Christian F Singer

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States

Are you Christian F Singer?

Claim your profile

Publications (268)1252.13 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Given the adverse effect of alcohol in the development of breast cancer among women in the general population, we evaluated whether a similar association exists among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Information regarding baseline daily alcohol consumption was abstracted from a research questionnaire for 3067 BRCA mutation carriers enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Women were followed biennially until the date of the last follow-up questionnaire, date of breast cancer diagnosis, date of prophylactic bilateral mastectomy, or date of death. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate relative risks (RRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) for invasive breast cancer associated with alcohol consumed at or prior to completion of the baseline questionnaire. After a mean of 5.4 years of follow-up, we observed 259 incident cases of primary invasive breast cancer. Compared with non-users, the adjusted RRs were 1.06 (95 % CI 0.78-1.44) for ever use and 1.08 (0.79-1.47) for current alcohol use. For women in the highest versus lowest quintile of cumulative alcohol consumption, the RR was 0.94 (95 % CI 0.63-1.40; P trend = 0.65). Our findings suggest that alcohol consumption is not a risk factor for breast cancer among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 05/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10549-015-3393-4 · 4.20 Impact Factor
  • Cancer Research 05/2015; 75(9 Supplement):S2-06-S2-06. DOI:10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS14-S2-06 · 9.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Journal of Immunological Methods 04/2015; 419. DOI:10.1016/j.jim.2015.04.003 · 2.01 Impact Factor
  • PLoS ONE 04/2015; 10(4):e0125317. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0125317 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Individuals carrying pathogenic mutations in BRCA1/2 genes have a high lifetime risk of breast cancer. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are involved in DNA double strand break repair, DNA alterations that can be caused by exposure to reactive oxygen species, a main source of which are mitochondria. Mitochondrial genome variations affect electron transport chain efficiency and reactive oxygen species production. Individuals from different mitochondrial haplogroups differ in their metabolism and sensitivity to oxidative stress. Variability in mitochondrial genetic background can alter reactive oxygen species production, leading to cancer risk. Here we test the hypothesis that mitochondrial haplogroups modify breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We genotyped 22214 (11421 affected, 10793 unaffected) mutation carriers belonging to the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 for 129 mitochondrial polymorphisms using the iCOGS array. Haplogroup inference and association detection were performed using a phylogenetic approach. ALTree was applied to explore the reference mitochondrial evolutionary tree and detect subclades enriched for affected or unaffected individuals. We discovered that subclade T1a1 was depleted in affected BRCA2 mutation carriers than the rest of clade T, (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.55 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.34-0.88, p-value = 0.01). Compared with the most frequent haplogroup in the general population i.e. H and T clade, the T1a1 haplogroup has an HR = 0.62 (95% CI = 0.40-0.95, p-value = 0.03). We also identified three potential susceptibility loci, including G13708A/rs28359178, which has demonstrated an inverse association with familial breast cancer risk. This study illustrates how original approaches like the phylogeny-based method we used can empower classical molecular epidemiological studies aimed at identifying association or risk modification effects.
    Breast cancer research: BCR 04/2015; 17(1):61. DOI:10.1186/s13058-015-0567-2 · 5.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
  • Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde 04/2015; 75(03). DOI:10.1055/s-0035-1548624 · 0.96 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IMPORTANCE: Limited information about the relationship between specific mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) and cancer risk exists. OBJECTIVE:To identify mutation-specific cancer risks for carriers of BRCA1/2. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Observational study of women who were ascertained between 1937 and 2011 (median, 1999) and found to carry disease-associated BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. The international sample comprised 19,581 carriers of BRCA1 mutations and 11,900 carriers of BRCA2 mutations from 55 centers in 33 countries on 6 continents. We estimated hazard ratios for breast and ovarian cancer based on mutation type, function, and nucleotide position. We also estimated RHR, the ratio of breast vs ovarian cancer hazard ratios. A value of RHR greater than 1 indicated elevated breast cancer risk; a value of RHR less than 1 indicated elevated ovarian cancer risk. EXPOSURES:Mutations of BRCA1 or BRCA2. