Abstract PD8-09: Approximately 40% of invasive recurrences after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ is likely to be a second primary tumor

Background. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a potential precursor of invasive breast cancer, because: DCIS often accompanies invasive breast cancer; its risk factors are similar to those of invasive breast cancer; and genetic markers found in DCIS are similar to the ones found in invasive breast cancer. However, clinical behavior of DCIS is still poorly understood, as there is only limited information on its long-term natural history. Altogether, this makes it difficult to understand the relatedness of DCIS and its subsequent ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (iIBC). Here, we set-up a comparison between primary DCIS and matched subsequent iIBC, by making use of pathological and molecular data. Patients and methods. For this study, we used a unique series of 155 DCIS cases which developed a subsequent iIBC during a median follow up period of 12.6 years. We assessed histological characteristics, tumor location, estrogen and progesterone receptor status, p16 expression, and HER2 and p53 overexpression. RNA sequencing and copy number sequencing was done on 78 DCIS lesions and 78 matched invasive breast cancer relapses. We determined if the iIBC lesion and DCIS lesion were related, with respect to tumor location, immunohistochemical (IHC) markers, and genomic features. Results. Based on tumor location and histological grade, >95% of the subsequent invasive breast cancers reflected outgrowth of residual disease. HER2 was the only IHC marker that showed a significant difference in expression between DCIS and matched iIBC: 40% of the HER2 positive DCIS was followed by a HER2 negative invasive recurrence. In addition, RNAseq data was used to classify DCIS and IBC lesions into PAM50 subtypes. 77% of the DCIS IBC pair belonged to the same subtype. The DCIS lesions showed copy number aberrations on typical breast cancer-associated loci. However, when we compared the DCIS with its matched iIBC, we saw in 41% of the cases very distinct copy number profiles, indicating either outgrow of a different tumor subclone or a second primary. Conclusion. This is the first time that a sound comparison could be made between primary DCIS and its subsequent invasive breast cancer with such a large patient group, integrating pathological and molecular data. Our results strongly suggest that many subsequent iIBCs after treatment of pure DCIS could be considered as second primary breast cancer lesions. To provide definite proof for this, in depth DNA sequencing and heterogeneity studies will be presented at SABCS 2018. Citation Format: Visser LL, Hoogstraat M, Elshof LE, van de Vijver K, Groen EJ, Almekinders MM, Bierman C, Nieboer F, de Maaker M, Kristel P, Mulder L, Schaapveld M, Schmidt MK, Lips E, Wesseling J. Approximately 40% of invasive recurrences after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ is likely to be a second primary tumor [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD8-09.