Next Article in Journal
Genomic Instability and Adaptive Evolution Induced by RFA Insufficiency in Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Previous Article in Journal
Integrative Multi-Omics and Machine Learning Identify ID1 as a Candidate Gene Associated with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
CIMB
Volume 48
Issue 2
10.3390/cimb48020157
cimb-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

MMTV-like Viruses and Human Breast Cancer: Evidence for Causality

by
Mónica L. Acevedo
1,*,
Francisco Aguayo
2,*,
Julio C. Osorio
2,
Luis N. Ardiles
2 and
Gloria M. Calaf
3
1
Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Virology, Núcleo Interdisciplinario de Microbiología, Instituto de Ciencias Biomédicas, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile, Santiago 8330015, Chile
2
Laboratory of Oncovirology, Departamento de Ciencias Biomédicas, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica 1000000, Chile
3
Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica 1000000, Chile
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Curr. Issues Mol. Biol. 2026, 48(2), 157; https://doi.org/10.3390/cimb48020157
Submission received: 31 December 2025 / Revised: 16 January 2026 / Accepted: 19 January 2026 / Published: 30 January 2026
(This article belongs to the Section Molecular Medicine)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus (MMTV) is an established mammary carcinogen in mice, yet the relevance of MMTV-like agents to human breast cancer remains debated. Across cohorts worldwide, PCR-based detection of MMTV-like DNA, in situ RNA localization, and immunohistochemical detection of viral proteins have been reported in a subset of tumors and, in some studies, in pre-invasive lesions; however, results are heterogeneous and vulnerable to methodological confounding, including murine DNA contamination and variable assay design. Here, we synthesize the evidence through a causality-oriented framework that integrates (i) standardized multi-target detection with mandatory contamination controls, (ii) epidemiologic designs that explicitly stratify sporadic versus hereditary/BRCA-driven disease, and (iii) mechanistic endpoints that are demonstrably human-relevant (e.g., in situ viral RNA/protein in tumor cells, integration-site mapping, and functional consequences of viral gene products in human models). Given current evidence, the overall causal plausibility is best considered “possible,” rising to “probable” only for a restricted subset of sporadic tumors, provided that future studies verify bona fide infection in situ using standardized multi-target assays, rigorous murine exclusion controls, and mechanistic evidence linking viral expression and/or integration to tumor cell biology. Without these endpoints, association studies alone are unlikely to resolve causality or enable meaningful clinical translation.
Keywords:
breast; cancer; MMTV; virus

1. Introduction

Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women globally, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7% of all cancers), and is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality among women, accounting for approximately 685,000 deaths in 2020 [1,2]. The heterogeneity of BC is recognized through various biomarkers with therapeutic implications. These include estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) [3], human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) [4], BC susceptibility genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1/2) [5], estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) gene mutations, HER2 gene mutations [6], microsatellite instability (MSI) [7], phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate-3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA) gene mutations [8], neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions [9], and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression [10]. The pathogenesis of BC is complex and multifactorial, involving the interplay of reproductive hormones, environmental exposures, socioeconomic factors, smoking, stress, and dietary patterns [11,12]. Intriguingly, associations between viral infections such as Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) [13], human papillomaviruses (HPVs) [14], hepatitis C virus (HCV) [15], hepatitis B virus (HBV) [16], human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) [17], Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus (KSHV) [18], and bovine leukemia virus (BLV) [19] and BC development have been reported, though their precise roles in this malignancy require further clarification.
Notably, sequences related to the Mouse mammary Tumor virus (MMTV), the etiological agent of mammary cancer in mice, have been detected in human BC samples at variable frequencies. While some evidence suggests a potential involvement of MMTV or a related MMTV-like virus in human BC, epidemiological and experimental studies have not yet definitively clarified its role in the development of this disease. Related designations such as Human Mammary Tumor Virus (HMTV) and Human Betaretrovirus (HBRV) have been used to emphasize the possibility that a betaretrovirus adapted to humans, and not necessarily a direct murine spillover, may underlie the detected MMTV-like signals. In this review, instead of invoking a generic “controversy”, we focus on three concrete unresolved issues: (i) the distinction between true infection and laboratory contamination, (ii) the differential detection of MMTV-like sequences in sporadic versus hereditary BC, and (iii) the relative contribution of insertional versus protein-mediated mechanisms in human disease. Throughout this review, we use MMTV-like agents as an umbrella term for reported human signals (DNA/RNA/protein) that are homologous to MMTV, and we reserve MMTV for the murine virus; proposed labels such as HMTV are used in the literature but remain unstandardized. This review is organized around causality rather than cataloging MMTV biology: we condense murine virology to features that directly inform human plausibility (host range, transmission, and oncogenic mechanism), and we synthesize the human literature into a graded causal judgment. Throughout, we distinguish three recurring failure modes: murine DNA contamination, uncontrolled mixing of sporadic and hereditary BC, and over-extrapolation from murine insertional mutagenesis to humans, and we outline the minimal mechanistic evidence required to move the field from association to etiology. The central novelty of this review is an explicit, testable causality framework that links epidemiologic patterns to minimum detection/reporting standards and human-relevant mechanistic benchmarks needed to move the field from association to etiology.

2. MMTV Infection and Pathogenesis in Mice

In mice, exogenous MMTV is transmitted mainly via milk. After oral acquisition, the virus traverses the gut-associated lymphoid tissue, infecting antigen-presenting cells and B cells, where Sag-driven activation expands infected lymphocytes and amplifies viral load. Migrating infected lymphocytes traffic to the mammary gland, enabling infection of mammary epithelial cells; this immune-amplification step is central to efficient in vivo spread and helps explain the long pre-neoplastic latency typical of MMTV infection [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27].
Murine mammary tumorigenesis is classically driven by proviral insertion near common integration sites (e.g., Wnt and Fgf family members, Notch4), where LTR enhancers dysregulate adjacent genes and tumors display clonal or oligoclonal integrations consistent with stepwise se-lection [24,25,28,29,30,31]. These features provide a clear benchmark for causality in the natural host but also highlight what is currently missing in humans: a reproducible map of tumor-cell integrations linked to transformation. Consequently, murine data should be used primarily to define testable human endpoints (integration, viral transcription/protein expression, and pathway activation) rather than as direct mechanistic proof for human BC (Figure 1).

