Protein biomarkers for the early detection of breast cancer.
Journal: 2011/November - International Journal of Proteomics
ISSN: 2090-2174
Advances in breast cancer control will be greatly aided by early detection so as to diagnose and treat breast cancer in its preinvasive state prior to metastasis. For breast cancer, the second leading cause of cancer-related death among women in the United States, early detection does allow for increased treatment options, including surgical resection, with a corresponding better patient response. Unfortunately, however, many patients' tumors are diagnosed following metastasis, thus making it more difficult to successfully treat the malignancy. There are, at present, no existing validated plasma/serum biomarkers for breast cancer. Only a few biomarkers (such as HER-2/neu, estrogen receptor, and progesterone receptor) have utility for diagnosis and prognosis. Thus, there is a great need for new biomarkers for breast cancer. This paper will focus on the identification of new serum protein biomarkers with utility for the early detection of breast cancer.
Similar articles
Articles by the same authors
Discussion board
International Journal of Proteomics. Dec/31/2010; 2011
Published online Aug/10/2011

Protein Biomarkers for the Early Detection of Breast Cancer


1. Introduction

Advances in breast cancer control will be greatly aided by early detection, thereby facilitating diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer in its preinvasive state prior to metastasis. Breast cancer is the most frequently occurring malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer-related death for women in the United States [1]. The most efficacious screening modality utilized in the clinic is mammography though lesions less than 0.5 cm in size remain undetectable by present technology. Importantly, however, even though a breast lesion may be detected, given the low sensitivity/specificity of mammography, approximately 4-fold more women (than those with breast malignancies) have resultant biopsies. Five-year survival of women with breast cancer is highly correlated with tumor stage, with tumor detection at very early stages (stages 0 and I) having an approximate 98% 5-year survival. Five-year survival for stage II tumors is approximately 85%, stage III approximately 60%, and stage IV approximately 20%. Overall, breast cancer has an approximate 80% 5-year survival, with 207,090 new cases and 39,840 deaths expected in women in the United States in 2010 [1].

Early detection of breast cancer does allow for increased treatment options, including surgical resection, with a corresponding better patient response. Surgical resection may involve lumpectomy or mastectomy with removal of some of the axillary lymph nodes. Following early detection, radiation therapy, chemotherapy (before or after surgery), and hormone therapy (tamoxifen [2] and aromatase inhibitors [35]) also have utility for therapeutic intervention. Targeted biologic therapy with trastuzumab (Herceptin) [6] or lapatinib (Tykerb) [7, 8] also has utility to treat HER2/neu-positive breast tumors. Unfortunately, however, in the absence of good serum/plasma biomarkers many breast cancer patients are diagnosed too late in the disease process (i.e., after the tumors metastasize) for surgical resection to be an effective option. Thus, these patients are typically offered various therapeutic treatment modalities dependent upon tumor subtype (ER+ or ER; HER2+ or HER2). The available treatment modalities may include hormonal (antiestrogen), taxane (docetaxel or paclitaxel) or nontaxane chemotherapy. In general, women with metastatic breast cancer are provided one therapeutic modality until treatment failure and are then switched to another therapeutic modality.

The origin of most breast cancer cases is not known. However, many risk factors have been identified, including female gender, increasing patient age, family history of breast cancer at an early age, early menarche, late menopause, older maternal age at first live childbirth, prolonged hormone replacement therapy, exposure to therapeutic chest irradiation, benign proliferative breast disease, and genetic mutations in genes such as BRCA1/2 [9]. The overwhelming majority of breast masses detected by palpation and/or by mammography are epithelial lesions, which include benign fibrocystic change, hyperplasia, carcinoma in situ, and infiltrating mammary carcinoma. Although several histologic types and subtypes of mammary carcinomas exist, >95% are either ductal or lobular carcinomas [10], with the majority (75%–80%) of mammary carcinomas being ductal carcinomas [11, 12].

A number of genetic alterations have been identified in breast tumors. The most frequent genomic aberrations identified are gains along chromosomes 1q, 8q, 17q, 20q, and 11q and losses along 8p, 13q, 16q, 18q, and 11q [1318]. Interestingly, many of these chromosomal segments harbor known proto-oncogenes and/or tumor suppressor genes such as BRCA1, BRCA2, HER2-neu, C-MYC, and Cyclin D-1. Low-grade (grade 1) infiltrating ductal carcinomas have relatively few numbers of chromosomal alterations with the highest frequency of aberrations occurring as losses on 16q and gains on 1q.

It is generally accepted that estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) and ER-negative (ER) breast cancers are two different disease entities. ER tumors tend to be of high grade, have more frequent p53 mutations, and have worse prognosis compared with ER+ disease. Both ER+ and ER tumors can be either HER2 positive or negative. Low-grade tumors are typically ER positive, almost always HER2 nonamplified, and frequently overexpress cyclin D-1 [10]. In contrast, high-grade (grade 3) tumors tend to be ER negative, have frequent loss of p53 function, usually overexpress C-MYC and commonly overexpress HER2 [1315, 19]. In the high-grade tumors, loss of p53 function is usually due to 17p13 deletion, mutation or inactivation, while overexpression of HER2 is usually because of 17q12 amplification [2028].