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Breast and ovarian cancer risks. RESULTS:Among BRCA1 mutation carriers, 9052 women (46%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 2317 (12%) with ovarian cancer, 1041 (5%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 7171 (37%) without cancer. Among BRCA2 mutation carriers, 6180 women (52%) were diagnosed with breast cancer, 682 (6%) with ovarian cancer, 272 (2%) with breast and ovarian cancer, and 4766 (40%) without cancer. In BRCA1, we identified 3 breast cancer cluster regions (BCCRs) located at c.179 to c.505 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.22-1.74; P = 2 × 10(-6)), c.4328 to c.4945 (BCCR2; RHR = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.01-1.78; P = .04), and c. 5261 to c.5563 (BCCR2', RHR = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.22-1.55; P = 6 × 10(-9)). We also identified an ovarian cancer cluster region (OCCR) from c.1380 to c.4062 (approximately exon 11) with RHR = 0.62 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70; P = 9 × 10(-17)). In BRCA2, we observed multiple BCCRs spanning c.1 to c.596 (BCCR1; RHR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.06-2.78; P = .03), c.772 to c.1806 (BCCR1'; RHR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10-2.40; P = .01), and c.7394 to c.8904 (BCCR2; RHR = 2.31; 95% CI, 1.69-3.16; P = .00002). We also identified 3 OCCRs: the first (OCCR1) spanned c.3249 to c.5681 that was adjacent to c.5946delT (6174delT; RHR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.44-0.60; P = 6 × 10(-17)). The second OCCR spanned c.6645 to c.7471 (OCCR2; RHR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41-0.80; P = .001). Mutations conferring nonsense-mediated decay were associated with differential breast or ovarian cancer risks and an earlier age of breast cancer diagnosis for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Breast and ovarian cancer risks varied by type and location of BRCA1/2 mutations. With appropriate validation, these data may have implications for risk assessment and cancer prevention decision making for carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 04/2015; 313(13):1347-61. DOI:10.1001/jama.2014.5985 · 30.39 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: While interplay between BRCA1 and AURKA-RHAMM-TPX2-TUBG1 regulates mammary epithelial polarization, common genetic variation in HMMR (gene product RHAMM) may be associated with risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Following on these observations, we further assessed the link between the AURKA-HMMR-TPX2-TUBG1 functional module and risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Forty-one single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 mutation carriers and subsequently analyzed using a retrospective likelihood approach. The association of HMMR rs299290 with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers was confirmed: per-allele hazard ratio (HR) = 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 - 1.15, p = 1.9 x 10-4 (false discovery rate (FDR)-adjusted p = 0.043). Variation in CSTF1, located next to AURKA, was also found to be associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers: rs2426618 per-allele HR = 1.10, 95% CI 1.03 - 1.16, p = 0.005 (FDR-adjusted p = 0.045). Assessment of pairwise interactions provided suggestions (FDR-adjusted pinteraction values > 0.05) for deviations from the multiplicative model for rs299290 and CSTF1 rs6064391, and rs299290 and TUBG1 rs11649877 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Following these suggestions, the expression of HMMR and AURKA or TUBG1 in sporadic breast tumors was found to potentially interact, influencing patients' survival. Together, the results of this study support the hypothesis of a causative link between altered function of AURKA-HMMR-TPX2-TUBG1 and breast carcinogenesis in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. PMID: 25830658 [PubMed - in process]
    PLoS ONE 04/2015; 10(4). · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the breast cancer screening efficacy of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a high-risk population and in various population subgroups. In a single-center, prospective, nonrandomized comparison study, BRCA mutation carriers and women with a high familial risk (> 20% lifetime risk) for breast cancer were offered screening with mammography, ultrasound, and MRI every 12 months. Diagnostic performance was compared between individual modalities and their combinations. Further comparisons were based on subpopulations dichotomized by screening rounds, mutation status, age, and breast density. There were 559 women with 1,365 complete imaging rounds included in this study. The sensitivity of MRI (90.0%) was significantly higher (P < .001) than that of mammography (37.5%) and ultrasound (37.5%). Of 40 cancers, 18 (45.0%) were detected by MRI alone. Two cancers were found by mammography alone (a ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS] with microinvasion and a DCIS with < 10-mm invasive areas). This did not lead to a significant increase of sensitivity compared with using MRI alone (P = .15). No cancers were detected by ultrasound alone. Similarly, of 14 DCISs, all were detected by MRI, whereas mammography and ultrasound each detected five DCISs (35.7%). Age, mutation status, and breast density had no influence on the sensitivity of MRI and did not affect the superiority of MRI over mammography and ultrasound. MRI allows early detection of familial breast cancer regardless of patient age, breast density, or risk status. The added value of mammography is limited, and there is no added value of ultrasound in women undergoing MRI for screening. © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 02/2015; 33(10). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2014.56.8626 · 17.88 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Specimen collection method and quality insurance is pivotal in biomarker discovery. Pre-analytical variables concerning blood collection and sample handling might affect analytical results and should be standardised prior application. In this study, we examine pre-analytical characteristics of blood samples using protein microarray. The influences of 1) standby times until centrifugation (1h, 4h, 24h and 48h), 2) four blood collection methods, and 3) IgG purified from those samples on differentially reactive antigens between samples ("DIRAGs") were investigated. Spearman correlation analyses of intra-individual arrays demonstrated remarkable differences (0.75-0.98 vs. 0.5-0.75) of antibody reactivities within and between serum and plasma samples. Class comparison showed that reactive antigen profiles were best preserved using IgG purified samples of serum tubes without separation gel as after 24hours 83% of the 1h baseline DIRAGs were re-found. Testing dilution series with protein microarrays and Luminex xMap® Technology, we found linear correlations (R(2)=0.94-0.99) between IgG concentration and read-out when using purified IgG instead of serum. Therefore, we highly recommend standardising pre-analytics and proposing the use of purified IgG for autoantibody immune-profiling with protein microarrays to reduce potential unspecific binding of matrix proteins abundant in serum and plasma samples. Although purified IgG cannot completely compensate the influence of pre-analytics, in highly parallel immune-profiling IgG enables reduction of unspecific effects, which occur when using serum or plasma for analysis on protein microarrays. Reproducibility problems due to pre-analytical processing of blood samples might explain discrepant results reported in various biomarker studies. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
    Journal of Immunological Methods 02/2015; 418. DOI:10.1016/j.jim.2015.01.009 · 2.01 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Special focus and aim of our research activities at AIT, the Austrian Institute of Technology, is to define reliable biomarkers suitable for early and non-invasive disease diagnosis from body fluids such as serum/plasma and saliva. Along a selection of research projects, which are described in more detail underneath, we will present and introduce the broad portfolio of high throughput technologies we successfully apply for diagnostic biomarker discovery and validation. As a first show case of successful non-invasive disease biomarker discovery we will present a study where we investigated and compared the genome wide methylation levels of lung cancer patients, patients suffering from lung fibrosis, patients with COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), and DNA samples derived from healthy lungs. Along this study we could identify specific methylation patterns for each of these lung diseases. After quantitative PCR validation of 240 disease specific methylation markers in the discovery sample set, the 90 top markers were picked and applied for serum testing (n=204). When we applied gradient boosting classification for differential diagnosis of tested lung diseases and healthy controls an AUC value of 0.95 was reached here to separate cancer from all other non-cancer samples whereas in differential diagnosis of healthy-, COPD and fibrosis patients AUC values of 0.71 and 0.49 were obtained for fibrosis, respectively COPD. Thus in case of COPD the presented method may be used to monitor cancer risk within COPD patients. Our second show case comprises a study where we screened cancer patients’ sera for tumor-specific antibody profiles using an in-house developed 16k protein-microarray. This methodology, which will be described in detail, enabled us to define different tumor-associated antigen (TAA) classifier panels for the big 4 cancer entities (breast, colon, prostate and lung cancer) which all showed very promising classification successes in distinction of patients versus controls. We will further present preliminary data obtained when comparing serum and saliva autoantibody profiles of breast-cancer patients and healthy controls.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 12 epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) susceptibility alleles. The pattern of association at these loci is consistent in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers who are at high risk of EOC. After imputation to 1000 Genomes Project data, we assessed associations of 11 million genetic variants with EOC risk from 15,437 cases unselected for family history and 30,845 controls and from 15,252 BRCA1 mutation carriers and 8,211 BRCA2 mutation carriers (3,096 with ovarian cancer), and we combined the results in a meta-analysis. This new study design yielded increased statistical power, leading to the discovery of six new EOC susceptibility loci. Variants at 1p36 (nearest gene, WNT4), 4q26 (SYNPO2), 9q34.2 (ABO) and 17q11.2 (ATAD5) were associated with EOC risk, and at 1p34.3 (RSPO1) and 6p22.1 (GPX6) variants were specifically associated with the serous EOC subtype, all with P < 5 × 10(-8). Incorporating these variants into risk assessment tools will improve clinical risk predictions for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction More than 70 common alleles are known to be involved in breast cancer (BC) susceptibility, and several exhibit significant heterogeneity in their associations with different BC subtypes. Although there are differences in the association patterns between BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and the general population for several loci, no study has comprehensively evaluated the associations of all known BC susceptibility alleles with risk of BC subtypes in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Methods We used data from 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 carriers to analyze the associations between approximately 200,000 genetic variants on the iCOGS array and risk of BC subtypes defined by estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and triple-negative- (TN) status; morphologic subtypes; histological grade; and nodal involvement. Results The estimated BC hazard ratios (HRs) for the 74 known BC alleles in BRCA1 carriers exhibited moderate correlations with the corresponding odds ratios from the general population. However, their associations with ER-positive BC in BRCA1 carriers were more consistent with the ER-positive associations in the general population (intraclass correlation (ICC) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45 to 0.74), and the