3. Epidemiology of MMTV-like Sequences in Human Breast Cancer

A potential link between MMTV or related MMTV-like virus (MMTV-LV) sequences and human BC was suggested in the early 1990s [32]. Initial studies employing polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and Southern blot analysis detected sequences homologous to MMTV genes (pol or env) in BC tissues from cohorts in France (approx. 36.6%) and the USA (approx. 38.5% for specific env fragments). These sequences were often reported at higher frequencies in cancerous tissues compared to benign breast lesions or normal breast tissue, which prompted further interest in a possible viral contribution to human BC [33]. As additional cohorts were studied, a heterogeneous landscape emerged that can arise from genuine geographic variation in exposure and prevalence, but also from differences in methodology and cohort design, rather than from inherently “conflicting” biology [34,35,36].
Several studies, especially those originating from Australia, consistently reported relatively high detection rates of MMTV-like sequences. Ford et al. (2003) identified such sequences in 32–42% of BC cases among Australian women, a rate significantly higher than that observed in Vietnamese women residing either in Australia or Vietnam [37]. Lawson et al. (2006) detected env-like sequences in 37% of Australian BCs [38], and a later study (2018) reported the presence of MMTV p14 protein via immunohistochemistry (IHC) in 54% of cases examined [39]. Furthermore, a study by Glenn et al., also in an Australian cohort, reported a high prevalence, identifying MMTV-like sequences in 78% (39/50) of invasive BC specimens. High prevalence rates, determined using various PCR-based methodologies, were also reported in specific cohorts from Tunisia (74%) [40], Morocco (57%) [41], Pakistan (29% and 66%) [42,43], and Egypt (70–76%) [44].
Conversely, a substantial number of studies reported very low frequencies or failed to detect MMTV-like sequences altogether. For example, investigations in Austria [45], Sweden [35], and Germany (utilizing microarrays) [36] found little to no evidence of these sequences in their BC cohorts. Similarly, low prevalence rates or negative findings were frequently reported from Japan (0% in one study), Myanmar (1.7%) [46,47] and several studies conducted in Iran (e.g., 0% and 12%) [48,49]. Findings from Mexico were also contradictory, with studies reporting rates of 0% and 12.4% [50,51]. A serological study in the USA did not detect specific antibodies against MMTV proteins in BC patients [52]; given that MMTV is a milk-borne virus inducing immune tolerance in its natural murine host, and that human exposure routes and timing are unknown, negative serology does not by itself contradict a viral hypothesis. This considerable heterogeneity in reported prevalence rates is likely attributable to several factors, prominently including the wide array of detection methods employed across studies. Techniques such as standard PCR, nested PCR, quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR), in situ hybridization (ISH), IHC, and Southern blotting possess differing sensitivities and specificities, potentially influencing results [53]. Variations in the choice of target viral gene (env, pol, LTR), primer sequences, and laboratory protocols may also contribute significantly to the discordant findings. In addition, work on XMRV and related murine retroviruses clearly demonstrated that murine DNA contamination in PCR master mixes, commercial reagents, and extraction columns can generate spurious murine retroviral signals in human samples, and dedicated assays for murine mitochondrial DNA or IAP sequences are therefore essential to exclude contamination in MMTV-like studies [54,55,56,57,58]. Taken together, the striking geographic heterogeneity is unlikely to have a single explanation; plausible contributors include differences in sample types (fresh vs. FFPE), nucleic-acid integrity, target loci/primer sets, assay sensitivity (PCR vs. qPCR/ddPCR), laboratory workflows, and contamination control rigor, as well as true population-level effects such as host genetic background, reproductive/hormonal factors, environmental co-exposures, and circulating mouse reservoir ecology. Publication bias and selective reporting of positive findings should also be considered, particularly where methods and negative controls are incompletely described. Across cohorts, apparent prevalence is strongly assay dependent. Conventional PCR and nested PCR maximize analytic sensitivity but are the most vulnerable to amplicon carryover and low-level murine DNA contamination; qPCR improves quantification but remains target- and primer-dependent; ddPCR can increase precision at low copy number but does not solve contamination or locus-specificity by itself [59]. In situ assays (e.g., ISH/RNAscope for RNA; IHC for protein) provide cellular localization and reduce the key confounder of detecting exogenous DNA not residing in tumor cells but typically trade sensitivity for specificity and are constrained by probe/antibody validation [60]. NGS-based approaches can, in principle, resolve integration or clonality, yet require stringent negative controls, laboratory separation, and transparent reporting of read-level filters to avoid artefactual signals [61]. Beyond simple cohort stratification, the biology of BRCA1/2-associated tumors could plausibly modulate detectability or relevance of any MMTV-like signal. For example, BRCA1-driven cancers are enriched for basal-like/triple-negative phenotypes and exhibit profound genomic instability; these features could either (i) reduce selective advantage for a virus that acts through hormone-responsive or luminal programs, or (ii) complicate downstream interpretations by increasing background DNA damage and rearrangements. Conversely, if any subset of sporadic tumors harbors bona fide viral material in tumor cells, that subset should be defined by tumor-intrinsic evidence (multi-locus DNA plus in situ RNA/protein), not by geography alone. Importantly, these are hypotheses for future studies.
MMTV-like sequences or related proteins have been detected not only in invasive BCs but also in other contexts, including normal breast epithelium adjacent to tumors, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), and benign breast lesions [62]. Rather than “complicating” interpretation, higher positivity rates in pre-invasive lesions and detection in adjacent epithelium are compatible with models in which infection is widespread and longstanding, and in which early viral contributions may be followed by “hit-and-run” or selection events during progression [63,64,65]. An association with BC subtypes has also been proposed. A particularly informative study by Naccarato et al. reported that MMTV-like sequences were significantly associated with sporadic BC (30.3% prevalence) but were almost absent in hereditary BC (4.2% prevalence). This suggests that cohort heterogeneity, specifically the uncontrolled inclusion of HBC cases with known genetic etiologies (e.g., BRCA1/2 mutations), may be a primary confounding variable that accounts for some of the negative findings reported in the literature [66]. These results underscore the importance of distinguishing sporadic and hereditary disease in both individual studies and meta-analyses, and they support the notion that a virus, if present, may preferentially contribute to sporadic BC rather than to BRCA-driven tumors.
A meta-analysis published in 2014 attempted to synthesize data from available studies up to that point. It reported a significantly higher overall estimated prevalence of MMTV-like sequences in Western populations compared to Asian populations and calculated a significant summary odds ratio (OR = 15.20) for the association with BC risk, based on the included studies [67]. However, the authors acknowledged the substantial heterogeneity among the studies, which remains a major limitation in drawing firm conclusions from pooled data. Taken together, the epidemiological evidence reveals a recurrent, geographically patterned signal of MMTV-like detection in BC that is strongest in certain Western and Middle Eastern cohorts, but its magnitude and meaning remain uncertain without harmonized detection methods, rigorous contamination controls and explicit stratification of sporadic versus hereditary disease (Table 1).