Although early detection of cancer has improved survival for a number of cancers, including breast cancer [29], colon cancer [3032], prostate cancer [33, 34], and cervical cancer [35], existing serum biomarkers for breast cancer are not adequate for early detection. The possibility of early detection of breast cancer may be realized through both noninvasive (i.e., imaging technologies) and invasive means (patient serum profiling). To date, gains in the early detection of breast cancer have been largely made due to routine mammography and/or by palpation (either self-examination or by physician or nurse practitioner). Imaging technologies (mammography, digital mammography, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) have been adopted clinically for mass screening purposes, but there is resistance for seeking such services on a yearly basis, given the relative complexity and high cost-to-benefit ratio of these imaging methodologies. As a result, there has been much interest in development and validation of serum-based biomarkers for the early detection, risk stratification, prediction, and disease prognosis of breast cancer. This paper will focus on recent developments in identification of new serum protein biomarkers with potential utility for the early detection of breast cancer (Table 1).

2. Autoantibodies and Breast Cancer

The humoral immune response to cancer in humans has been well demonstrated by identification of autoantibodies to a number of different intracellular and surface antigens in patients with various tumor types [3639]. A tumor-specific humoral immune response directed against oncoproteins [40, 41], mutated proteins such as p53 [42, 43], or other aberrantly expressed proteins have all been described. While it is currently unknown whether the occurrence of such antibodies is beneficial, knowledge of potential tumor antigens that may evoke tumor-specific immune responses may have utility in early cancer diagnosis, in establishing prognosis and in immunotherapy against the disease.

Several approaches are currently available for the identification of tumor antigens. In contrast to identification of tumor antigens based on analysis of recombinant proteins (which do not contain posttranslational modifications as found in tumors or tumor cell lines), it may be preferable to utilize a proteomics-based approach for the identification of tumor antigens. This may facilitate the identification of autoantibodies to naturally occurring proteins, such as in lysates prepared from tumors and tumor cell lines, and may uncover antigenicity associated with aberrant posttranslational modification of tumor cell proteins. Such a proteomics approach was implemented for the identification of breast tumor antigens that elicit a humoral response against proteins that are expressed in the SUM-44 breast cancer cell line. 2D PAGE was used to simultaneously separate individual cellular proteins from the SUM-44 cell line. The separated proteins were transferred onto PVDF membranes. Sera from breast cancer patients were screened individually for antibodies that reacted against the separated proteins by Western blot analysis. Proteins specifically reacting with sera from the breast cancer patients were identified by mass spectrometry. Le Naour and colleagues [36] have shown that a humoral response directed against RS/DJ-1 occurred in 13.3% of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. None of the 25 healthy controls (0%) or 46 patients (0%) with hepatocellular carcinoma exhibited autoantibodies to RS/DJ-1. Only 2/54 (3.7%) samples of sera from lung adenocarcinoma patients demonstrated autoantibodies to RS/DJ-1.

In breast cancer, besides RS/DJ-1 [36], autoimmunity has also been shown against a number of other cellular proteins. These proteins include p53 [4447], heat shock protein 60 [48, 49], heat shock protein 90 [50, 51], and mucin-related antigens [49, 5254]. The presence of p53 autoantibodies have been observed in 15% of patients with breast cancer and were shown to be associated with a poor prognosis [44, 45, 47]. However, p53 autoantibodies have also been found in patients with other malignancies and inflammatory conditions [42, 43], thus the humoral response to p53 is not specific to breast cancer. A humoral response to the 90 kDa heat shock protein has also been associated with poor survival in breast cancer [51]. In contrast, the presence of MUC1 autoantibodies has been associated with a reduced risk for disease progression in patients with breast cancer [53, 54]. While the antigenic epitope on MUC1 (or, for that matter, any of the other breast tumor antigens discussed above) is unknown, MUC1 has been shown to be aberrantly glycosylated frequently in breast cancer [54]. At present, CA 15-3 (a soluble or secreted form of MUC1) has utility as a circulating marker for breast cancer [55, 56]. Serial measurements of CA 15-3 have utility to detect recurrences and to monitor the treatment of metastatic breast cancer [5557]. Additionally, the CA 15-3 concentration at initial presentation does have prognostic significance [5862].

In order to circumvent many of the difficulties associated with 2D-PAGE (namely, inadequate resolution, slow throughput, and limited dynamic range), protein microarrays were developed that have the capability to screen patient's sera for autoantibodies directed against tumor antigens [6366]. In comparison to traditional ELISAs that use single purified recombinant proteins, the protein microarrays are capable of presenting and analyzing >1000 tumor antigens simultaneously. In addition, as these tumor antigens are typically derived from diseased tissues or disease-related cells, they possess disease-related, potentially antigenic, posttranslational modifications not normally expressed by the particular cells or tissue. In this technology, proteins from diseased tissues or disease-related cell lines are separated by 2-dimensional liquid chromatography (chromatofocusing or ion exchange HPLC in the first dimension, followed by reverse phase HPLC in the second dimension). Following separation, all fractions (≥1700 fractions) from each separation are printed onto nitrocellulose-coated microscope slides and are subsequently probed with sera from patients or control subjects [6366]. As each reactive fraction may contain a number of different proteins, each reactive fraction would need to be further assessed to determine the tumor antigen of interest.

More recently, Ramachandran et al. [67, 68] developed a novel protein microarray technology, termed nucleic acid protein programmable array (NAPPA). NAPPA arrays are generated by printing full-length cDNA encoding the target proteins at each feature of the array. The proteins are then transcribed and translated by a cell-free system and immobilized in situ using epitope tags fused to the proteins. Although this technology circumvents many of the difficulties of traditional protein microarrays (i.e., the need to resolve complex protein lysates), the printed proteins on the array lack all normal posttranslational modifications. Thus, any antigenicity resulting from aberrant modification of tumor proteins is not assessed. Anderson and colleagues [69] utilized the NAPPA arrays to screen 4988 candidate tumor antigens with sera from patients with early stage breast cancer for autoantibodies. Twenty-eight of these antigens were confirmed using an independent serum cohort (n = 51 cases/38 controls, P < 0.05). Using all 28 antigens, a classifier was identified with a sensitivity of 80.8% and a specificity of 61.6% (AUC = 0.756). Although the sensitivity and specificity are not high, these 28 recombinant protein antigens may be considered as potential biomarkers for the early detection of breast cancer.

