Research ArticleOriginal Article

Association between homologous recombination deficiency and outcomes with platinum and platinum-free chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer

Yimeng Chen, Xue Wang, Feng Du, Jian Yue, Yiran Si, Xiaochen Zhao, Lina Cui, Bei Zhang, Ting Bei, Binghe Xu and Peng Yuan
Cancer Biology & Medicine February 2023, 20 (2) 155-168; DOI: https://doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2022.0525

References

  1. 1.↵
    2. Jiang YZ,
    3. Liu Y,
    4. Xiao Y,
    5. Hu X,
    6. Jiang L,
    7. Zuo WJ, et al.
    Molecular subtyping and genomic profiling expand precision medicine in refractory metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: the future trial. Cell Res. 2021; 31: 178–86.
    OpenUrl
  2. 2.
    2. Borri F,
    3. Granaglia A.
    Pathology of triple negative breast cancer. Semin Cancer Biol. 2021; 72: 136–45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    2. Criscitiello C,
    3. Azim HA,
    4. Schouten PC,
    5. Linn SC,
    6. Sotiriou C.
    Understanding the biology of triple-negative breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2012; 23: vi13–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    2. Ge J,
    3. Zuo W,
    4. Chen Y,
    5. Shao Z,
    6. Yu K.
    The advance of adjuvant treatment for triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Biol Med. 2021; 19: 187–201.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    2. Schmid P,
    3. Cortes J,
    4. Pusztai L,
    5. McArthur H,
    6. Kummel S,
    7. Bergh J, et al.
    Pembrolizumab for early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382: 810–21.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.
    2. Cortes J,
    3. Cescon DW,
    4. Rugo HS,
    5. Nowecki Z,
    6. Im SA,
    7. Yusof MM, et al.
    Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy for previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (KEYNOTE-355): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial. Lancet. 2020; 396: 1817–28.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.
    2. Hu N,
    3. Si Y,
    4. Yue J,
    5. Sun T,
    6. Wang X,
    7. Jia Z, et al.
    Anlotinib has good efficacy and low toxicity: a phase II study of anlotinib in pre-treated HER-2 negative metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Biol Med. 2021; 18: 849–59.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    2. Zhu A,
    3. Yuan P,
    4. Hu N,
    5. Li M,
    6. Wang W,
    7. Wang X, et al.
    Phase II study of apatinib in combination with oral vinorelbine in heavily pretreated HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and clinical implications of monitoring ctDNA. Cancer Biol Med. 2021; 18: 875–87.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in Oncology. Breast Cancer. Version 5. 2021.
  10. 10.↵
    2. Mayer IA,
    3. Zhao F,
    4. Arteaga CL,
    5. Symmans WF,
    6. Park BH,
    7. Burnette BL, et al.
    Randomized phase III postoperative trial of platinum-based chemotherapy versus capecitabine in patients with residual triple-negative breast cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: ECOG-ACRIN EA1131. J Clin Oncol. 2021; 39: 2539–51.
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.↵
    2. Chen Y,
    3. Guan Y,
    4. Wang J,
    5. Ma F,
    6. Luo Y,
    7. Chen S, et al.
    Platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced triple-negative breast cancer: a multicenter real-world study in china. Int J Cancer. 2020; 147: 3490–9.
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.
    2. Hu X,
    3. Wang B,
    4. Zhang J,
    5. Wang Z,
    6. Sun T,
    7. Wang S, et al.
    282MO Abraxane plus cisplatin compared with gemcitabine plus cisplatin as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (GAP): a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III trial. Ann Oncol. 2020; 31: S354.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    2. Hu XC,
    3. Zhang J,
    4. Xu BH,
    5. Cai L,
    6. Ragaz J,
    7. Wang ZH, et al.
    Cisplatin plus gemcitabine versus paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as first-line therapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (CBCSG006): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015; 16: 436–46.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    2. Fan Y,