4. Mechanisms of MMTV-Mediated Carcinogenesis in Humans

While insertional mutagenesis is the established oncogenic mechanism in mice, evidence for an analogous dominant mechanism in humans remains limited. No reproducible map of common integration sites in human BC tissues is currently available, and the presence of MMTV-like sequences in human samples has not yet been linked to recurrent insertional activation of specific proto-oncogenes [79]. Instead, research has focused on non-insertional mechanisms driven by specific MMTV proteins. Of particular interest is the MMTV envelope protein, which has been proposed to potentially facilitate the transformation of normal human breast cells. This protein contains a distinctive immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activation motif (ITAM), a motif typically associated with immune cell signaling [80]. When the MMTV Env protein is experimentally expressed in human breast epithelial cells, either in vitro cultures or through genetic manipulation in mice, its functional ITAM appears to disrupt normal acinar morphogenesis and induce hallmarks of transformation, including anchorage-independent growth and invasion [81]. This disruption is associated with the activation of oncogenic signaling pathways, including Syk and Src tyrosine kinases, that promote hallmarks of cancer, such as aberrant proliferation, invasion of surrounding tissues, and resistance to apoptosis [82]. Crucially, mutations that inactivate the ITAM function (e.g., Y > F substitutions) eliminate these transforming effects in experimental systems [83]. This proposed mechanism is significant as it does not rely on insertional mutagenesis near specific proto-oncogenes, pointing to a potential mechanism by which a viral protein could theoretically contribute to the development of human BC [82] (Figure 2). Importantly, most mechanistic evidence arises from murine tumors, murine cell systems, or engineered expression models; these studies establish biological plausibility but should not be overinterpreted as proof of active viral replication or an etiologic role in human breast carcinogenesis without in situ validation in human tissues.
The MMTV Env signal peptide protein, p14, despite being a fragment of the larger envelope precursor, appears to possess unique functionalities within host cells. P14 is a small protein consisting of 98 amino acids and plays a role in transporting the Env precursor protein (74 kDa) produced by MMTV through the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Initially designated as MMTV-p14, it is commonly referred to simply as p14 [84]. Once inside the ER, a signal tag is removed, allowing for post-translationally modifications involving sugar addition, leading to the maturation of viral envelope proteins gp52 and gp36 [85]. Typically, signal peptides are degraded by enzymes after directing proteins to the ER, but the p14 signal peptide appears to be an exception [86]. Research has indicated that it can localize to the nucleoli in the cells of mice with mammary tumors and lymphoma induced by the virus, as well as potentially in human BC, suggesting that the p14 signal peptide can shuttle between the nucleus and cytoplasm [87]. Notably, the phosphorylation state of p14 appears to modulate the tumorigenic potential of MMTV-infected cells in mouse models. The envelope precursor signal peptide functions as a potential tumor-modulating phosphoprotein, undergoing phosphorylation by two serine kinases: casein kinase 2 (CK2) at serine 65 and protein kinase C (PKC) at serine 18 in experimental settings [86]. Studies using site-directed mutagenesis found that a p14-Ser65Ala mutation was associated with impaired tumorigenicity, whereas a p14-Ser18Ala mutation was associated with enhanced tumorigenicity. This suggests that phosphorylation at serine 65 (by CK2) is pro-oncogenic, while phosphorylation at serine 18 (by PKC) is anti-oncogenic. Thus, the tumorigenic potential of MMTV in these models may be linked to CK2 and PKC activity on p14. Excessive amounts of p14 might accelerate tumor growth. p14 exhibits a range of functions, as it can be in both the nucleolus and the ribosome. Furthermore, p14 may act as a regulatory switch, potentially affecting the localization of crucial RNA components relative to the nucleolus and impacting ribosome assembly in the cytoplasm. This process could lead to increased protein production and disturbances in cell growth [88]. Moreover, microarray analysis associated with these phosphorylation states appears to determine its functional role in these models. This analysis has been associated with the transcriptional regulation of genes related to cell proliferation and the Erb-B signaling pathway, which is well-known for its role in driving oncogenesis [89]. Overall, the overexpression of p14 can disrupt cellular homeostasis by affecting protein synthesis and potentially activating pro-cancerous signaling pathways, underscoring its potential role as an oncogenic factor in experimental contexts.
The p14 protein is not only a signaling molecule but also functions as part of a variant of MMTV-env, known as Rem (Regulator of Export of MMTV mRNA), which facilitates the transport of specific viral mRNAs out of the nucleus [90,91]. This finding adds to the complexity of MMTV. Additionally, p14 can be present on the surface of cells infected with MMTV, presenting a potential target for developing therapies aimed at MMTV-related cancers [92]. A study by Braitbard et al. in 2016 explored the potential of p14 for treating MMTV-associated tumors in mice [91]. Their results indicate several promising avenues for further exploration. p14, or modified versions of it, could potentially be used in vaccines or antibody therapies. Furthermore, immune cells specifically targeting p14 on cancer cells were identified as viable treatment options in their murine model. The study also suggests the possibility of introducing molecules or inhibitors directly into cancer cells to target p14. Finally, both p14 and antibodies designed against it could potentially be used for early detection of these tumors. Although the detection of p14 in MMTV-positive human cases has been reported, further research is necessary to substantiate these therapeutic possibilities [92].
MMTV encodes various proteins beyond the essential structural and enzymatic components typically found in retroviruses. These regulatory proteins, such as Rem, Sag, and Naf, play crucial roles in the viral life cycle, influencing critical processes such as RNA splicing, nuclear export, and immune evasion [93]. Suggestions that additional, as-yet-undiscovered MMTV proteins might have Tax-like oncogenic properties in humans remain speculative and are not supported by current evidence; we therefore avoid extending mechanistic models beyond what is directly demonstrated [94]. Intriguingly, some of these MMTV proteins have been linked to BC development in mice. For example, Rem, which is involved in RNA export, could potentially impact the expression of cellular genes related to cell proliferation and survival. Likewise, Sag, a superantigen, has the potential to disrupt the immune response, possibly fostering an environment favorable for tumor growth [95]. In addition to direct viral-driven mechanisms, the interplay between the virus and host innate immunity is also being investigated. The APOBEC3 (Apolipoprotein B mRNA Editing Enzyme Catalytic Polypeptide-like 3) family of cytidine deaminases are key antiviral restriction factors that can induce G-to-A hypermutations in retroviral cDNA during reverse transcription. While this is a host defense mechanism, APOBEC mutagenesis is also a known “off-target” source of somatic mutations in the host genome, creating a distinct mutational signature observed in many human cancers. A potential link was observed in human BC, where MMTV-like positivity combined with an APOBEC3A/B gene deletion was associated with a significantly earlier age-at-diagnosis. This suggests a complex interplay where the virus may trigger a host mutagenic response that, in turn, contributes to carcinogenesis, or where a compromised innate immune defense (i.e., APOBEC3A/B deletion) enhances the pathogenic potential of the virus [96]. These findings are consistent with a model in which viral infection, insertional events and host restriction mechanisms converge to shape tumor evolution, but they do not yet define a single dominant pathway in human BC. Overall, these pathways support plausibility but are not yet anchored to definitive viral expression or integration in human tumor cells, underscoring the need for paired in situ detection and functional validation in primary-like human systems. Figure 2 is a conceptual model (hypothesis-generating) largely derived from murine retrovirology; the proposed steps and arrows should not be interpreted as established mechanisms in human breast cancer and require direct in situ and integration-level validation in human tissues.