It is not clear why only a subset of patients with a particular tumor type develop a humoral response to particular tumor antigens. Immunogenicity may depend on the level of expression, posttranslational modification, or other types of protein processing, the extent of which may be variable among tumors of a similar histological type. Other factors that may influence the immune response include variability among tumors and individuals in major histocompatibility complex molecules and in antigen presentation. Although a number of autoantibodies have been identified in breast cancer, in most cases, they occur in less than 50% of patient's sera. Therefore, they are not likely to be effective individually for the early detection of breast cancer but may show efficacy if utilized as a panel of biomarkers.

3. Detection of Altered Plasma Protein Expression for Identification of Breast Cancer-Specific Biomarkers

There has been great interest in the hypothesis that tumor-specific proteins may be found in patient's circulation, and they may have utility for the early detection of cancer. For example, proteins such as CA125 in ovarian cancer and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in prostate cancer have been used clinically as diagnostic markers of cancer. CA125 is a mucin commonly employed as a diagnostic marker for epithelial ovarian cancer. PSA is secreted primarily by prostate epithelial cells into the seminal plasma and is one of the best characterized examples of a secreted glycoprotein used in cancer diagnostics.

There are a number of reports that have described aberrantly expressed proteins in the serum of breast cancer patients. The most widely used serum marker in breast cancer diagnostics is CA 15-3, which detects soluble forms of the mucin MUC1. MUC1 is normally found in the apical membrane of normal secretory epithelium. Following malignant transformation, however, MUC1 may be localized throughout the external surface of the entire plasma membrane. In addition, changes in MUC1 glycosylation have been reported during neoplastic transformation [70, 71]. Although MUC1 is expressed in normal and neoplastic breast epithelium, the clinical utility of MUC1 measurements is confined to measurements of shed or soluble forms (termed CA 15-3), released from the cell surface by proteolytic cleavage. Unfortunately, CA 15-3 is not suitable for early detection, as serum levels are rarely increased in patients with early or localized breast cancer. The main utility for CA 15-3 is for monitoring therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Le Naour and coworkers [36] have evaluated RS/DJ-1 as a serum biomarker of breast cancer. In normal tissue, expression of RS/DJ-1 was observed in epithelium, smooth muscle, blood vessels, and nerves. All 15 (100%) invasive ductal carcinomas and 3 (100%) invasive lobular carcinomas showed some level of cytoplasmic and nuclear reactivity in the neoplastic cells. Significantly elevated levels of serum RS/DJ-1 was observed in the sera of 11/30 patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, as compared to serum from 25 healthy subjects. However, these authors did not evaluate serum RS/DJ-1 levels in patients with other types of breast lesions. Thus, it is unknown whether the increased serum RS/DJ-1 levels are cancer-specific.

In another study [72], significantly higher serum HER-2/neu levels were found in patients with tissue overexpression of HER-2/neu. Univariate analysis showed that HER-2/neu serum levels were prognostic factors in disease-free survival and overall survival only in patients with tissue overexpression. When only patients with HER-2/neu overexpression in tissue were studied, tumor size, nodal involvement, and tumor markers (at least one positive) were found to be independent prognostic factors for both disease-free survival and overall survival.

4. Use of Mass Spectrometric Methodologies for Identification of Breast Cancer-Specific Biomarkers

Methodologies have been developed to directly analyze the proteins contained within complex protein mixtures, such as that found within human biofluids (plasma or serum, nipple aspirate fluid, ductal lavage fluid, saliva, etc.). Among these technologies, some, like SELDI (Surface-Enhanced Laser Desorption and Ionization) are mass spectrometry-based. A number of investigators have used SELDI-TOF mass spectrometry to interrogate serum [7381] and nipple aspirate/ductal lavage fluid [8289] from patients with breast cancer. In one study, serum samples from women with or without breast cancer were analyzed using SELDI protein chip mass spectrometry [77]. Using a case-control study design, serum samples from 48 female patients with primary invasive breast cancer were compared with samples from 48 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. To increase the number of identifiable proteins, patient's serum was profiled on IMAC30 (activated with nickel) ProteinChip surfaces. Differences in protein intensity between breast cancer cases and controls were measured by the Mann-Whitney U test and adjusted for confounding variables in a multivariate logistic regression model. Three peaks, with mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) 4276, 4292 and 8941 were found that showed significant decreased expression in cancer sera, as compared to control sera (P < 0.001). One drawback of the SELDI technology, however, is that given the limited dynamic range of SELDI, it is likely that distinctive features observed in serum with this approach represent relatively abundant proteins that are not necessarily specific to breast cancer. Further, SELDI has difficulties in providing the identification of the distinctive proteins when used to directly profile complex protein mixtures.

5. Mass-Spectrometric Profiling of Nipple Aspirate Fluid or Ductal Lavage Fluid

Other mass spectrometric profiling methods have been utilized to profile proteins found in nipple aspirate fluid [90] and ductal lavage fluid in order to identify breast cancer-specific biomarkers. These investigators [90] analyzed paired nipple aspirate fluid samples from 18 women with stage I or stage II unilateral invasive breast cancer and 4 healthy volunteers using ICAT (isotope-coded affinity tag) labeling, followed by SDS-PAGE. Gel slices were cut from each sample, with subsequent analysis by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). They identified 353 peptides from the tandem mass spectra. Alpha-2-HS-glycoprotein was found to be underexpressed in nipple aspirate fluid from tumor-bearing breasts, while lipophilin B, beta-globin, hemopexin and vitamin D-binding protein were all overexpressed. Unfortunately, these authors only identified abundant proteins whose over- or underexpression was somewhat modest. Moreover, these authors did not analyze nipple aspirate fluid from patients with inflammatory breast disease. Thus, conclusions cannot be drawn regarding breast cancerspecificity of protein expression.