same was true when considering ER-negative associations in both groups (ICC = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.72). Similarly, there was strong correlation between the ER-positive associations for BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers (ICC = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.78), whereas ER-positive associations in any one of the groups were generally inconsistent with ER-negative associations in any of the others. After stratifying by ER status in mutation carriers, additional significant associations were observed. Several previously unreported variants exhibited associations at P <10−6 in the analyses by PR status, HER2 status, TN phenotype, morphologic subtypes, histological grade and nodal involvement. Conclusions Differences in associations of common BC susceptibility alleles between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers and the general population are explained to a large extent by differences in the prevalence of ER-positive and ER-negative tumors. Estimates of the risks associated with these variants based on population-based studies are likely to be applicable to mutation carriers after taking ER status into account, which has implications for risk prediction. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13058-014-0492-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
    Breast Cancer Research 12/2014; 16(6). DOI:10.1186/s13058-014-0492-9 · 5.33 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Approximately 6-15 % of breast cancer patients are diagnosed with primary ulcerated breast cancer (ULBC). ULBC is known to be associated with short recurrence free and poor overall survival. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to characterize ULBC and compare the histopathological findings with those of non-ulcerative breast cancer (NULBC). A total of 152 ULBCs were evaluated and compared to 304 consecutive non-ulcerated, age-matched breast malignancies. Patients mean age was 65 years (SD = 13.0 ULBC, SD = 14.0 NULBC). ULBC was associated with a higher rate of poorly differentiated tumors (p = <0.001), as well as larger tumor sizes (p = <0.001). As expected, the rate of axillary lymph node involvement was higher in ULBC patients (p = <0.001). In addition to that, ULBC was associated with a higher rate of triple negative breast cancer (p = 0.002), and higher Ki67 expression (p = <0.001). ULBC showed more aggressive histopathological features in comparison to NULBC which may contribute to the generally known poorer prognosis of women with ULBC.
    Tumor Biology 12/2014; DOI:10.1007/s13277-014-2977-7 · 2.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are at substantially increased risk for developing breast and ovarian cancer. The incomplete penetrance coupled with the variable age at diagnosis in carriers of the same mutation suggests the existence of genetic and non-genetic modifying factors. In this study we evaluated the putative role of variants in many candidate modifier genes. Methods: Genotyping data from 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 mutation carriers, for known variants (n=3,248) located within or around 445 candidate genes, were available through the iCOGS custom-designed array. Breast and ovarian cancer association analysis was performed within a retrospective cohort approach. Results: The observed p-values of association ranged between 0.005-1.000. None of the variants was significantly associated with breast or ovarian cancer risk in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, after multiple testing adjustments. Conclusion: There is little evidence that any of the evaluated candidate variants act as modifiers of breast and/or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Impact: Genome-wide association studies have been more successful at identifying genetic modifiers of BRCA1/2 penetrance than candidate gene studies.
    Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 10/2014; 24:308-16. DOI:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0532 · 4.32 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Inherited mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) confer very high risk of breast and ovarian cancers. Genetic testing and counseling can reduce risk and death from these cancers if appropriate preventive strategies are applied, including risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) or risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM). However, some women who might benefit from these interventions do not take full advantage of them. We evaluated RRSO and RRM use in a prospective cohort of 1,499 women with inherited BRCA1/2 mutations from 20 centers who enrolled in the study without prior cancer or RRSO or RRM and were followed forward for the occurrence of these events. We estimated the age-specific usage of RRSO/RRM in this cohort using Kaplan-Meier analyses. Use of RRSO was 45 % for BRCA1 and 34 % for BRCA2 by age 40, and 86 % for BRCA1 and 71 % for BRCA2 by age 50. RRM usage was estimated to be 46 % by age 70 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. BRCA1 mutation carriers underwent RRSO more frequently than BRCA2 mutation carriers overall, but the uptake of RRSO in BRCA2 was similar after mutation testing and in women born since 1960. RRM uptake was similar for both BRCA1 and BRCA2. Childbearing influenced the use of RRSO and RRM in both BRCA1 and BRCA2. Uptake of RRSO is high, but some women are still diagnosed with ovarian cancer before undergoing RRSO. This suggests that research is needed to understand the optimal timing of RRSO to maximize risk reduction and limit potential adverse consequences of RRSO.
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 10/2014; 148(2). DOI:10.1007/s10549-014-3134-0 · 4.20 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Men with a BRCA2 mutation face substantial lifetime risks for the development of both breast and prostate cancer.