5. Human and MMTV Interactions

If MMTV-like signals in human tissues reflect true infection, two non-exclusive scenarios require testing: recurrent zoonotic exposure from mice (potentially modulated by the geographic distribution of Mus musculus domesticus) and/or sustained circulation of a human-adapted betaretrovirus derived from an ancient cross-species transmission event [97,98,99,100,101]. Putative routes such as saliva or other mucosal shedding remain intriguing but technically vulnerable to contamination artifacts; therefore, progress depends on orthogonal detection in paired tissues, deep sequencing with stringent murine DNA exclusion, and phylogenetic evidence of viral evolution inconsistent with laboratory mouse proviruses [54,55,56,57,58].

6. Evidence Synthesis, Causal Plausibility and Perspectives

MMTV is unequivocally oncogenic in the murine mammary gland, but in humans the cumulative literature remains insufficient for a definitive etiological claim. A central limitation is that epidemiological heterogeneity (including true geographic variation) is inseparable from methodological variability and the long-recognized risk of murine DNA contamination; therefore, additional prevalence surveys alone are unlikely to resolve causality without mechanistic, human-relevant endpoints (Table 2).
Operationally, we define the ‘restricted subset’ as sporadic tumors that meet a minimum evidentiary threshold: (1) concordant detection of at least two independent viral loci (e.g., env and LTR/pol) in the same specimen with rigorous murine-contamination controls; (2) localization of viral RNA and/or protein within tumor epithelial cells by validated in situ methods; and (3) ideally, integration or clonality evidence by orthogonal sequencing-based approaches. Tumors not meeting these criteria should be interpreted as unconfirmed signals. We therefore position the overall causal relationship between MMTV-like agents and human breast cancer as “possible”, rising to “probable” only in a restricted subset of sporadic tumors, provided that future studies demonstrate bona fide infection in situ with standardized multi-target assays, rigorous murine contamination exclusion, and mechanistic evidence linking viral expression and/or integration to tumor cell biology. This grading is intentionally conservative: the current literature is limited by interlaboratory heterogeneity, incomplete reporting of negative controls, and the risk that strong non-viral etiologies (e.g., hereditary/BRCA-driven disease) dilute or mask any viral signal when cohorts are not stratified.
A key implication of this grading is methodological: progress requires a unified detection and reporting framework and a shift toward human-relevant causal benchmarks. At minimum, future studies should report and/or implement (i) multi-locus nucleic-acid detection (e.g., LTR + env + gag/pol) with quantitative readouts (qPCR/ddPCR) and sequence confirmation; (ii) mandatory murine exclusion controls (IAP and/or mitochondrial markers), physical separation of pre-/post-PCR steps, and reagent/environmental blanks; (iii) orthogonal localization in tissue (RNAscope/ISH for viral RNA and IHC for viral proteins) with clear tumor-cell attribution; (iv) cohort design with explicit stratification (sporadic vs. hereditary/BRCA, tumor subtype, grade/stage, and relevant exposures) and preferably prospective sampling; (v) where signals are detected, integration-site mapping (NGS-based) and assessment of clonality/single-cell distribution; and (vi) functional testing in primary-like human models (organoids, patient-derived models) to connect viral gene products to defined oncogenic phenotypes. Clinically, translation is premature, but if a causal subset is validated, it could enable risk stratification, standardized biomarker development, and rational exploration of prevention/therapeutic strategies (e.g., vaccination concepts or antiviral/immune-targeted approaches) tailored to that subset.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.L.A. and F.A.; methodology, M.L.A., F.A. and J.C.O.; software, L.N.A. and J.C.O.; investigation, M.L.A. and F.A.; resources, J.C.O. and L.N.A.; writing—original draft preparation, F.A., J.C.O. and M.L.A.; writing—review and editing, F.A., M.L.A., J.C.O., L.N.A. and G.M.C.; supervision, M.L.A. and F.A.; project administration, F.A.; funding acquisition, M.L.A. and F.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Fondecyt 1221033 (F.A.) and Fondecyt 1231275 (M.A.).

