Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2026

Comparative Lesions Analysis Through a Targeted Sequencing Approach
Published on: November 5, 2019
Translational case series comparing next-generation sequencing profiles of primary breast cancer and brain metastases
Giselle de Souza Carvalho1, Lucas Delmonico2, Gilda Alves2
1Clinical Research and Technological Development Division, Brazilian National Cancer Institute (INCA), Rio de Janeiro/RJ, Brazil.
Background:
Breast cancer (BC) is a heterogeneous disease, and its molecular and immunohistochemical (IHC) profiles may change over time, particularly under therapeutic pressure. IHC discordance between primary tumors and BC brain metastases (BCBM) has been reported, yet its biological and clinical significance remains incompletely defined. Genomic profiling using next-generation sequencing (NGS) may provide additional insight into tumor evolution and clonal selection, although data from paired BC and BCBM are limited.
Methods:
This translational case series included six patients randomly selected from an institutional cohort of BC patients who underwent neurosurgical resection of BCBM. IHC reassessment (ER, PR, and HER2) and NGS profiling using targeted panels were performed.
Results:
Three of the six cases presented with IHC discordance, mainly loss of HR expression and gain of HER2 in BCBM. Genomic profiling identified 23 mutations in primary tumors compared with four in BCBM. BRCA1/2 variants predominated in primary tumors (21/23, 91%), most predicted to result in loss-of-function alterations. One mutation (PIK3CA/N345K) was shared between primary and metastatic tissues within the same patient. Overall survival ranged from 28 to 146 months.
Conclusion:
This paired analysis demonstrates immunophenotypic and genomic divergence between BC and BCBM, supporting the concept of dynamic tumor evolution. Receptor conversion and emergence or loss of actionable genomic alterations highlight the potential value of repeat molecular assessment in advanced stages. Although limited by a small sample size, retrospective design, and absence of matched germline testing, these findings reinforce the importance of integrating biomarker reevaluation into the management of selected patients.

