Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is the most common of the breast cancer special types, accounting for up to 15% of all breast cancer cases. ILCs are noted for their lack of E-cadherin function, which underpins their characteristic discohesive growth pattern, with cells arranged in single file and dispersed throughout the stroma. Typically, tumours are luminal in molecular subtype, being oestrogen and progesterone receptor positive, and HER2 negative. Since last reviewing the lobular literature (McCart Reed et al., Breast Cancer Res 17:12, 2015), there has been a considerable increase in research output focused on this tumour type, including studies into the pathology and management of disease, a high-resolution definition of the genomic landscape of tumours as well as the evolution of several potential therapeutic avenues. There abounds a huge amount of new data, which we will review herein.

Metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) is relatively rare but accounts for a significant proportion of global breast cancer mortality. This group is extremely heterogeneous and by definition exhibits metaplastic change to squamous and/or mesenchymal elements, including spindle, squamous, chondroid, osseous, and rhabdomyoid features. Clinically, patients are more likely to present with large primary tumours (higher stage), distant metastases, and overall, have shorter 5‐year survival compared to invasive carcinomas of no special type. The current World Health Organisation (WHO) diagnostic classification for this cancer type is based purely on morphology – the biological basis and clinical relevance of its seven sub‐categories are currently unclear. By establishing the Asia‐Pacific MBC (AP‐MBC) Consortium, we amassed a large series of MBCs (n = 347) and analysed the mutation profile of a subset, expression of 14 breast cancer biomarkers, and clinicopathological correlates, contextualising our findings within the WHO guidelines. The most significant indicators of poor prognosis were large tumour size (T3; p = 0.004), loss of cytokeratin expression (lack of staining with pan‐cytokeratin AE1/3 antibody; p = 0.007), EGFR overexpression (p = 0.01), and for ‘mixed’ MBC, the presence of more than three distinct morphological entities (p = 0.007). Conversely, fewer morphological components and EGFR negativity were favourable indicators. Exome sequencing of 30 cases confirmed enrichment of TP53 and PTEN mutations, and intriguingly, concurrent mutations of TP53, PTEN, and PIK3CA. Mutations in neurofibromatosis‐1 (NF1) were also overrepresented [16.7% MBCs compared to ∼5% of breast cancers overall; enrichment p = 0.028; mutation significance p = 0.006 (OncodriveFM)], consistent with published case reports implicating germline NF1 mutations in MBC risk. Taken together, we propose a practically minor but clinically significant modification to the guidelines: all WHO_1 mixed‐type tumours should have the number of morphologies present recorded, as a mechanism for refining prognosis, and that EGFR and pan‐cytokeratin expression are important prognostic markers. Copyright © 2018 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Genome-wide association studies have identified a breast cancer risk locus at 19q13.31. The candidate causal variants at this locus are located in the first exon of KCNN4. KCNN4, which regulates membrane potential and Ca2+ signaling, is a good candidate for drug repositioning because its inhibitor, Senicapoc, has been shown to be well tolerated in Phase-II and -III clinical trials for asthma and sickle cell anemia. Methods: We evaluated public mRNA expression data to determine whether the allele at 19q13.31 associated with increased breast cancer risk was associated with KCNN4 expression. We also used immunohistochemistry to evaluate the relationship between KCNN4 protein expression and breast cancer survival. We then used Senicapoc in two murine mammary tumor models to determine if it would delay tumor development. We also treated mice bearing 4T1 mammary tumors with Senicapoc, by subcutaneous injection and by oral gavage. Finally we used gene editing to make deletions within Kcnn4 in 4T1 to determine whether Senicapoc had off-target effects on tumor growth. Results: Analysis of the Genotype-Tissue Expression Project showed that the allele at 19q13.31 associated with increased breast cancer risk is associated with increased KCNN4 expression, suggesting that inhibiting KCNN4 might reduce breast cancer risk. Using immunohistochemistry in a large breast cancer cohort, we found that membrane and cytoplasmic expression is a marker of poor prognosis in triple negative breast cancer. We then tested the efficacy of Senicapoc to prevent and treat breast cancer. This showed that it delays the development of mammary tumors in two murine models, and slows growth of a syngeneic (4T1) model of triple negative breast cancer. Senicapoc monotherapy showed similar efficacy to anthracycline/taxane-based chemotherapy in these studies, with a stronger effect when they were combined. Conclusions: These results provide a rationale for clinical testing of Senicapoc for treating, and even preventing, breast cancer.

No abstract

No abstract