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Acknowledgments

Fortalecimiento de la Investigacion en la UTA 7703-24.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Sung, H.; Ferlay, J.; Siegel, R.L.; Laversanne, M.; Soerjomataram, I.; Jemal, A.; Bray, F. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2021, 71, 209–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ferlay, J.; Colombet, M.; Soerjomataram, I.; Parkin, D.M.; Pineros, M.; Znaor, A.; Bray, F. Cancer statistics for the year 2020: An overview. Int. J. Cancer 2021, 149, 778–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Horwitz, K.B.; Sartorius, C.A. 90 YEARS OF PROGESTERONE: Progesterone and progesterone receptors in breast cancer: Past, present, future. J. Mol. Endocrinol. 2020, 65, T49–T63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Iqbal, N.; Iqbal, N. Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) in Cancers: Overexpression and Therapeutic Implications. Mol. Biol. Int. 2014, 2014, 852748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Tung, N.M.; Garber, J.E. BRCA1/2 testing: Therapeutic implications for breast cancer management. Br. J. Cancer 2018, 119, 141–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Urso, L.; Vernaci, G.; Carlet, J.; Lo Mele, M.; Fassan, M.; Zulato, E.; Faggioni, G.; Menichetti, A.; Di Liso, E.; Griguolo, G.; et al. ESR1 Gene Mutation in Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients: Concordance Between Tumor Tissue and Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis. Front. Oncol. 2021, 11, 625636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kurata, K.; Kubo, M.; Kai, M.; Mori, H.; Kawaji, H.; Kaneshiro, K.; Yamada, M.; Nishimura, R.; Osako, T.; Arima, N.; et al. Microsatellite instability in Japanese female patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2020, 27, 490–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chung, C.; Yeung, V.T.Y.; Wong, K.C.W. Prognostic and predictive biomarkers with therapeutic targets in breast cancer: A 2022 update on current developments, evidence, and recommendations. J. Oncol. Pharm. Pract. 2023, 29, 1343–1360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gatalica, Z.; Xiu, J.; Swensen, J.; Vranic, S. Molecular characterization of cancers with NTRK gene fusions. Mod. Pathol. 2019, 32, 147–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Vidula, N.; Yau, C.; Rugo, H.S. Programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) receptor and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) gene expression in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2021, 187, 387–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Iacoviello, L.; Bonaccio, M.; de Gaetano, G.; Donati, M.B. Epidemiology of breast cancer, a paradigm of the “common soil” hypothesis. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2021, 72, 4–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Tuasha, N.; Petros, B. Heterogeneity of Tumors in Breast Cancer: Implications and Prospects for Prognosis and Therapeutics. Scientifica 2020, 2020, 4736091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Arias-Calvachi, C.; Blanco, R.; Calaf, G.M.; Aguayo, F. Epstein-Barr Virus Association with Breast Cancer: Evidence and Perspectives. Biology 2022, 11, 799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Blanco, R.; Carrillo-Beltran, D.; Munoz, J.P.; Corvalan, A.H.; Calaf, G.M.; Aguayo, F. Human Papillomavirus in Breast Carcinogenesis: A Passenger, a Cofactor, or a Causal Agent? Biology 2021, 10, 804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Chen, H.; Du, P.; Yang, T.; Xu, X.; Cui, T.; Dai, Y. Hepatitis C virus infection is associated with high risk of breast cancer: A pooled analysis of 68,014 participants. Front. Oncol. 2023, 13, 1274340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Lu, L.J.; Adhikari, V.P.; Zhao, C.X.; Wu, H.; Dai, W.; Li, X.; Li, H.Y.; Ren, G.S.; Wu, K.N.; Kong, L.Q. Clinical study on the relationship between hepatitis B virus infection and risk of breast cancer: A large sized case-control and single center study in southwest of China. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 72044–72053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Touma, J.; Pantalone, M.R.; Rahbar, A.; Liu, Y.; Vetvik, K.; Sauer, T.; Soderberg-Naucler, C.; Geisler, J. Human Cytomegalovirus Protein Expression Is Correlated with Shorter Overall Survival in Breast Cancer Patients: A Cohort Study. Viruses 2023, 15, 732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Tsai, J.H.; Hsu, C.S.; Tsai, C.H.; Su, J.M.; Liu, Y.T.; Cheng, M.H.; Wei, J.C.; Chen, F.L.; Yang, C.C. Relationship between viral factors, axillary lymph node status and survival in breast cancer. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2007, 133, 13–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gao, A.; Kouznetsova, V.L.; Tsigelny, I.F. Bovine leukemia virus relation to human breast cancer: Meta-analysis. Microb. Pathog. 2020, 149, 104417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chen, L.; Zhang, X.; Liu, G.; Chen, S.; Zheng, M.; Zhu, S.; Zhang, S. Intestinal Immune System and Amplification of Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2021, 11, 807462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Callahan, R.; Smith, G.H. Common integration sites for MMTV in viral induced mouse mammary tumors. J. Mammary Gland. Biol. Neoplasia 2008, 13, 309–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Baribaud, F.; Maillard, I.; Vacheron, S.; Brocker, T.; Diggelmann, H.; Acha-Orbea, H. Role of dendritic cells in the immune response induced by mouse mammary tumor virus superantigen. J. Virol. 1999, 73, 8403–8410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Baribaud, F.; Shaw, A.V.; Scarpellino, L.; Diggelmann, H.; Acha-Orbea, H. Preferential binding of mouse mammary tumor virus to B lymphocytes. J. Virol. 