    3. Xu BH,
    4. Yuan P,
    5. Ma F,
    6. Wang JY,
    7. Ding XY, et al.
    Docetaxel-cisplatin might be superior to docetaxel-capecitabine in the first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2013; 24: 1219–25.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    2. Tutt A,
    3. Tovey H,
    4. Cheang MCU,
    5. Kernaghan S,
    6. Kilburn L,
    7. Gazinska P, et al.
    Carboplatin in BRCA1/2-mutated and triple-negative breast cancer BRCAness subgroups: the TNT trial. Nat Med. 2018; 24: 628–37.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    2. Li Q,
    3. Zhang P,
    4. Yuan P,
    5. Wang J,
    6. Ma F,
    7. Luo Y, et al.
    A phase II study of capecitabine plus cisplatin in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer patients pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. Cancer Biol Ther. 2015; 16: 1746–53.
    OpenUrl
  17. 17.
    2. O’Shaughnessy J,
    3. Schwartzberg L,
    4. Danso MA,
    5. Miller KD,
    6. Rugo HS,
    7. Neubauer M, et al.
    Phase III study of iniparib plus gemcitabine and carboplatin versus gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014; 32: 3840–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    2. Zhu Y,
    3. Hu Y,
    4. Tang C,
    5. Guan X,
    6. Zhang W.
    Platinum-based systematic therapy in triple-negative breast cancer. Biochim Biophys Acta Rev Cancer. 2022; 1877: 188678.
  19. 19.↵
    2. Isakoff SJ,
    3. Mayer EL,
    4. He L,
    5. Traina TA,
    6. Carey LA,
    7. Krag KJ, et al.
    TBCRC009: a multicenter phase II clinical trial of platinum monotherapy with biomarker assessment in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015; 33: 1902–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.
    2. Byrski T,
    3. Gronwald J,
    4. Huzarski T,
    5. Grzybowska E,
    6. Budryk M,
    7. Stawicka M, et al.
    Pathologic complete response rates in young women with BRCA1-positive breast cancers after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 375–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    2. Arun B,
    3. Bayraktar S,
    4. Liu DD,
    5. Gutierrez Barrera AM,
    6. Atchley D,
    7. Pusztai L, et al.
    Response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer in brca mutation carriers and noncarriers: a single-institution experience. J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 3739–46.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    2. Lord CJ,
    3. Ashworth A.
    BRCAness revisited. Nat Rev Cancer. 2016; 16: 110–20.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    2. Davies H,
    3. Glodzik D,
    4. Morganella S,
    5. Yates LR,
    6. Staaf J,
    7. Zou X, et al.
    HRDetect is a predictor of BRCA1 and BRCA2 deficiency based on mutational signatures. Nat Med. 2017; 23: 517–25.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    2. Muggia F,
    3. Safra T.
    ‘BRCAness’ and its implications for platinum action in gynecologic cancer. Anticancer Res. 2014; 34: 551–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.
    2. Tutt AN,
    3. Lord CJ,
    4. McCabe N,
    5. Farmer H,
    6. Turner N,
    7. Martin NM, et al.
    Exploiting the DNA repair defect in BRCA mutant cells in the design of new therapeutic strategies for cancer. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 2005; 70: 139–48.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.
    2. Lord CJ,
    3. Ashworth A.
    The DNA damage response and cancer therapy. Nature. 2012; 481: 287–94.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  27. 27.
    2. Taniguchi T,
    3. D’Andrea AD.
    Molecular pathogenesis of fanconi anemia: recent progress. Blood. 2006; 107: 4223–33.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    2. Venkitaraman AR.