    Clinical Genetics 08/2014; DOI:10.1111/cge.12478 · 3.65 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Women with a genetic predisposition to breast cancer may be at increased risk of cancer after exposure to ionizing radiation. It is unclear whether mammography screening increases the risk of breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. We identified 2,346 women with a BRCA1 (n = 1844) or BRCA2 (n = 502) mutation and no breast cancer, and we reviewed their history of mammography exposure. These women were followed for an average of 5.3 years and were observed for new breast cancer diagnoses. At study entry, 1808 women (77.1 %) reported ever having had a mammogram; of these, 204 women (11.2 %) reported having had a mammogram before age 30. We estimated the hazard ratios for the development of invasive breast cancer, conditional on the number of prior mammograms and on the age at first mammogram. Hazard ratios were estimated and stratified by gene (BRCA1 or BRCA2), relative to women with no exposure. We observed no significant association between prior mammography exposure and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 carriers (HR 0.79; 95 % CI 0.53-1.19; P = 0.26) or for BRCA2 carriers (HR 0.90; 95 % CI 0.35-2.34; P = 0.83). An early age at first mammogram (<30 years) did not increase breast cancer risk among BRCA1 carriers (HR 0.75; 95 % CI 0.41-1.37; P = 0.35) or among BRCA2 carriers (HR 0.69; 95 % CI 0.19-2.48; P = 0.57). Exposure to mammography in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 08/2014; 147(1). DOI:10.1007/s10549-014-3063-y · 4.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background:Validated multigene signatures (MGS) provide additional prognostic information when evaluating clinical features of ER(+), HER2(-) early breast cancer. We have studied the quantitative and qualitative impact of MGS on multidisciplinary team (MDT) recommendations.Methods:We prospectively recruited 75 ER(+), HER2(-) breast cancer patients. Inclusion was based on biopsy assessment of grade, hormone receptor status, HER2, clinical tumour and nodal status. A fresh tissue sample was sent for MammaPrint (MP), TargetPrint analysis at surgery. Clinical risk was decided by the MDT in the absence of MP results and repeated following the collection of MP results. Decision changes were recorded and a health technology assessment was undertaken to compare cost effectiveness.Results:The majority of patients were assigned low to intermediate clinical risk by the MDT. According to MP, 76% were low risk. A very high correlation between local IHC and the TargetPrint assessment was shown. In over a third of patients, discordance between clinical and molecular risk was observed. Decision changes were recorded in half of these cases (18.6%) and resulted in two out of three patients not requiring chemotherapy. The use of MP was also found to be more cost effective.Conclusions:The multigene signature MP revealed clinical and molecular risk discordance in a third of patients. The impact of this on MDT recommendations was most profound in cases where few clinical risk factors were observed and enabled some women to forgo chemotherapy. The use of MGS is unlikely to have an impact in either clinically low-risk women or in patients with more than one relative indication for chemotherapy.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication, 8 July 2014; doi:10.1038/bjc.2014.339 www.bjcancer.com.
    British Journal of Cancer 07/2014; DOI:10.1038/bjc.2014.339 · 4.82 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

3k Citations
1,252.13 Total Impact Points

Institutions

  • 2015
    • Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
      New York, New York, United States
  • 2002–2015
    • Medical University of Vienna
      • • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
      • • Comprehensive Cancer Center Vienna
      • • Universitätsklinik für Innere Medizin I
      Wien, Vienna, Austria
  • 2013
    • Mississippi University for Women
      Колумбус, Mississippi, United States
    • Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre
      • Department of Cancer Medicine
      Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • 2012
    • Treatment Research Institute, Philadelphia PA
      Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
  • 2010–2012
    • Mayo Clinic - Rochester
      • • Department of Health Science Research
      • • Department of Laboratory Medicine & Pathology
      Рочестер, Minnesota, United States
    • Queensland Institute of Medical Research
      Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    • НИИ онкологии им.Н.Н. Петрова
      Sankt-Peterburg, St.-Petersburg, Russia
  • 2009–2012
    • University of Cambridge
      • Department of Public Health and Primary Care
      Cambridge, England, United Kingdom
    • Pantarhei Bioscience
      Zeist, Utrecht, Netherlands
  • 1999–2011
    • University of Vienna
      • Department of Gynecology
      Wien, Vienna, Austria
  • 2002–2008
    • Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Experimental and Clinical Traumatology
      Wien, Vienna, Austria
  • 2007
    • Ghent University
      Gand, Flemish, Belgium
  • 2006
    • Harvard University
      Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
  • 2000–2002
    • Ludwig Boltzmann-Cluster Oncology (LB-CO) | Medical University Vienna
      Wien, Vienna, Austria