1999, 73, 7899–7902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ross, S.R. MMTV infectious cycle and the contribution of virus-encoded proteins to transformation of mammary tissue. J. Mammary Gland. Biol. Neoplasia 2008, 13, 299–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Mustafa, F.; Lozano, M.; Dudley, J.P. C3H mouse mammary tumor virus superantigen function requires a splice donor site in the envelope gene. J. Virol. 2000, 74, 9431–9440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  26. Held, W.; Waanders, G.A.; Shakhov, A.N.; Scarpellino, L.; Acha-Orbea, H.; MacDonald, H.R. Superantigen-induced immune stimulation amplifies mouse mammary tumor virus infection and allows virus transmission. Cell 1993, 74, 529–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Dzuris, J.L.; Golovkina, T.V.; Ross, S.R. Both T and B cells shed infectious mouse mammary tumor virus. J. Virol. 1997, 71, 6044–6048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Courreges, M.C.; Burzyn, D.; Nepomnaschy, I.; Piazzon, I.; Ross, S.R. Critical role of dendritic cells in mouse mammary tumor virus in vivo infection. J. Virol. 2007, 81, 3769–3777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kim, H.H.; van den Heuvel, A.P.; Schmidt, J.W.; Ross, S.R. Novel common integration sites targeted by mouse mammary tumor virus insertion in mammary tumors have oncogenic activity. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e27425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yu, M.; Qin, K.; Fan, J.; Zhao, G.; Zhao, P.; Zeng, W.; Chen, C.; Wang, A.; Wang, Y.; Zhong, J.; et al. The evolving roles of Wnt signaling in stem cell proliferation and differentiation, the development of human diseases, and therapeutic opportunities. Genes Dis. 2024, 11, 101026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zhou, B.; Lin, W.; Long, Y.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Wu, K.; Chu, Q. Notch signaling pathway: Architecture, disease, and therapeutics. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2022, 7, 95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Moyret, C.; Bernard, D.; Bignon, Y.; Dastugue, B.; Plagne, R.; Chollet, P.; Peters, G. Presence of the mouse mammary-tumor virus (mmtv) pol gene in breast-cancer. Int. J. Oncol. 1992, 1, 475–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, Y.; Holland, J.F.; Bleiweiss, I.J.; Melana, S.; Liu, X.; Pelisson, I.; Cantarella, A.; Stellrecht, K.; Mani, S.; Pogo, B.G. Detection of mammary tumor virus env gene-like sequences in human breast cancer. Cancer Res. 1995, 55, 5173–5179. [Google Scholar]
  34. Mant, C.; Gillett, C.; D’Arrigo, C.; Cason, J. Human murine mammary tumour virus-like agents are genetically distinct from endogenous retroviruses and are not detectable in breast cancer cell lines or biopsies. Virology 2004, 318, 393–404, Correction in Virology 2004, 327, 320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Bindra, A.; Muradrasoli, S.; Kisekka, R.; Nordgren, H.; Warnberg, F.; Blomberg, J. Search for DNA of exogenous mouse mammary tumor virus-related virus in human breast cancer samples. J. Gen. Virol. 2007, 88, 1806–1809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Frank, O.; Verbeke, C.; Schwarz, N.; Mayer, J.; Fabarius, A.; Hehlmann, R.; Leib-Mosch, C.; Seifarth, W. Variable transcriptional activity of endogenous retroviruses in human breast cancer. J. Virol. 2008, 82, 1808–1818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ford, C.E.; Tran, D.; Deng, Y.; Ta, V.T.; Rawlinson, W.D.; Lawson, J.S. Mouse mammary tumor virus-like gene sequences in breast tumors of Australian and Vietnamese women. Clin. Cancer Res. 2003, 9, 1118–1120. [Google Scholar]
  38. Lawson, J.S.; Tran, D.D.; Carpenter, E.; Ford, C.E.; Rawlinson, W.D.; Whitaker, N.J.; Delprado, W. Presence of mouse mammary tumour-like virus gene sequences may be associated with morphology of specific human breast cancer. J. Clin. Pathol. 2006, 59, 1287–1292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lawson, J.S.; Mazzanti, C.; Civita, P.; Menicagli, M.; Ngan, C.C.; Whitaker, N.J.; Hochman, J.; Braitbard, O.; Yosufi, B.; Glenn, W.K. Association of Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus With Human Breast Cancer: Histology, Immunohistochemistry and Polymerase Chain Reaction Analyses. Front. Oncol. 2018, 8, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Levine, P.H.; Pogo, B.G.; Klouj, A.; Coronel, S.; Woodson, K.; Melana, S.M.; Mourali, N.; Holland, J.F. Increasing evidence for a human breast carcinoma virus with geographic differences. Cancer 2004, 101, 721–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Slaoui, M.; El Mzibri, M.; Razine, R.; Qmichou, Z.; Attaleb, M.; Amrani, M. Detection of MMTV-Like sequences in Moroccan breast cancer cases. Infect. Agents Cancer 2014, 9, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Naushad, W.; Surriya, O.; Sadia, H. Prevalence of EBV, HPV and MMTV in Pakistani breast cancer patients: A possible etiological role of viruses in breast cancer. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2017, 54, 230–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Khalid, H.F.; Ali, A.; Fawad, N.; Rafique, S.; Ullah, I.; Rehman, G.; Shams, M.U.; Idrees, M. MMTV-LIKE virus and c-myc over-expression are associated with invasive breast cancer. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2021, 91, 104827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Loutfy, S.A.; Abdallah, Z.F.; Shaalan, M.; Moneer, M.; Karam, A.; Moneer, M.M.; Sayed, I.M.; Abd El-Hafeez, A.A.; Ghosh, P.; Zekri, A.N. Prevalence of MMTV-Like env Sequences and Its Association with BRCA1/2 Genes Mutations Among Egyptian Breast Cancer Patients. Cancer Manag. Res. 2021, 13, 2835–2848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Witt, A.; Hartmann, B.; Marton, E.; Zeillinger, R.; Schreiber, M.; Kubista, E. The mouse mammary tumor virus-like env gene sequence is not detectable in breast cancer tissue of Austrian patients. Oncol. Rep. 2003, 10, 1025–1029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Fukuoka, H.; Moriuchi, M.; Yano, H.; Nagayasu, T.; Moriuchi, H. No association of mouse mammary tumor virus-related retrovirus with Japanese cases of breast cancer. J. Med. Virol. 