PURPOSE: To evaluate cMET (mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor gene) and phospho-cMET (p-cMET) levels in breast cancer subtypes and its impact on survival outcomes. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We measured protein levels of cMET and p-cMET in 257 breast cancers using reverse phase protein array. Regression tree method and Martingale residual plots were applied to find best cutoff point for high and low levels. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to estimate relapse-free (RFS) and overall (OS) survival. Cox proportional hazards models were fit to determine associations of cMET/p-cMET with outcomes after adjustment for other characteristics. RESULTS: Median age was 51 years. There were 140 (54.5%) hormone receptor (HR) positive, 53 (20.6%) HER2 positive, and 64 (24.9%) triple-negative tumors. Using selected cutoffs, 181 (70.4%) and 123 (47.9%) cancers had high levels of cMET and p-cMET, respectively. There were no significant differences in mean expression of cMET (P < 0.128) and p-cMET (P < 0.088) by breast cancer subtype. Dichotomized cMET and p-cMET level was a significant prognostic factor for RFS [HR: 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.34-4.44, P = 0.003 and HR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.04-2.60, P = 0.033] and OS (HR: 3.18, 95% CI: 1.43-7.11, P = 0.003 and HR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.08-3.44, P = 0.025). Within breast cancer subtypes, high cMET levels were associated with worse RFS (P = 0.014) and OS (P = 0.006) in HR-positive tumors, and high p-cMET levels were associated with worse RFS (P = 0.019) and OS (P = 0.014) in HER2-positive breast cancers. In multivariable analysis, patients with high cMET had a significantly higher risk of recurrence (HR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.08-3.94, P = 0.028) and death (HR: 2.81, 95% CI: 1.19-6.64, P = 0.019). High p-cMET level was associated with higher risk of recurrence (HR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.08-2.95.77, P = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: High levels of cMET and p-cMET were seen in all breast cancer subtypes and correlated with poor prognosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raghav et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: