Did circulating tumor cells tell us all they could? The missed circulating tumor cell message in breast cancer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare circulating tumor cell (CTC) detection rates in patients with early (M0) and metastatic (M+) breast cancer using 2 positive-selection methods or size-based unbiased enrichment. Methods: Blood collected at baseline and at different times during treatment from M0 patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy and from M+ women starting a new line of treatment was processed in parallel using AdnaTest EMT-1/ and EMT-2/Stem CellSelect/Detect kits or ScreenCell Cyto devices. CTC positivity was defined according to the suggested cutoffs and cytological parameters, respectively. Results: Higher CTC detection rates were obtained with the AdnaTest approach when using for CTC-enrichment antibodies against ERBB2 and EGFR in addition to MUC1 and the classical epithelial surface marker EPCAM (13% vs. 48%). In M0 patients mainly, CTC positivity rates further increased when EMT- and stemness-related marker expression (PIK3CA, AKT2 and ALDH1) was evaluated in addition to EPCAM, MUC1 and ERBB2. When the physical properties of tumor cells were exploited, CTCs were detected at higher percentages than with positive-selectionbased methods, without any difference between clinical stages (78% in M0 vs. 72% in M+cases at baseline). Circulating tumor microemboli (CTMs) were detected in addition to single CTCs with significantly higher frequency in M0 than M+ samples (78% vs. 27%, p = 0.0002). Conclusions: Different approaches for CTC detection probably identify distinct tumor cell subpopulations, but need technical standardization before their clinical validity and biological specificity may be adequately investigated. The distinct role of CTMs compared with CTCs as prognostic and predictive biomarkers represents a further challenge.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e429-e433
JournalInternational Journal of Biological Markers
Volume30
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 1 2015

Fingerprint

Circulating Neoplastic Cells
Tumors
Cells
Breast Neoplasms
Neoplasms
Neoadjuvant Therapy
Biomarkers
Equipment and Supplies
Antibodies
Standardization
Therapeutics
Blood
Physical properties

Keywords

  • Breast cancer
  • Circulating tumor cells (CTCs)
  • Circulating tumor microemboli (CTM)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Biochemistry
  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

@article{30abec5ae1f9445fac14666aa1e271a8,
title = "Did circulating tumor cells tell us all they could? The missed circulating tumor cell message in breast cancer",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare circulating tumor cell (CTC) detection rates in patients with early (M0) and metastatic (M+) breast cancer using 2 positive-selection methods or size-based unbiased enrichment. Methods: Blood collected at baseline and at different times during treatment from M0 patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy and from M+ women starting a new line of treatment was processed in parallel using AdnaTest EMT-1/ and EMT-2/Stem CellSelect/Detect kits or ScreenCell Cyto devices. CTC positivity was defined according to the suggested cutoffs and cytological parameters, respectively. Results: Higher CTC detection rates were obtained with the AdnaTest approach when using for CTC-enrichment antibodies against ERBB2 and EGFR in addition to MUC1 and the classical epithelial surface marker EPCAM (13{\%} vs. 48{\%}). In M0 patients mainly, CTC positivity rates further increased when EMT- and stemness-related marker expression (PIK3CA, AKT2 and ALDH1) was evaluated in addition to EPCAM, MUC1 and ERBB2. When the physical properties of tumor cells were exploited, CTCs were detected at higher percentages than with positive-selectionbased methods, without any difference between clinical stages (78{\%} in M0 vs. 72{\%} in M+cases at baseline). Circulating tumor microemboli (CTMs) were detected in addition to single CTCs with significantly higher frequency in M0 than M+ samples (78{\%} vs. 27{\%}, p = 0.0002). Conclusions: Different approaches for CTC detection probably identify distinct tumor cell subpopulations, but need technical standardization before their clinical validity and biological specificity may be adequately investigated. The distinct role of CTMs compared with CTCs as prognostic and predictive biomarkers represents a further challenge.",
keywords = "Breast cancer, Circulating tumor cells (CTCs), Circulating tumor microemboli (CTM)",
author = "Emanuela Fina and Carolina Reduzzi and Rosita Motta and {Di Cosimo}, Serena and Giulia Bianchi and Antonia Martinetti and Janine Wechsler and Vera Cappelletti and Daidone, {Maria G.}",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5301/jbm.5000166",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "e429--e433",
journal = "International Journal of Biological Markers",
issn = "0393-6155",
publisher = "Wichtig Publishing Srl",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Did circulating tumor cells tell us all they could? The missed circulating tumor cell message in breast cancer

AU - Fina, Emanuela

AU - Reduzzi, Carolina

AU - Motta, Rosita

AU - Di Cosimo, Serena

AU - Bianchi, Giulia

AU - Martinetti, Antonia

AU - Wechsler, Janine

AU - Cappelletti, Vera

AU - Daidone, Maria G.

