Cancer is one of the leading causes of death, and despite increased research in recent years, control of advanced-stage disease and optimal therapeutic responses remain elusive. Recent technological improvements have increased our understanding of human cancer as a heterogeneous disease. For instance, four hallmarks of cancer have recently been included, which in addition to being involved in cancer development, could be involved in therapeutic responses and resistance. One of these hallmarks is chromosome instability (CIN), a source of genetic variation in either altered chromosome number or structure. CIN has become a hot topic in recent years, not only for its implications in cancer diagnostics and prognostics, but also for its role in therapeutic responses. Chromosomal alterations are mainly used to determine genetic heterogeneity in tumors, but CIN could also reveal treatment efficacy, as many therapies are based on increasing CIN, which causes aberrant cells to undergo apoptosis. However, it should be noted that contradictory findings on the implications of CIN for the therapeutic response have been reported, with some studies associating high CIN with a better therapeutic response and others associating it with therapeutic resistance. Considering these observations, it is necessary to increase our understanding of the role CIN plays not only in tumor development, but also in therapeutic responses. This review focuses on recent studies that suggest possible mechanisms and consequences of CIN in different disease types, with a primary focus on cancer outcomes and therapeutic responses.

17β-Estradiol (E2) plays a pivotal role in the development and progression of breast cancer. As a result, blockade of the E2 signal through either tamoxifen (TAM) or aromatase inhibitors is an important therapeutic strategy to treat or prevent estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer. However, resistance to TAM is the major obstacle in endocrine therapy. This resistance occurs either de novo or is acquired after an initial beneficial response. The underlying mechanisms for TAM resistance are probably multifactorial and remain largely unknown. Considering that breast cancer is a very heterogeneous disease and patients respond differently to treatment, the molecular analysis of TAM’s biological activity could provide the necessary framework to understand the complex effects of this drug in target cells. Moreover, this could explain, at least in part, the development of resistance and indicate an optimal therapeutic option. This review highlights the implications of TAM in breast cancer as well as the role of receptors/signal pathways recently suggested to be involved in the development of TAM resistance. G protein—coupled estrogen receptor, Androgen Receptor and Hedgehog signaling pathways are emerging as novel therapeutic targets and prognostic indicators for breast cancer, based on their ability to mediate estrogenic signaling in ERα-positive or -negative breast cancer.

The incidence and mortality of breast cancer (BC) have increased in recent years, and BC is the main cause of cancer-related death in women worldwide. One of the most significant clinical problems in the treatment of patients with BC is the development of therapeutic resistance. Therefore, elucidating the molecular mechanisms involved in drug resistance is critical. The therapeutic decision for the management of patients with BC is based not only on the assessment of prognostic factors but also on the evaluation of clinical and pathological parameters. Although this has been a successful approach, some patients relapse and/or eventually develop resistance to treatment. This review is focused on recent studies on the possible biological and molecular mechanisms involved in both response and resistance to treatment in BC. Additionally, emerging treatments that seek to overcome resistance and reduce side effects are also described. A greater understanding of the mechanisms of action of treatments used in BC might contribute not only to the enhancement of our understanding of the mechanisms involved in the development of resistance but also to the optimization of the existing treatment regimens.

The significance of androgen receptor (AR) in breast cancer (BC) management is not fully defined, and it is still ambiguous how the level of AR expression influences oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) tumours. The aim of the present study was to analyse the prognostic impact of AR/ER ratio, evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC), correlating this value with clinical, pathological and molecular characteristics. We retrospectively selected a cohort of 402 ER+BC patients. On each tumour, IHC analyses for AR, ER, PgR, HER2 and Ki67 were performed and AR+ cases were used to calculate the AR/ER value. A cut-off of ≥2 was selected using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses. RNA from 19 cases with AR/ER≥2 was extracted and used for Prosigna-PAM50 assays. Tumours with AR/ER≥2 (6%) showed more frequent metastatic lymph nodes, larger size, higher histological grade and lower PgR levels than cases with AR/ER<2. Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients with AR/ER≥2 had worse disease-free interval (DFI) and disease-specific survival (DSS) (hazard ratios (HR) = 4.96 for DFI and HR = 8.69 for DSS, both P ≤ 0.004). According to the Prosigna-PAM50 assay, 63% (12/19) of these cases resulted in intermediate or high risk of recurrence categories. Additionally, although all samples were positive for ER assessed by IHC, the molecular test assigned 47.4% (9/19) of BCs to intrinsic non-luminal subtypes. In conclusion, the AR/ER ratio ≥2 identifies a subgroup of patients with aggressive biological features and may represent an additional independent marker of worse BC prognosis. Moreover, the Prosigna-PAM50 results indicate that a significant number of cases with AR/ER≥2 could be non-luminal tumours.