    Tracing the network connecting brca and fanconi anaemia proteins. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004; 4: 266–76.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  29. 29.↵
    2. Timms KM,
    3. Abkevich V,
    4. Hughes E,
    5. Neff C,
    6. Reid J,
    7. Morris B, et al.
    Association of BRCA1/2 defects with genomic scores predictive of DNA damage repair deficiency among breast cancer subtypes. Breast Cancer Res. 2014; 16: 475.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    2. Sipos O,
    3. Tovey H,
    4. Quist J,
    5. Haider S,
    6. Nowinski S,
    7. Gazinska P, et al.
    Assessment of structural chromosomal instability phenotypes as biomarkers of carboplatin response in triple negative breast cancer: the TNT trial. Ann Oncol. 2021; 32: 58–65.
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    2. Lips EH,
    3. Mulder L,
    4. Oonk A,
    5. van der Kolk LE,
    6. Hogervorst FB,
    7. Imholz AL, et al.
    Triple-negative breast cancer: BRCAness and concordance of clinical features with BRCA1-mutation carriers. Br J Cancer. 2013; 108: 2172–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  32. 32.↵
    2. Popova T,
    3. Manie E,
    4. Rieunier G,
    5. Caux-Moncoutier V,
    6. Tirapo C,
    7. Dubois T, et al.
    Ploidy and large-scale genomic instability consistently identify basal-like breast carcinomas with BRCA1/2 inactivation. Cancer Res. 2012; 72: 5454–62.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.
    2. Birkbak NJ,
    3. Wang ZC,
    4. Kim JY,
    5. Eklund AC,
    6. Li Q,
    7. Tian R, et al.
    Telomeric allelic imbalance indicates defective DNA repair and sensitivity to DNA-damaging agents. Cancer Discov. 2012; 2: 366–75.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. 34.↵
    2. Abkevich V,
    3. Timms KM,
    4. Hennessy BT,
    5. Potter J,
    6. Carey MS,
    7. Meyer LA, et al.
    Patterns of genomic loss of heterozygosity predict homologous recombination repair defects in epithelial ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer. 2012; 107: 1776–82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. 35.↵
    2. Moore KN,
    3. Secord AA,
    4. Geller MA,
    5. Miller DS,
    6. Cloven N,
    7. Fleming GF, et al.
    Niraparib monotherapy for late-line treatment of ovarian cancer (QUADRA): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019; 20: 636–48.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    2. Telli ML,
    3. Timms KM,
    4. Reid J,
    5. Hennessy B,
    6. Mills GB,
    7. Jensen KC, et al.
    Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score predicts response to platinum-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2016; 22: 3764–73.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.
    2. Telli ML,
    3. Chu C,
    4. Badve SS,
    5. Vinayak S,
    6. Silver DP,
    7. Isakoff SJ, et al.
    Association of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes with homologous recombination deficiency and BRCA1/2 status in patients with early triple-negative breast cancer: a pooled analysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2020; 26: 2704–10.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.
    2. Loibl S,
    3. Weber KE,
    4. Timms KM,
    5. Elkin EP,
    6. Hahnen E,
    7. Fasching PA, et al.
    Survival analysis of carboplatin added to an anthracycline/taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy and HRD score as predictor of response-final results from GeparSixto. Ann Oncol. 2018; 29: 2341–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.
    2. Chai Y,
    3. Chen Y,
    4. Zhang D,
    5. Wei Y,
    6. Li Z,
    7. Li Q, et al.
    Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and BRCA 1/2 gene mutation for predicting the effect of platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy of early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pers Med. 2022; 12: 323.
    OpenUrl
  40. 40.
    2. Mayer EL,
    3. Abramson V,
    4. Jankowitz R,
    5. Falkson C,
    6. Marcom PK,
    7. Traina T, et al.
    TBCRC 030: a phase II study of preoperative cisplatin versus paclitaxel in triple-negative breast cancer: evaluating the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) biomarker. Ann Oncol. 2020; 31: 1518–25.
    OpenUrl
  41. 41.
    2. Zhang L,
    3. Chen Y,
    4. Cheng MY,
    5. Zhuang X,
    6. Zou J,
    7. Wei D, et al.
    Homologous recombination deficiency predicts the response to platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2022; 14: 17588359221096253.
