Molecular classification of non-invasive breast lesions for personalised therapy and chemoprevention

Breast cancer screening has led to a dramatic increase in the detection of pre-invasive breast lesions. While mastectomy is almost guaranteed to treat the disease, more conservative approaches could be as effective if patients can be stratified based on risk of co-existing or recurrent invasive disease.Here we use a range of biomarkers to interrogate and classify purely non-invasive lesions (PNL) and those with co-existing invasive breast cancer (CEIN). Apart from Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS), relative homogeneity is observed. DCIS contained a greater spread of molecular subtypes. Interestingly, high expression of p-mTOR was observed in all PNL with lower expression in DCIS and invasive carcinoma while the opposite expression pattern was observed for TOP2A.Comparing PNL with CEIN, we have identified p53 and Ki67 as predictors of CEIN with a combined PPV and NPV of 90.48% and 43.3% respectively. Furthermore, HER2 expression showed the best concordance between DCIS and its invasive counterpart.We propose that these biomarkers can be used to improve the management of patients with pre-invasive breast lesions following further validation and clinical trials. p53 and Ki67 could be used to stratify patients into low and high-risk groups for co-existing disease. Knowledge of expression of more actionable targets such as HER2 or TOP2A can be used to design chemoprevention or neo-adjuvant strategies. Increased knowledge of the molecular profile of pre-invasive lesions can only serve to enhance our understanding of the disease and, in the era of personalised medicine, bring us closer to improving breast cancer care.

Systematic review of tools to measure outcomes for young children with autism spectrum disorder

BACKGROUND: The needs of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are complex and this is reflected in the number and diversity of outcomes assessed and measurement tools used to collect evidence about children's progress. Relevant outcomes include improvement in core ASD impairments, such as communication, social awareness, sensory sensitivities and repetitiveness; skills such as social functioning and play; participation outcomes such as social inclusion; and parent and family impact.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the measurement properties of tools used to measure progress and outcomes in children with ASD up to the age of 6 years. To identify outcome areas regarded as important by people with ASD and parents.

METHODS: The MeASURe (Measurement in Autism Spectrum disorder Under Review) research collaboration included ASD experts and review methodologists. We undertook systematic review of tools used in ASD early intervention and observational studies from 1992 to 2013; systematic review, using the COSMIN checklist (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) of papers addressing the measurement properties of identified tools in children with ASD; and synthesis of evidence and gaps. The review design and process was informed throughout by consultation with stakeholders including parents, young people with ASD, clinicians and researchers.

RESULTS: The conceptual framework developed for the review was drawn from the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, including the domains 'Impairments', 'Activity Level Indicators', 'Participation', and 'Family Measures'. In review 1, 10,154 papers were sifted - 3091 by full text - and data extracted from 184; in total, 131 tools were identified, excluding observational coding, study-specific measures and those not in English. In review 2, 2665 papers were sifted and data concerning measurement properties of 57 (43%) tools were extracted from 128 papers. Evidence for the measurement properties of the reviewed tools was combined with information about their accessibility and presentation. Twelve tools were identified as having the strongest supporting evidence, the majority measuring autism characteristics and problem behaviour. The patchy evidence and limited scope of outcomes measured mean these tools do not constitute a 'recommended battery' for use. In particular, there is little evidence that the identified tools would be good at detecting change in intervention studies. The obvious gaps in available outcome measurement include well-being and participation outcomes for children, and family quality-of-life outcomes, domains particularly valued by our informants (young people with ASD and parents).

CONCLUSIONS: This is the first systematic review of the quality and appropriateness of tools designed to monitor progress and outcomes of young children with ASD. Although it was not possible to recommend fully robust tools at this stage, the review consolidates what is known about the field and will act as a benchmark for future developments. With input from parents and other stakeholders, recommendations are made about priority targets for research.

FUTURE WORK: Priorities include development of a tool to measure child quality of life in ASD, and validation of a potential primary outcome tool for trials of early social communication intervention.

STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002223.

FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.