Abstract P2-01-08: Different numbers and prognostic significance of circulating tumour cells in patients with metastatic breast cancer according to immunohistochemical subtypes.

Introduction: The enumeration of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) with the EPCAM-based CellSearch system has prognostic significance in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, breast cancer has been shown to be a molecularly heterogeneous disease. The aim of this study was to assess potential differences in the detection and prognostic significance of CTCs according to the immunohistochemically defined molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Methods: CellSearch CTC counts were obtained from 110 patients with MBC prior to first line systemic treatment, treated at GZA Hospitals Sint-Augustinus between november 2007 and december 2011. Clinicopathological variables were prospectively entered in a database. Based on the St-Gallen surrogate definitions of intrinsic breast cancer subtypes (Goldhirsch et al. Ann Oncol 2011), patients were divided in 5 groups: luminal A (ER/PR+, HER2−, Bloom-Richardson histological grade I-II), luminal B – HER2 negative (ER/PR+, Her2−, grade III), luminal B – HER2 positive (ER/PR+, HER2+, any grade), HER2 positive – non luminal (ER/PR−, HER2+), and triple negative (TN) (ER/PR−, HER2−). Differences in progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to the FDA approved prognostic cut-off of ≥5 CTC/7.5 ml blood were estimated using Kaplan Meier and Cox proportional hazard statistics. Results: CTC were detected in 78 of 110 (71%) patients. Higher detection rates and numbers of CTC were observed in patients with luminal A and TN breast cancer as compared to patients with luminal B and HER2 positive disease. However, no differences in positivity rates were observed between molecular subtypes according to the 5 CTC prognostic cut-off point (table 1). After a median FU time of 3.1 years, 39 patients had died. In the total study population, the presence of ≥5 CTC was an independent predictor of PFS and OS in multivariate analysis (PFS: HRCTC≥5=2.236 (1.366–3.658), p = 0.001; OS: HRCTC≥5=3.180 (1.553–6.509), p = 0.002). When analyzing subgroups separately, a lower prognostic power was observed in the HER2 positive and luminal B subgroups. Conclusion: Significant differences were observed in the detection and prognostic significance of EPCAM positive CTC according to the immunohistochemically defined breast cancer subtypes. Interestingly, CTC were detected more frequently in patients with luminal A and TN tumors. Furthermore, our data suggest a lower prognostic significance of CTC evaluation in HER2 positive patients with MBC. Our data independently confirm those reported by Giordano et al. (Ann Oncol 2010) in a large clinically uniform population of patients with MBC before the start of first-line treatment. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-01-08.