FBC). Methods: A total of 66 clinicopathologically well-annotated fresh frozen MBC tumors were analyzed using Illumina Human HT-12 bead arrays, and a tissue microarray with 220 MBC tumors was constructed for validation using immunohistochemistry. Two external gene expression datasets were used for comparison purposes: 37 MBCs and 359 FBCs. Results: Using an unsupervised approach, we classified the MBC tumors into two subgroups, luminal M1 and luminal M2, respectively, with differences in tumor biological features and outcome, and which differed from the intrinsic subgroups described in FBC. The two subgroups were recapitulated in the external MBC dataset. Luminal M2 tumors were characterized by high expression of immune response genes and genes associated with estrogen receptor (ER) signaling. Luminal M1 tumors, on the other hand, despite being ER positive by immunohistochemistry showed a lower correlation to genes associated with ER signaling and displayed a more aggressive phenotype and worse prognosis. Validation of two of the most differentially expressed genes, class 1 human leukocyte antigen (HLA) and the metabolizing gene N-acetyltransferase-1 (NAT1), respectively, revealed significantly better survival associated with high expression of both markers (HLA, hazard ratio (HR) 3.6, P = 0.002; NAT1, HR 2.5, P = 0.033). Importantly, NAT1 remained significant in a multivariate analysis (HR 2.8, P = 0.040) and may thus be a novel prognostic marker in MBC. Conclusions: We have detected two unique and stable subgroups of MBC with differences in tumor biological features and outcome. They differ from the widely acknowledged intrinsic subgroups of FBC. As such, they may constitute two novel subgroups of breast cancer, occurring exclusively in men, and which may consequently require novel treatment approaches. Finally, we identified NAT1 as a possible prognostic biomarker for MBC, as suggested by NAT1 positivity corresponding to better outcome.