2008, 80, 1447–1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. San, T.H.; Fujisawa, M.; Fushimi, S.; Yoshimura, T.; Ohara, T.; Soe, L.; Min, N.W.; Kyaw, O.; Yang, X.; Matsukawa, A. Low prevalence of human mammary tumor virus (HMTV) in breast cancer patients from Myanmar. Infect. Agents Cancer 2017, 12, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Motamedifar, M.; Saki, M.; Ghaderi, A. Lack of association of mouse mammary tumor virus-like sequences in Iranian breast cancer patients. Med. Princ. Pract. 2012, 21, 244–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Reza, M.A.; Reza, M.H.; Mahdiyeh, L.; Mehdi, F.; Hamid, Z.N. Evaluation Frequency of Merkel Cell Polyoma, Epstein-Barr and Mouse Mammary Tumor Viruses in Patients with Breast Cancer in Kerman, Southeast of Iran. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2015, 16, 7351–7357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  50. Morales-Sanchez, A.; Molina-Munoz, T.; Martinez-Lopez, J.L.; Hernandez-Sancen, P.; Mantilla, A.; Leal, Y.A.; Torres, J.; Fuentes-Panana, E.M. No association between Epstein-Barr Virus and Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus with breast cancer in Mexican women. Sci. Rep. 2013, 3, 2970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Cedro-Tanda, A.; Cordova-Solis, A.; Juarez-Cedillo, T.; Pina-Jimenez, E.; Hernandez-Caballero, M.E.; Moctezuma-Meza, C.; Castelazo-Rico, G.; Gomez-Delgado, A.; Monsalvo-Reyes, A.C.; Salamanca-Gomez, F.A.; et al. Prevalence of HMTV in breast carcinomas and unaffected tissue from Mexican women. BMC Cancer 2014, 14, 942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  52. Goedert, J.J.; Rabkin, C.S.; Ross, S.R. Prevalence of serologic reactivity against four strains of mouse mammary tumour virus among US women with breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2006, 94, 548–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Usman, M.; Hameed, Y.; Ahmad, M. Does human papillomavirus cause human colorectal cancer? Applying Bradford Hill criteria postulates. Ecancermedicalscience 2020, 14, 1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Robinson, M.J.; Erlwein, O.W.; Kaye, S.; Weber, J.; Cingoz, O.; Patel, A.; Walker, M.M.; Kim, W.J.; Uiprasertkul, M.; Coffin, J.M.; et al. Mouse DNA contamination in human tissue tested for XMRV. Retrovirology 2010, 7, 108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Tuke, P.W.; Tettmar, K.I.; Tamuri, A.; Stoye, J.P.; Tedder, R.S. PCR master mixes harbour murine DNA sequences. Caveat emptor! PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e19953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zheng, H.; Jia, H.; Shankar, A.; Heneine, W.; Switzer, W.M. Detection of murine leukemia virus or mouse DNA in commercial RT-PCR reagents and human DNAs. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e29050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Erlwein, O.; Robinson, M.J.; Dustan, S.; Weber, J.; Kaye, S.; McClure, M.O. DNA extraction columns contaminated with murine sequences. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e23484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Sato, E.; Furuta, R.A.; Miyazawa, T. An endogenous murine leukemia viral genome contaminant in a commercial RT-PCR kit is amplified using standard primers for XMRV. Retrovirology 2010, 7, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Etkind, P.R.; Steward, A.F.; Wiernik, P.H. Mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV)-like DNA sequences in the breast tumors of father, mother, and daughter. Infect. Agents Cancer 2008, 3, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Wang, F.; Flanagan, J.; Su, N.; Wang, L.-C.; Bui, S.; Nielson, A.; Wu, X.; Vo, H.-T.; Ma, X.-J.; Luo, Y. RNAscope: A novel in situ RNA analysis platform for formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues. J. Mol. Diagn. 2012, 14, 22–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Datta, S.; Budhauliya, R.; Das, B.; Chatterjee, S.; Vanlalhmuaka; Veer, V. Next-generation sequencing in clinical virology: Discovery of new viruses. World J. Virol. 2015, 4, 265–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Mazzanti, C.M.; Al Hamad, M.; Fanelli, G.; Scatena, C.; Zammarchi, F.; Zavaglia, K.; Lessi, F.; Pistello, M.; Naccarato, A.G.; Bevilacqua, G. A mouse mammary tumor virus env-like exogenous sequence is strictly related to progression of human sporadic breast carcinoma. Am. J. Pathol. 2011, 179, 2083–2090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Al Dossary, R.; Alkharsah, K.R.; Kussaibi, H. Prevalence of Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus (MMTV)-like sequences in human breast cancer tissues and adjacent normal breast tissues in Saudi Arabia. BMC Cancer 2018, 18, 170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. de Sousa Pereira, N.; Akelinghton Freire Vitiello, G.; Karina Banin-Hirata, B.; Scantamburlo Alves Fernandes, G.; Jose Sparca Salles, M.; Karine Amarante, M.; Angelica Ehara Watanabe, M. Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus (MMTV)-like env Sequence in Brazilian Breast Cancer Samples: Implications in Clinicopathological Parameters in Molecular Subtypes. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 9496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Lawson, J.S.; Glenn, W.K. Multiple oncogenic viruses are present in human breast tissues before development of virus associated breast cancer. Infect. Agents Cancer 2017, 12, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Naccarato, A.G.; Lessi, F.; Zavaglia, K.; Scatena, C.; Al Hamad, M.A.; Aretini, P.; Menicagli, M.; Roncella, M.; Ghilli, M.; Caligo, M.A.; et al. Mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV)—Like exogenous sequences are associated with sporadic but not hereditary human breast carcinoma. Aging 2019, 11, 7236–7241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Wang, F.; Hou, J.; Shen, Q.; Yue, Y.; Xie, F.; Wang, X.; Jin, H. Mouse mammary tumor virus-like virus infection and the risk of human breast cancer: A meta-analysis. Am. J. Transl. Res. 2014, 6, 248–266. [Google Scholar]