6. N-linked Glycan Profiling for Biomarker Identification in Breast Cancer Serum

Glycoproteins are the most heterogeneous group of posttranslational modifications known in proteins. Glycans show a high structural diversity reflecting inherent functional diversity. N- and O-oligosaccharide variants on glycoproteins (glycoforms) can lead to alterations in protein activity or function that may manifest itself as overt disease [91, 92]. Many clinical biomarkers and therapeutic targets in cancer are glycoproteins [9395], such as CA125 in ovarian cancer, HER2/neu in breast cancer, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in prostate cancer. The human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/neu) is a transmembrane glycoprotein, where the presence of HER2 overexpression appears to be a key factor in malignant transformation and is predictive of a poor prognosis in breast cancer. CA125 is a mucin commonly employed as a diagnostic marker for epithelial ovarian cancer. Although CA125 has been used as an ovarian cancer marker for a long time, many of its O- and N-glycan structures have only recently been characterized [96]. PSA is secreted primarily by prostate epithelial cells into the seminal plasma. It is one of the best characterized examples of a secreted glycoprotein used in cancer diagnostics, and its glycoforms have been described [97]. The alteration in protein glycosylation that occurs through varying the heterogeneity of glycosylation sites or changing glycan structure of proteins on the cell surface and in body fluids has been shown to correlate with the development or progression of cancer and other disease states [98]. It has been reported that the glycosylation of PSA secreted by the tumor prostate cell line LNCaP differs significantly from that of PSA from seminal plasma (normal control). These carbohydrate differences allow a distinction to be made between PSA from normal and tumor origins and provide a valuable biochemical tool for diagnosis of prostate cancer [99].

There is growing evidence that glycan structures on glycoproteins are modified in breast cancer [100109]. Breast cancer-associated alterations have been demonstrated for fucosylation groups and for sialylations on the plasma protein α-1-proteinase inhibitor [106]. Increased GlcNAc β1-6Man α1-6Man β-branching in asparagine-linked oligosaccharides has been observed in human tumor cells. The levels of the β1-6 branched oligosaccharides were evaluated in a series of benign and malignant human breast biopsies. Normal human breast tissue and benign lesions showed low expression but 50% of the primary malignancies examined showed significantly elevated β1-6 branching [107]. Subsequently, L-PHA (a lectin that binds specifically to the β1-6 branched oligosaccharides) lectin histochemistry was performed on paraffin sections of human breast tissues. All breast carcinomas and epithelial hyperplasia with atypia demonstrated significantly increased L-PHA staining as compared to fibroadenomas and hyperplasia without atypia [108]. More recently, L-PHA reactive glycoproteins were identified from matched normal (nondiseased) and malignant tissue isolated from patients with invasive ductal breast carcinoma [109]. Comparison analysis of the data identified 34 proteins that were enriched by L-PHA fractionation in tumor relative to normal tissue for at least 2 cases of ductal invasive breast carcinoma. Of these 34 L-PHA tumor enriched proteins, 12 were common to all 4 matched cases analyzed.

Abd Hamid and coworkers [110] analyzed fluorescently tagged serum N-glycans of advanced breast cancer patients using exoglycosidases and LC-MS/MS. They found that the expression of a trisialylated triantennary glycan containing an α-1,3-linked fucose was increased in the presence of breast cancer. Kyselova and coworkers. profiled the permethylated N-glycans in sera of breast cancer patients at different stages (stages I to IV) using MALDI TOF/TOF MS in one study [111]. In a second study, they profiled reduced and methylated serum N-glycans of late-stage breast cancer patients using nanoliquid chromatography (LC) chip/time-of-flight (TOF) MS [112]. In both studies, they found an increase in fucosylation in both core and branched segments of N-glycans in the presence of breast cancer. In the latter study, they found a decrease in expression of a biantennary-monosialylated N-linked glycan and an increase in expression of a fucosylated triantennary-trisialylated N-linked glycan in the presence of Stage IV breast cancer. These glycosylation changes in a tumor-secreted protein may reflect fundamental activity changes in the enzymes involved in the glycosylation pathway, either through altered levels of enzymes or altered enzymatic activity. Importantly, the changes in glycan structure may serve as early detection biomarkers of breast cancer.

7. Summary

Early detection of breast cancer, so as to diagnose and treat cancer in its preinvasive state prior to metastasis, may greatly impact the treatment and prognosis of patients with this common, but deadly, malignancy. Unfortunately, at present, suitable biomarkers have not been identified for the early detection of breast cancer. Biomarker discovery for this disease is still very much in its discovery phase. Multiple approaches have been developed, as described above, that hold promise for the identification of serum biomarkers. The protein biomarkers that have been identified to date do not possess the requisite sensitivity/specificity to have utility individually as a biomarker for the early detection of breast cancer but ultimately may have utility within a panel of protein biomarkers. Additionally, other emerging technologies, such as genetically engineered mouse models of breast cancer may have utility to identify panels of serum biomarkers that can be further explored in human sera. In order to determine the utility of any promising protein biomarkers, the candidates will need to be tested and validated by multiple independent studies using an adequately sized test and training set of sera samples from very early-stage breast cancer. Development of such resources, including serum from patients with nonmalignant breast lesions and prospective serum collection from individuals at high risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer as well as serum from patients with other breast lesions and other types (nonbreast) of malignancies is of critical need for the identification of biomarkers with utility for the early detection of breast cancer. Up until now, serum/plasma collection has been primarily performed in individual laboratories, using heterogeneous sample collection methods. The Human Proteome Organization (HUPO) has conducted a study to assess efficacious serum collection methods. These findings have lead to efforts presently being made by the National Cancer Institute, through the Early Detection Research Network, to develop suitable serum resources for both the discovery phase and the subsequent validation phase of biomarkers for the early detection of cancer. With the ultimate development of these standardized resources, it is expected that suitable biomarkers would be validated and have utility for the early clinical detection of breast cancer within the next five-to-ten years.

