Breast Cancer Medicine Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA.
Oncologist. 2011;16 Suppl 1:1-11. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2011-S1-01.
Triple-negative breast cancer, characterized by tumors that do not express estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), or HER-2 genes, represents an important clinical challenge because these cancers do not respond to endocrine therapy or other available targeted agents. The metastatic potential in triple-negative breast cancer is similar to that of other breast cancer subtypes, but these tumors are associated with a shorter median time to relapse and death. One important goal is therefore the identification of prognostic factors and markers to reliably select high and low risk subsets of patients with triple-negative disease for different treatment approaches of subtypes with differential responsiveness to specific agents. However, a reliable prognostic marker has been elusive, and markers have been inconsistently useful. For example, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has been studied, but there is still a lack of agreement on a standard assay or cutoff for EGFR expression levels with respect to prognosis. Similarly, because triple-negative status is sometimes used as a surrogate for basal-like breast cancer, specific basal markers have been explored. Indeed, trials designed to accrue patients with basal-like breast cancer using ER/PR and HER-2 negativity may provide only an approximation of the triple-negative population and are sometimes reanalyzed using more specific indicators like CK 5/6, EGFR status, and others, again marred by discordances. Chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment of triple-negative breast cancer, but important limitations still need to be overcome in the next few years if any significant clinical strides are to be made. Current treatment strategies for triple-negative disease include anthracyclines, taxanes, ixabepilone, platinum agents, and biologic agents. More recently, EGFR inhibition has been proposed as a therapeutic mechanism in triple-negative breast cancer, again with mixed results. Agents that target poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase and androgen receptors have also been proposed in these patients or subsets of them, and ongoing trials should result in definitive guidance with respect to the value of these agents in triple-negative disease. Triple-negative breast cancer is clearly a distinct clinical subtype, from the perspective of both ER and HER-2 expression, but further subclassification is needed. At present, there is not a clear, proven effective single agent that targets a defining vulnerability in triple-negative breast cancer. This article will review the clinical problem of triple-negative disease, potential prognostic factors, demonstrated efficacy of currently available therapeutic options, and new potential therapies.
三阴性乳腺癌的特征是肿瘤不表达雌激素受体 (ER)、孕激素受体 (PR) 或 HER-2 基因,这是一个重要的临床挑战,因为这些癌症对内分泌治疗或其他可用的靶向药物没有反应。三阴性乳腺癌的转移潜力与其他乳腺癌亚型相似,但这些肿瘤与复发和死亡的中位时间更短有关。因此,一个重要的目标是确定预后因素和标志物,以便可靠地选择不同治疗方法的高危和低危患者亚组,这些方法对特定药物的反应不同。然而,可靠的预后标志物一直难以捉摸,并且标志物的作用并不一致。例如,已经研究了表皮生长因子受体 (EGFR),但对于 EGFR 表达水平与预后的关系,仍然缺乏标准检测或截断值的共识。同样,由于三阴性状态有时被用作基底样乳腺癌的替代物,因此已经探索了特定的基底标志物。事实上,为了使用 ER/PR 和 HER-2 阴性来累积基底样乳腺癌患者而设计的试验可能只是对三阴性人群的近似值,并且有时会使用更具体的指标(如 CK5/6、EGFR 状态等)重新分析,再次存在差异。化疗仍然是三阴性乳腺癌治疗的主要方法,但如果要取得任何重大临床进展,未来几年仍需要克服重要的局限性。目前三阴性疾病的治疗策略包括蒽环类药物、紫杉烷类药物、伊沙匹隆、铂类药物和生物制剂。最近,EGFR 抑制被提议作为三阴性乳腺癌的一种治疗机制,但结果喜忧参半。在这些患者或其中的亚组中,还提出了针对多聚(ADP-核糖)聚合酶和雄激素受体的药物,正在进行的试验应该会提供关于这些药物在三阴性疾病中的价值的明确指导。从 ER 和 HER-2 表达的角度来看,三阴性乳腺癌显然是一种独特的临床亚型,但需要进一步细分。目前,没有一种明确的、经过验证的有效单一药物可以针对三阴性乳腺癌的明确脆弱性。本文将回顾三阴性疾病的临床问题、潜在的预后因素、目前可用治疗方法的疗效以及新的潜在治疗方法。