Citations

Introduction Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a non-obligate precursor of invasive breast cancer (IBC). Many DCIS patients are either undertreated or overtreated. The overarching goal of the study described here is to facilitate detection of patients with DCIS at risk of IBC development. Here, we propose to use risk factor data and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) DCIS tissue from a large, ethnically diverse, population-based cohort of 8175 women with a first diagnosis of DCIS and followed for subsequent IBC to: identify/validate miRNA expression changes in DCIS tissue associated with risk of subsequent IBC; evaluate ipsilateral IBC risk in association with two previously identified marker sets (triple immunopositivity for p16, COX-2, Ki67; Oncotype DX Breast DCIS score); examine the association of risk factor data with IBC risk. Methods and analysis We are conducting a series of case–control studies nested within the cohort. Cases are women with DCIS who developed subsequent IBC; controls (2/case) are matched to cases on calendar year of and age at DCIS diagnosis. We project 485 cases/970 controls in the aim focused on risk factors. We estimate obtaining FFPE tissue for 320 cases/640 controls for the aim focused on miRNAs; of these, 173 cases/346 controls will be included in the aim focused on p16, COX-2 and Ki67 immunopositivity, and of the latter, 156 case–control pairs will be included in the aim focused on the Oncotype DX Breast DCIS score®. Multivariate conditional logistic regression will be used for statistical analyses. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Boards of Albert Einstein College of Medicine (IRB 2014-3611), Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Kaiser Permanente Hawaii, Henry Ford Health System, Mayo Clinic, Marshfield Clinic Research Institute and Hackensack Meridian Health, and from Lifespan Research Protection Office. The study results will be presented at meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Objective. To determine whether results of the nasopharyngeal FilmArray respiratory panel (NP-FARP) influenced antibiotic decisions. Methods. We reviewed the medical records of nonintensive care unit (ICU) inpatients that had an NP-FARP performed at our institution between June 2013 and June 2014. The inpatient records were reviewed 48 hours after the NP-FARP for the following data: demographic information; NP-FARP, serum procalcitonin, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nasal swab (MRSA NS) results; antibiotics prior and post-48 hours of the NP-FARP result; and the current immunosuppression status. Clinical outcome data were not obtained. Patients were categorized into those who had a positive (+) or a negative (−) NP-FARP. We further subdivided these two categories into groups A, B, and C based on the antibiotic modifications 48 hours after their NP-FARP result. Group A included patients who were never initiated on antimicrobial therapy. Patients whose antibiotics were discontinued or deescalated were placed in group B. Patients with antibiotic escalation or continuation without change constituted group C. We compared and analyzed groups A, B, and C in the (+) and (−) NP-FARP cohorts. Results. A total of 545 patients were included. There were 143 (26%) patients with positive and 402 (74%) patients with negative NP-FARPs. Comparison of groups A, B, and C between those with a (+) and (−) NP-FARP were as follows: (+) A and (−) A, 28/143 (20%) and 84/402 (21%); (+) B and (−) B, 59/143 (41%) and 147/402 (37%); and (+) C and (−) C, 56/143 (39%) and 171/402 (43%), respectively. We found no statistically significant differences between groups (+) A versus (−) A, (+) B versus (−) B, and (+) C versus (−) C with respect to age, gender, MRSA NS result, procalcitonin result, or concurrent immunosuppression. Conclusion. In non-ICU inpatients, NP-FARP alone or in combination with procalcitonin or MRSA NS did not influence antibiotic decisions during the study period.

Background. The FilmArray Respiratory Panel (FARP) (BioFire Diagnostics, Inc.) is a multiplex, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique that can detect 17 respiratory viruses and 3 bacterial targets in a single reaction. Immunocompromised hosts (ICH) with respiratory illnesses often undergo bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). This prospective study aimed to evaluate the yield and concordance of NP and BAL FARP testing when performed on the same patient concurrently. Methods. From February to December 2016, 125 patients (100 ICH and 25 non-ICH) were enrolled. NP swabs and BAL samples were sent for FARP testing. Results. The yield of the BAL FARP among ICH and non-ICH was 24% (24/100) and 8% (2/25), respectively. The yield of positive NP swabs in ICH was 27% (27/100) versus 4% (1/25) in non-ICH. The majority of patients (89%; 111/125) had concordant results between NP and BAL specimens. Of the 24 ICH patients who had a positive BAL FARP, the majority (79%) had the same pathogen detected from the NP swab. Conclusion. The FARP may be useful in the ICH. Given the high concordance, in patients whom a pathogen is identified on the NP FARP, a FARP performed on BAL will likely yield the same result. However, if the NP FARP is negative, performing the test on a BAL sample may have an incremental yield.

Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens, when used in conjunction with patient clinical data history, represent an invaluable resource for molecular studies of cancer. Even though nucleic acids extracted from archived FFPE tissues are degraded, their molecular analysis has become possible. In this study, we optimized a laboratory-based next-generation sequencing barcoded cDNA library preparation protocol for analysis of small RNAs recovered from archived FFPE tissues. Using matched fresh and FFPE specimens, we evaluated the robustness and reproducibility of our optimized approach, as well as its applicability to archived clinical specimens stored for up to 35 years. We then evaluated this cDNA library preparation protocol by performing a miRNA expression analysis of archived breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) specimens, selected for their relation to the risk of subsequent breast cancer development and obtained from six different institutions. Our analyses identified six miRNAs (miR-29a, miR-221, miR-375, miR-184, miR-363, miR-455-5p) differentially expressed between DCIS lesions from women who subsequently developed an invasive breast cancer (cases) and women who did not develop invasive breast cancer within the same time interval (control). Our thorough evaluation and application of this laboratory-based miRNA sequencing analysis indicates that the preparation of small RNA cDNA libraries can reliably be performed on older, archived, clinically-classified specimens.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the presence of HER-2/neu gene amplification and/or overexpression in benign breast disease was associated with an increased risk of subsequent breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study of a cohort of women who were diagnosed with benign breast disease at the Mayo Clinic and who were subsequently observed for the development of breast cancer. Patients who developed breast cancer formed the case group, and a matched sample from the remaining cohort served as controls. Benign tissue samples from 137 cases and 156 controls and malignant tissues from 99 cases provided DNA or tissue for evaluation of HER-2/neu amplification and protein overexpression. RESULTS: Among the controls, seven benign tissues (4.5%) demonstrated low-level HER-2/neu amplification, whereas 13 benign (9.5%) and 18 malignant (18%) tissue specimens from cases exhibited amplification. HER-2/neu amplification in benign breast biopsies was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer (odds ratio [OR] = 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 5.8); this association approached statistical significance. The risks for breast cancer associated with benign breast histopathologic diagnoses were OR = 1.1 (95% CI, 0.6 to 1.9) for lesions exhibiting proliferation without atypia and OR = 1.5 (95% CI, 0.4 to 5.6) for the diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia. For women having both HER-2/neu amplification and a proliferative histopathologic diagnosis (either typical or atypical), the risk of breast cancer was more than seven-fold (OR = 7.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 60.8). Overexpression of the HER-2/neu protein product, defined as membrane staining in 10% or more of epithelial cells, was found in 30% of the breast tumors but was not detected in any of the benign breast tissues. Case patients who had HER-2/neu gene amplification in their malignant tumor were more likely to have had HER-2/neu amplification in their prior benign biopsy (P = .06, Fisher’s exact test). CONCLUSION: Women with benign breast biopsies demonstrating both HER-2/neu amplification and a proliferative histopathologic diagnosis may be at substantially increased risk for subsequent breast cancer.