Table 1
Current promising biomarkers for the detection of breast cancer.
Name of biomarkerTechnology used for discoveryTypeReference
RS/DJ-1Humoral responseautoantibody[36]
p53Humoral responseautoantibody[4447]
HSP60Humoral responseautoantibody[48, 49]
HSP90Humoral responseautoantibody[50, 51]
Mucin-relatedHumoral responseautoantibody[49, 5254]
CA 15-3Serum profilingserum protein[55, 56]
RS/DJ-1Serum profilingserum protein[36]
HER-2/neuSerum profilingserum protein[72]
α-2-HS-glycoproteinNipple aspirate fluid profilingDuctal protein[90]
Lipophilin BNipple aspirate fluid profilingDuctal protein[90]
beta-globinNipple aspirate fluid profilingDuctal protein[90]
HemopexinNipple aspirate fluid profilingDuctal protein[90]
Vitamin D-binding proteinNipple Aspirate Fluid ProfilingDuctal protein[90]


This work was supported by Award no. W81XWH-09-1-0043 from the DoD (Army). The information presented reflects the opinions of the authors only and does not reflect the opinion of the DoD.


  • 1. JemalASiegelRXuJWardECancer statistics, 2010CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians2010605277300[Google Scholar]
  • 2. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG)Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trialsThe Lancet200536516871717[Google Scholar]
  • 3. NabholtzJMBuzdarAPollakMAnastrozole is superior to tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women: results of a North American multicenter randomized trialJournal of Clinical Oncology2000182237583767[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 4. BonneterreJThurlimannBRobertsonJFAnastrozole versus tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in 668 postmenopausal women: results of the tamoxifen or arimidex randomized group efficacy and tolerability studyJournal of Clinical Oncology2000182237483757[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 5. BonneterreJBuzdarANabholtzJMAnastrozole is superior to tamoxifen as first-line therapy in hormone receptor positive advanced breast carcinomaCancer200192922472258[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 6. HudisCATrastuzumab—Mechanism of action and use in clinical practiceNew England Journal of Medicine200735713951[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 7. BilanciaDRosatiGDinotaAGermanoDRomanoRManzioneLLapatinib in breast cancerAnnals of Oncology200718supplement 6vi26vi30[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 8. HigaGMAbrahamJLapatinib in the treatment of breast cancerExpert Review of Anticancer Therapy20077911831192[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 9. CarlsonRWAndersonBOBursteinHJInvasive breast cancer: clinical practice guidelines in oncologyJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network200753246312[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 10. YoderBJWilkinsonEJMassollNAMolecular and morphologic distinctions between infiltrating ductal and lobular carcinoma of the breastBreast Journal2007132172179[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 11. TavassoliFATavassoliFAInvasive lobular carcinomaPathology of the Breast19992nd editionStamford, Conn, USAAppleton & Lange42636[Google Scholar]
  • 12. RosenPPInvasive lobular carcinomaRosen’s Breast Pathology20012nd editionPhiladelphia, Pa, USALippincott Williams & Wilkins62752[Google Scholar]
  • 13. Reis-FilhoJSSimpsonPTGaleTLakhaniSRThe molecular genetics of breast cancer: the contribution of comparative genomic hybridizationPathology Research and Practice200520111713725[Google Scholar]
  • 14. ShackneySESilvermanJFMolecular evolutionary patterns in breast cancerAdvances in Anatomic Pathology2003105278290[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 15. SimpsonPTReis-FilhoJSGaleTLakhaniSRMolecular evolution of breat cancerJournal of Pathology20052052248254[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 16. StangeDERadlwimmerBSchubertFHigh-resolution genomic profiling reveals association of chromosomal aberrations on 1q and 16p with histologic and genetic subgroups of invasive breast cancerClinical Cancer Research2006122345352[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 17. AlbertsonDGCollinsCMcCormickFGrayJWChromosome aberrations in solid tumorsNature Genetics2003344369376[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 18. AlbertsonDGPinkelDGenomic microarrays in human genetic disease and cancerHuman Molecular Genetics2003122R145R152[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 19. BuergerHMommersECLittmannRDuctal invasive G2 and G3 carcinomas of the breast are the end stages of at least two different lines of genetic evolutionJournal of Pathology20011942165170[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 20. TsudaHHirohashiSMultiple developmental pathways of highly aggressive breast cancers disclosed by comparison of histological grades and c-erbB-2 expression patterns in both the non-invasive and invasive portionsPathology International1998487518525[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 21. SomervilleJEClarkeLABiggartJDc-erbB-2 overexpression and histological type of in situ and invasive breast carcinomaJournal of Clinical Pathology19924511620[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 22. JainANChinKBørresen-DaleALQuantitative analysis of chromosomal CGH in human breast tumors associates copy number abnormalities with p53 status and patient survivalProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2001981479527957[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 23. PollerDNHutchingsCEGaleaMp53 protein expression in human breast carcinoma: relationship to expression of epidermal growth factor receptor, c-erbB-2 protein overexpression, and oestrogen receptorBritish Journal of Cancer1992663583588[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 24. BarbareschiMLeonardiEMauriFASerioGDalla PalmaPp53 and c-erbB-2 protein expression in breast carcinomas: an immunohistochemical study including correlations with receptor status, proliferation markers, and clinical stage in human breast cancerAmerican Journal of Clinical Pathology1992984408418[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 25. RudasMNeumayerRGnantMFXMittelböckMJakeszRReinerAp53 Protein expression, cell proliferation and steroid hormone receptors in ductal and lobular in situ carcinomas of the breastEuropean Journal of Cancer A19973313944[Google Scholar]