PY - 2015/10/1

Y1 - 2015/10/1

N2 - Purpose: To compare circulating tumor cell (CTC) detection rates in patients with early (M0) and metastatic (M+) breast cancer using 2 positive-selection methods or size-based unbiased enrichment. Methods: Blood collected at baseline and at different times during treatment from M0 patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy and from M+ women starting a new line of treatment was processed in parallel using AdnaTest EMT-1/ and EMT-2/Stem CellSelect/Detect kits or ScreenCell Cyto devices. CTC positivity was defined according to the suggested cutoffs and cytological parameters, respectively. Results: Higher CTC detection rates were obtained with the AdnaTest approach when using for CTC-enrichment antibodies against ERBB2 and EGFR in addition to MUC1 and the classical epithelial surface marker EPCAM (13% vs. 48%). In M0 patients mainly, CTC positivity rates further increased when EMT- and stemness-related marker expression (PIK3CA, AKT2 and ALDH1) was evaluated in addition to EPCAM, MUC1 and ERBB2. When the physical properties of tumor cells were exploited, CTCs were detected at higher percentages than with positive-selectionbased methods, without any difference between clinical stages (78% in M0 vs. 72% in M+cases at baseline). Circulating tumor microemboli (CTMs) were detected in addition to single CTCs with significantly higher frequency in M0 than M+ samples (78% vs. 27%, p = 0.0002). Conclusions: Different approaches for CTC detection probably identify distinct tumor cell subpopulations, but need technical standardization before their clinical validity and biological specificity may be adequately investigated. The distinct role of CTMs compared with CTCs as prognostic and predictive biomarkers represents a further challenge.

AB - Purpose: To compare circulating tumor cell (CTC) detection rates in patients with early (M0) and metastatic (M+) breast cancer using 2 positive-selection methods or size-based unbiased enrichment. Methods: Blood collected at baseline and at different times during treatment from M0 patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy and from M+ women starting a new line of treatment was processed in parallel using AdnaTest EMT-1/ and EMT-2/Stem CellSelect/Detect kits or ScreenCell Cyto devices. CTC positivity was defined according to the suggested cutoffs and cytological parameters, respectively. Results: Higher CTC detection rates were obtained with the AdnaTest approach when using for CTC-enrichment antibodies against ERBB2 and EGFR in addition to MUC1 and the classical epithelial surface marker EPCAM (13% vs. 48%). In M0 patients mainly, CTC positivity rates further increased when EMT- and stemness-related marker expression (PIK3CA, AKT2 and ALDH1) was evaluated in addition to EPCAM, MUC1 and ERBB2. When the physical properties of tumor cells were exploited, CTCs were detected at higher percentages than with positive-selectionbased methods, without any difference between clinical stages (78% in M0 vs. 72% in M+cases at baseline). Circulating tumor microemboli (CTMs) were detected in addition to single CTCs with significantly higher frequency in M0 than M+ samples (78% vs. 27%, p = 0.0002). Conclusions: Different approaches for CTC detection probably identify distinct tumor cell subpopulations, but need technical standardization before their clinical validity and biological specificity may be adequately investigated. The distinct role of CTMs compared with CTCs as prognostic and predictive biomarkers represents a further challenge.

KW - Breast cancer

KW - Circulating tumor cells (CTCs)

KW - Circulating tumor microemboli (CTM)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84947920038&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84947920038&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5301/jbm.5000166

DO - 10.5301/jbm.5000166

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - e429-e433

JO - International Journal of Biological Markers

JF - International Journal of Biological Markers

SN - 0393-6155

IS - 4

ER -