Overexpression of miR-146a in basal-like breast cancer cells confers enhanced tumorigenic potential in association with altered p53 status.

The tumor suppressor p53 is the most frequently mutated gene in human cancers, mutated in 25-30% of breast cancers. However, mutation rates differ according to breast cancer subtype, being more prevalent in aggressive estrogen receptor-negative tumors and basal-like and HER2-amplified subtypes. This heterogeneity suggests that p53 may function differently across breast cancer subtypes. We used RNAi-mediated p53 knockdown (KD) and antagomir-mediated KD of microRNAs to study how gene expression and cellular response to p53 loss differ in luminal versus basal-like breast cancer. As expected, p53 loss caused downregulation of established p53 targets (e.g. p21 and miR-34 family) and increased proliferation in both luminal and basal-like cell lines. However, some p53-dependent changes were subtype specific, including expression of miR-134, miR-146a and miR-181b. To study the cellular response to miR-146a upregulation in p53-impaired basal-like lines, antagomir KD of miR-146a was performed. KD of miR-146a caused decreased proliferation and increased apoptosis, effectively ablating the effects of p53 loss. Furthermore, we found that miR-146a upregulation decreased NF-κB expression and downregulated the NF-κB-dependent extrinsic apoptotic pathway (including tumor necrosis factor, FADD and TRADD) and antagomir-mediated miR-146a KD restored expression of these components, suggesting a plausible mechanism for miR-146a-dependent cellular responses. These findings are relevant to human basal-like tumor progression in vivo, since miR-146a is highly expressed in p53 mutant basal-like breast cancers. These findings suggest that targeting miR-146a expression may have value for altering the aggressiveness of p53 mutant basal-like tumors.

Gene expression in extratumoral microenvironment predicts clinical outcome in breast cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: A gene expression signature indicative of activated wound responses is common to more than 90% of non-neoplastic tissues adjacent to breast cancer, but these tissues also exhibit substantial heterogeneity. We hypothesized that gene expression subtypes of breast cancer microenvironment can be defined and that these microenvironment subtypes have clinical relevance. METHODS: Gene expression was evaluated in 72 patient-derived breast tissue samples adjacent to invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ. Unsupervised clustering identified two distinct gene expression subgroups that differed in expression of genes involved in activation of fibrosis, cellular movement, cell adhesion and cell-cell contact. We evaluated the prognostic relevance of extratumoral subtype (comparing the Active group, defined by high expression of fibrosis and cellular movement genes, to the Inactive group, defined by high expression of claudins and other cellular adhesion and cell-cell contact genes) using clinical data. To establish the biological characteristics of these subtypes, gene expression profiles were compared against published and novel tumor and tumor stroma-derived signatures (Twist-related protein 1 (TWIST1) overexpression, transforming growth factor beta (TGF-ß)-induced fibroblast activation, breast fibrosis, claudin-low tumor subtype and estrogen response). Histological and immunohistochemical analyses of tissues representing each microenvironment subtype were performed to evaluate protein expression and compositional differences between microenvironment subtypes. RESULTS: Extratumoral Active versus Inactive subtypes were not significantly associated with overall survival among all patients (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.4, 95% CI 0.6 to 2.8, P = 0.337), but there was a strong association with overall survival among estrogen receptor (ER) positive patients (HR = 2.5, 95% CI 0.9 to 6.7, P = 0.062) and hormone-treated patients (HR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 7.0, P = 0.045). The Active subtype of breast microenvironment is correlated with TWIST-overexpression signatures and shares features of claudin-low breast cancers. The Active subtype was also associated with expression of TGF-ß induced fibroblast activation signatures, but there was no significant association between Active/Inactive microenvironment and desmoid type fibrosis or estrogen response gene expression signatures. Consistent with the RNA expression profiles, Active cancer-adjacent tissues exhibited higher density of TWIST nuclear staining, predominantly in epithelium, and no evidence of increased fibrosis. CONCLUSIONS: These results document the presence of two distinct subtypes of microenvironment, with Active versus Inactive cancer-adjacent extratumoral microenvironment influencing the aggressiveness and outcome of ER-positive human breast cancers.

Interactions with fibroblasts are distinct in Basal-like and luminal breast cancers.

Basal-like breast cancers have several well-characterized distinguishing molecular features, but most of these are features of the cancer cells themselves. The unique stromal-epithelial interactions, and more generally, microenvironmental features of basal-like breast cancers have not been well characterized. To identify characteristic microenvironment features of basal-like breast cancer, we performed cocultures of several basal-like breast cancer cell lines with fibroblasts and compared these with cocultures of luminal breast cancer cell lines with fibroblasts. Interactions between basal-like cancer cells and fibroblasts induced expression of numerous interleukins and chemokines, including IL-6, IL-8, CXCL1, CXCL3, and TGFß. Under the influence of fibroblasts, basal-like breast cancer cell lines also showed increased migration in vitro. Migration was less pronounced for luminal lines; but, these lines were more likely to have altered proliferation. These differences were relevant to tumor biology in vivo, as the gene set that distinguished luminal and basal-like stromal interactions in coculture also distinguishes basal-like from luminal tumors with 98% accuracy in 10-fold cross-validation and 100% accuracy in an independent test set. However, comparisons between cocultures where cells were in direct contact and cocultures where interaction was solely through soluble factors suggest that there is an important impact of direct cell-to-cell contact. The phenotypes and gene expression changes invoked by cancer cell interactions with fibroblasts support the microenvironment and cell-cell interactions as intrinsic features of breast cancer subtypes.