  • 26. EyfjordJEThorlaciusSSteinarsdottirMValgardsdottirROgmundsdottirHMAnamthawat-JonssonKp53 Abnormalities and genomic instability in primary human breast carcinomasCancer Research1995553646651[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 27. WiltschkeCKindas-MueggeISteiningerAReinerAReingerGPreisPNCoexpression of HER-2/neu and p53 is associated with a shorter disease-free survival in node-positive breast cancer patientsJournal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology199412012737742[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 28. SeshadriRLeongASYMccaulKFirgairaFASetlurVHorsfallDJRelationship between p53 gene abnormalities and other tumour characteristics in breast-cancer prognosisInternational Journal of Cancer1996692135141[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 29. GoldhirschAColleoniMDomenighettiGGelberRDSystemic treatments for women with breast cancer: outcome with relation to screening for the diseaseAnnals of Oncology200314812121214[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 30. LiebermanDHow to screen for colon cancerAnnual Review of Medicine199849163172[Google Scholar]
  • 31. FergusonJAEarly detection of unsuspected colon cancers in asymptomatic peopleDiseases of the Colon and Rectum1993364p. 411[Google Scholar]
  • 32. MandelJSBondJHChurchTRReducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control StudyNew England Journal of Medicine19933281913651371[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 33. CatalonaWJManagement of cancer of the prostateNew England Journal of Medicine1995331159961004[Google Scholar]
  • 34. JacobsenSJKatusicSKBergstralhEJIncidence of prostate cancer diagnosis in the eras before and after serum prostate-specific antigen testingJournal of the American Medical Association19952741814451449[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 35. LyngeEScreening for cancer of the cervix uteriWorld Journal of Surgery19891317178[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 36. Le NaourFMisekDEKrauseMCProteomics-based identification of RS/DJ-1 as a novel circulating tumor antigen in breast cancerClinical Cancer Research200171133283335[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 37. BrichoryFMMisekDEYimAMAn immune response manifested by the common occurrence of annexins I and II autoantibodies and high circulating levels of IL-6 in lung cancerProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2001981798249829[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 38. GüreAOAltorkiNKStockertEScanlanMJOldLJChenYTHuman lung cancer antigens recognized by autologous antibodies: definition of a novel cDNA derived from the tumor suppressor gene locus on chromosome 3p21.3Cancer Research199858510341041[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 39. StockertEJägerEChenYTA survey of the humoral immune response of cancer patients to a panel of human tumor antigensJournal of Experimental Medicine1998187813491354[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 40. Ben-MahrezKSorokineIThierryDCirculating antibodies against c-myc oncogene product in sera of colorectal cancer patientsInternational Journal of Cancer19904613538[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 41. PupaSMMenardSAndreolaSColnaghiMIAntibody response against the c-erbB-2 oncoprotein in breast carcinoma patientsCancer Research1993532458645866[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 42. WinterSFMinnaJDJohnsonBETakahashiTGazdarAFCarboneDPDevelopment of antibodies against p53 in lung cancer patients appears to be dependent on the type of p53 mutationCancer Research1992521541684174[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 43. RaedleJOremekGWelkerMRothWKCasparyWFZeuzemSp53 autoantibodies in patients with pancreatitis and pancreatic carcinomaPancreas1996133241246[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 44. LennerPWiklundFEmdinSOSerum antibodies against p53 in relation to cancer risk and prognosis in breast cancer: a population-based epidemiological studyBritish Journal of Cancer1999795-6927932[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 45. SoussiTp53 Antibodies in the sera of patients with various types of cancer: a reviewCancer Research200060717771788[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 46. AngelopoulouKYuHBharajBGiaiMDiamandisEPp53 Gene mutation, tumor p53 protein overexpression, and serum p53 autoantibody generation in patients with breast cancerClinical Biochemistry20003315362[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 47. KulićASirotković-SkerlevMJelisavac-ĆosićSHercegDKovačZVrbanecDAnti-p53 antibodies in serum: relationship to tumor biology and prognosis of breast cancer patientsMedical Oncology2010273887893[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 48. DesmetzCBibeauFBoissièreFProteomics-based identification of HSP60 as a tumor-associated antigen in early stage breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situJournal of Proteome Research20087938303837[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 49. DesmetzCBascoul-MolleviCRochaixPIdentification of a new panel of serum autoantibodies associated with the presence of in situ carcinoma of the breast in younger womenClinical Cancer Research2009151447334741[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 50. ConroySEGibsonSLBrunstromGIsenbergDLuqmaniYLatchmanDSAutoantibodies to 90 kD heat-shock protein in sera of breast cancer patientsThe Lancet19953458942p. 126[Google Scholar]
  • 51. ConroySESasieniPDFentimanILatchmanDSAutoantibodies to the 90 kDa heat shock protein and poor survival in breast cancer patientsEuropean Journal of Cancer1998346942943[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 52. Von Mensdorff-PouillySGourevitchMMKenemansPHumoral immune response to polymorphic epithelial mucin (MUC-1) in patients with benign and malignant breast tumoursEuropean Journal of Cancer A199632813251331[Google Scholar]
  • 53. Von Mensdorff-PouillySVerstraetenAAKenemansPSurvival in early breast cancer patients is favorably influenced by a natural humoral immune response to polymorphic epithelial mucinJournal of Clinical Oncology2000183574583[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 54. BlixtOBuetiDBurfordBAutoantibodies to aberrantly glycosylated MUC1 in early stage breast cancer are associated with a better prognosisBreast Cancer Research2011132, article R25[Google Scholar]