  42. 42.↵
    2. Ueno T,
    3. Kitano S,
    4. Masuda N,
    5. Ikarashi D,
    6. Yamashita M,
    7. Chiba T, et al.
    Immune microenvironment, homologous recombination deficiency, and therapeutic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer: Japan Breast Cancer Research Group (JBCRG)22 TR. BMC Med. 2022; 20: 136.
    OpenUrl
  43. 43.↵
    2. Vetter M,
    3. Fokas S,
    4. Biskup E,
    5. Schmid T,
    6. Schwab F,
    7. Schoetzau A, et al.
    Efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin for early triple negative breast cancer: a single center experience. Oncotarget. 2017; 8: 75617–26.
    OpenUrl
  44. 44.↵
    2. Yu KD,
    3. Ye FG,
    4. He M,
    5. Fan L,
    6. Ma D,
    7. Mo M, et al.
    Effect of adjuvant paclitaxel and carboplatin on survival in women with triple-negative breast cancer: a phase 3 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2020; 6: 1390–6.
    OpenUrl
  45. 45.↵
    2. Zhao EY,
    3. Shen Y,
    4. Pleasance E,
    5. Kasaian K,
    6. Leelakumari S,
    7. Jones M, et al.
    Homologous recombination deficiency and platinum-based therapy outcomes in advanced breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2017; 23: 7521–30.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  46. 46.↵
    2. Du F,
    3. Wang W,
    4. Wang Y,
    5. Li M,
    6. Zhu A,
    7. Wang J, et al.
    Carboplatin plus taxanes are non-inferior to epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by taxanes as adjuvant chemotherapy for early triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020; 182: 67–77.
    OpenUrl
  47. 47.↵
    2. Hong R,
    3. Ma F,
    4. Xu B,
    5. Li Q,
    6. Zhang P,
    7. Yuan P, et al.
    Efficacy of platinum-based chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer patients with metastases confined to the lungs: a single-institute experience. Anticancer Drugs. 2014; 25: 1089–94.
    OpenUrl
  48. 48.↵
    2. Lheureux S,
    3. Lai Z,
    4. Dougherty BA,
    5. Runswick S,
    6. Hodgson DR,
    7. Timms KM, et al.
    Long-term responders on olaparib maintenance in high-grade serous ovarian cancer: clinical and molecular characterization. Clin Cancer Res. 2017; 23: 4086–94.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  49. 49.↵
    2. Sokol ES,
    3. Pavlick D,
    4. Khiabanian H,
    5. Frampton GM,
    6. Ross JS,
    7. Gregg JP, et al.
    Pan-cancer analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genomic alterations and their association with genomic instability as measured by genome-wide loss of heterozygosity. JCO Precis Oncol. 2020; 4: 442–65.
    OpenUrl
  50. 50.↵
    2. Priestley P,
    3. Baber J,
    4. Lolkema MP,
    5. Steeghs N,
    6. de Bruijn E,
    7. Shale C, et al.
    Pan-cancer whole-genome analyses of metastatic solid tumours. Nature. 2019; 575: 210–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. 51.↵
    2. Knijnenburg TA,
    3. Wang L,
    4. Zimmermann MT,
    5. Chambwe N,
    6. Gao GF,
    7. Cherniack AD, et al.
    Genomic and molecular landscape of DNA damage repair deficiency across The Cancer Genome Atlas. Cell Rep. 2018; 23: 239–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  52. 52.↵
    2. Menghi F,
    3. Banda K,
    4. Kumar P,
    5. Straub R,
    6. Dobrolecki L,
    7. Rodriguez IV, et al.
    Genomic and epigenomic BRCA alterations predict adaptive resistance and response to platinum-based therapy in patients with triple-negative breast and ovarian carcinomas. Sci Transl Med. 2022; 14: eabn1926.
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Email Article
Citation Tools

Jump to section

Keywords