  • 55. DuffyMJCA 15-3 and related mucins as circulating markers in breast cancerAnnals of Clinical Biochemistry1999365579586[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 56. DuffyMJEvoyDMcDermottEWCA 15-3: uses and limitation as a biomarker for breast cancerClinica Chimica Acta201041123-2418691874[Google Scholar]
  • 57. De La LandeBHaceneKFloirasJLAlatrakchiNPichonMFPrognostic value of CA 15.3 kinetics for metastatic breast cancerInternational Journal of Biological Markers2002174231238[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 58. EbelingFGStieberPUntchMSerum CEA and CA 15-3 as prognostic factors in primary breast cancerBritish Journal of Cancer200286812171222[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 59. GionMBoracchiPDittadiRPrognostic role of serum CA15.3 in 362 node-negative breast cancers. An old player for a new gameEuropean Journal of Cancer200238911811188[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 60. KumpulainenEJKeskikuruRJJohanssonRTSerum tumor marker CA 15.3 and stage are the two most powerful predictors of survival in primary breast cancerBreast Cancer Research and Treatment200276295102[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 61. MartínACorteMDÁlvarezAMPrognostic value of pre-operative serum CA 15.3 levels in breast cancerAnticancer Research2006265B39653971[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 62. MolinaRFilellaXAlicarteJProspective evaluation of CEA and CA 15.3 in Patients with locoregional breast cancerAnticancer Research2003232A10351041[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 63. Madoz-GúrpideJWangHMisekDEBrichoryFHanashSMProtein based microarrays: a tool for probing the proteome of cancer cells and tissuesProteomics200111012791287[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 64. NamMJMadoz-GurpideJWangHMolecular profiling of the immune response in colon cancer using protein microarrays: occurrence of autoantibodies to ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase L3Proteomics200331121082115[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 65. BouwmanKQiuJZhouHMicroarrays of tumor cell derived proteins uncover a distinct pattern of prostate cancer serum immunoreactivityProteomics200331122002207[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 66. QiuJMadoz-GurpideJMisekDEDevelopment of natural protein microarrays for diagnosing cancer based on an antibody response to tumor antigensJournal of Proteome Research200432261267[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 67. RamachandranNHainsworthEBhullarBSelf-assembling protein microarraysScience200430556808690[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 68. RamachandranNRaphaelJVHainsworthENext-generation high-density self-assembling functional protein arraysNature Methods200856535538[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 69. AndersonKSSibaniSWallstromGProtein microarray signature of autoantibody biomarkers for the early detection of breast cancerJournal of Proteome Research20111018596[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 70. HattrupCLGendlerSJStructure and function of the cell surface (tethered) mucinsAnnual Review of Physiology200870431457[Google Scholar]
  • 71. KufeDWMucins in cancer: function, prognosis and therapyNature Reviews Cancer2009912874885[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 72. MolinaRAugéJMEscuderoJMEvaluation of tumor markers (HER-2/neu oncoprotein, CEA, and CA 15.3) in patients with locoregional breast cancer: prognostic valueTumor Biology2010313171180[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 73. FanYWangJYangYDetection and identification of potential biomarkers of breast cancerJournal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology2010136812431254[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 74. GastMCvan DulkenEJvan LoenenTKDetection of breast cancer by surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry tissue and serum protein profilingInternational Journal of Biological Markers2009243130141[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 75. GastMCvan GilsCHWesselsLFSerum protein profiling for diagnosis of breast cancer using SELDI-TOF MSOncology Reports2009221205213[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 76. LebrechtABoehmDSchmidtMKoelblHGrusFHSurface-enhanced laser desorption/ionisation time-of-flight mass spectrometry to detect breast cancer markers in tears and serumCancer Genomics and Proteomics2009627584[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 77. Van WindenAWGastMCWBeijnenJHValidation of previously identified serum biomarkers for breast cancer with SELDI-TOF MS: a case control studyBMC Medical Genomics20092, article 4[Google Scholar]
  • 78. BellucoCPetricoinEFMammanoESerum proteomic analysis identifies a highly sensitive and specific discriminatory pattern in stage 1 breast cancerAnnals of Surgical Oncology200714924702476[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 79. RicolleauGCharbonnelCLodéLSurface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry protein profiling identifies ubiquitin and ferritin light chain as prognostic biomarkers in node-negative breast cancer tumorsProteomics20066619631975[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 80. LarongaCBeckerSWatsonPSELDI-TOF serum profiling for prognostic and diagnostic classification of breast cancersDisease Markers2003194-5229238[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 81. LiJZhangZRosenzweigJWangYYChanDWProteomics and bioinformatics approaches for identification of serum biomarkers to detect breast cancerClinical Chemistry200248812961304[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 82. SauterERDavisWQinWIdentification of a β-casein-like peptide in breast nipple aspirate fluid that is associated with breast cancerBiomarkers in Medicine200935577588[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 83. ZhouJTrockBTsangarisTNA unique proteolytic fragment of alpha1-antitrypsin is elevated in ductal fluid of breast cancer patientBreast Cancer Research and Treatment201012317386[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 84. NobleJLDuaRSCoultonGRIsackeCMGuiGPHA comparative proteinomic analysis of nipple aspiration fluid from healthy women and women with breast cancerEuropean Journal of Cancer2007431623152320[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 85. HeJGornbeinJShenDDetection of breast cancer biomarkers in nipple aspirate fluid by SELDI-TOF and their identification by combined liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometryInternational Journal of Oncology2007301145154[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 86. LiJZhaoJYuXIdentification of biomarkers for breast cancer in nipple aspiration and ductal lavage fluidClinical Cancer Research2005112383128320[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 87. PawlikTMFritscheHCoombesKRSignificant differences in nipple aspirate fluid protein expression between healthy women and those with breast cancer demonstrated by time-of-flight mass spectrometryBreast Cancer Research and Treatment2005892149157[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 88. SauterERShanSHewettJESpeckmanPDu BoisGCProteomic analysis of nipple aspirate fluid using SELDl-TOF-MSInternational Journal of Cancer20051145791796[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 89. PaweletzCPTrockBPennanenMProteomic patterns of nipple aspirate fluids obtained by SELDI-TOF: potential for new biomarkers to aid in the diagnosis of breast cancerDisease Markers2001174301307[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 90. PawlikTMHawkeDHLiuYProteomic analysis of nipple aspirate fluid from women with early-stage breast cancer using isotope-coded affinity tags and tandem mass spectrometry reveals differential expression of vitamin D binding proteinBMC Cancer20066, article no. 68[Google Scholar]
  • 91. RuddPMElliottTCresswellPWilsonIADwekRAGlycosylation and the immune systemScience2001291551223702376[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 92. KobataAAmanoJAltered glycosylation of proteins produced by malignant cells, and application for the diagnosis and immunotherapy of tumoursImmunology and Cell Biology2005834429439[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 93. DubeDHBertozziCRGlycans in cancer and inflammation—Potential for therapeutics and diagnosticsNature Reviews Drug Discovery200546477488[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 94. ØrntoftTFVestergaardEMClinical aspects of altered glycosylation of glycoproteins in cancerElectrophoresis1999202362371[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 95. SemmesOJMalikGWardMApplication of mass spectrometry to the discovery of biomarkers for detection of prostate cancerJournal of Cellular Biochemistry2006983496503[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 96. WongNKEastonRLPanicoMCharacterization of the oligosaccharides associated with the human ovarian tumor marker CA125Journal of Biological Chemistry2003278312861928634[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 97. PrakashSRobbinsPWGlycotyping of prostate specific antigenGlycobiology2000102173176[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 98. BlockTMComunaleMALowmanMUse of targeted glycoproteomics to identify serum glycoproteins that correlate with liver cancer in woodchucks and humansProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America20051023779784[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 99. PeracaulaRTabarésGRoyleLAltered glycosylation pattern allows the distinction between prostate-specific antigen (PSA) from normal and tumor originsGlycobiology2003136457470[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 100. HayesDFAbeMSiddiquiJTondiniCKufeDWCerianiRLClinical and molecular investigations of the DF3 breast cancer-associated antigenImmunological Approaches to the Diagnosis and Therapy of Breast Cancer II1989New York, NY, USAPlenum4553[Google Scholar]
  • 101. HullSRBrightACarrawayKLAbeMHayesDFKufeDWOligosaccharide differences in the DF3 sialomucin antigen from normal human milk and the BT-20 human breast carcinoma cell lineCancer Communications198914261267[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 102. PereyLHayesDFKufeDEffects of differentiating agents on cell surface expression of the breast carcinoma-associated DF3-P epitopeCancer Research1992522263656370[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 103. PereyLHayesDFMaimonisPAbeMO’HaraCKufeDWTumor selective reactivity of a monoclonal antibody prepared against a recombinant peptide derived from the DF3 human breast carcinoma-associated antigenCancer Research199252925632568[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 104. SewellRBäckströmMDalzielMThe ST6GalNAc-I sialyltransferase localizes throughout the golgi and is responsible for the synthesis of the tumor-associated sialyl-Tn O-glycan in human breast cancerJournal of Biological Chemistry2006281635863594[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 105. BurchellJMMungulATaylor-PapadimitriouJO-linked glycosylation in the mammary gland: changes that occur during malignancyJournal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia200163355364[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 106. GoodarziMTTurnerGADecreased branching, increased fucosylation and changed sialylation of alpha-1-proteinase inhibitor in breast and ovarian cancerClinica Chimica Acta19952362161171[Google Scholar]
  • 107. DennisJWLaferteSOncodevelopmental expression of -GlcNAcβ1-6Manα1-6Manβ1- branched asparagine-linked oligosaccharides in murine tissues and human breast carcinomasCancer Research1989494945950[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 108. FernandesBSagmanUAugerMDemetrioMDennisJWβ1-6 branched oligosaccharides as a marker of tumor progression in human breast and colon neoplasiaCancer Research1991512718723[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 109. AbbottKLAokiKLimJMTargeted glycoproteomic identification of biomarkers for human breast carcinomaJournal of Proteome Research20087414701480[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 110. Abd HamidUMRoyleLSaldovaRA strategy to reveal potential glycan markers from serum glycoproteins associated with breast cancer progressionGlycobiology2008181211051118[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 111. KyselovaZMechrefYKangPBreast cancer diagnosis and prognosis through quantitative measurements of serum glycan profilesClinical Chemistry200854711661175[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 112. AlleyWRMaderaMMechrefYNovotnyMVChip-based reversed-phase liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry of permethylated N-linked glycans: a potential methodology for cancer-biomarker discoveryAnalytical Chemistry2010821250955106[PubMed][Google Scholar]
Collaboration tool especially designed for Life Science professionals.Drag-and-drop any entity to your messages.