  68. Melana, S.M.; Picconi, M.A.; Rossi, C.; Mural, J.; Alonio, L.V.; Teyssie, A.; Holland, J.F.; Pogo, B.G. Detection of murine mammary tumor virus (MMTV) env gene-like sequences in breast cancer from Argentine patients. Medicina 2002, 62, 323–327. [Google Scholar]
  69. Ford, C.E.; Faedo, M.; Crouch, R.; Lawson, J.S.; Rawlinson, W.D. Progression from normal breast pathology to breast cancer is associated with increasing prevalence of mouse mammary tumor virus-like sequences in men and women. Cancer Res. 2004, 64, 4755–4759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Luo, T.; Wu, X.T.; Zhang, M.M.; Qian, K. Study of mouse mammary tumor virus-like gene sequences expressing in breast tumors of Chinese women. Sichuan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban 2006, 37, 844–846, 851. [Google Scholar]
  71. Zapata-Benavides, P.; Saavedra-Alonso, S.; Zamora-Avila, D.; Vargas-Rodarte, C.; Barrera-Rodriguez, R.; Salinas-Silva, J.; Rodriguez-Padilla, C.; Tamez-Guerra, R.; Trejo-Avila, L. Mouse mammary tumor virus-like gene sequences in breast cancer samples of Mexican women. Intervirology 2007, 50, 402–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hachana, M.; Trimeche, M.; Ziadi, S.; Amara, K.; Gaddas, N.; Mokni, M.; Korbi, S. Prevalence and characteristics of the MMTV-like associated breast carcinomas in Tunisia. Cancer Lett. 2008, 271, 222–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Glenn, W.K.; Heng, B.; Delprado, W.; Iacopetta, B.; Whitaker, N.J.; Lawson, J.S. Epstein-Barr virus, human papillomavirus and mouse mammary tumour virus as multiple viruses in breast cancer. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e48788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Shariatpanahi, S.; Farahani, N.; Salehi, A.R.; Salehi, R. High prevalence of mouse mammary tumor virus-like gene sequences in breast cancer samples of Iranian women. Nucleosides Nucleotides Nucleic Acids 2017, 36, 621–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Seo, I.; Cho, J.H.; Lee, M.H.; Park, W.J.; Kwon, S.Y.; Lee, J.H. Clinical and Prognostic Value of Human Mammary Tumor Virus in Korean Patients with Breast Carcinoma. Ann. Clin. Lab. Sci. 2019, 49, 171–174. [Google Scholar]
  76. Al Hamad, M.; Matalka, I.; Al Zoubi, M.S.; Armogida, I.; Khasawneh, R.; Al-Husaini, M.; Sughayer, M.; Jaradat, S.; Al-Nasser, A.D.; Mazzanti, C.M. Human Mammary Tumor Virus, Human Papilloma Virus, and Epstein-Barr Virus Infection Are Associated With Sporadic Breast Cancer Metastasis. Breast Cancer 2020, 14, 1178223420976388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Wang, F.L.; Zhang, X.L.; Yang, M.; Lin, J.; Yue, Y.F.; Li, Y.D.; Wang, X.; Shu, Q.; Jin, H.C. Prevalence and characteristics of mouse mammary tumor virus-like virus associated breast cancer in China. Infect. Agents Cancer 2021, 16, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Gupta, I.; Ulamec, M.; Peric-Balja, M.; Ramic, S.; Al Moustafa, A.E.; Vranic, S.; Al-Farsi, H.F. Presence of high-risk HPVs, EBV, and MMTV in human triple-negative breast cancer. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2021, 17, 4457–4466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Lawson, J.S.; Glenn, W.K. Mouse Mammary Tumour Virus (MMTV) in Human Breast Cancer-The Value of Bradford Hill Criteria. Viruses 2022, 14, 721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Humphrey, M.B.; Lanier, L.L.; Nakamura, M.C. Role of ITAM-containing adapter proteins and their receptors in the immune system and bone. Immunol. Rev. 2005, 208, 50–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Katz, E.; Lareef, M.H.; Rassa, J.C.; Grande, S.M.; King, L.B.; Russo, J.; Ross, S.R.; Monroe, J.G. MMTV Env encodes an ITAM responsible for transformation of mammary epithelial cells in three-dimensional culture. J. Exp. Med. 2005, 201, 431–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Medjouel Khlifi, H.; Guia, S.; Vivier, E.; Narni-Mancinelli, E. Role of the ITAM-Bearing Receptors Expressed by Natural Killer Cells in Cancer. Front. Immunol. 2022, 13, 898745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Sunder-Plassmann, R.; Lialios, F.; Madsen, M.; Koyasu, S.; Reinherz, E.L. Functional analysis of immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activation motif (ITAM)-mediated signal transduction: The two YxxL segments within a single CD3zeta-ITAM are functionally distinct. Eur. J. Immunol. 1997, 27, 2001–2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Hoch-Marchaim, H.; Weiss, A.M.; Bar-Sinai, A.; Fromer, M.; Adermann, K.; Hochman, J. The leader peptide of MMTV Env precursor localizes to the nucleoli in MMTV-derived T cell lymphomas and interacts with nucleolar protein B23. Virology 2003, 313, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Nusse, R.; van der Ploeg, L.; van Duijn, L.; Michalides, R.; Hilgers, J. Impaired maturation of mouse mammary tumor virus precursor polypeptides in lymphoid leukemia cells, producing intracytoplasmic A particles and no extracellular B-type virions. J. Virol. 1979, 32, 251–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Feldman, D.; Roniger, M.; Bar-Sinai, A.; Braitbard, O.; Natan, C.; Love, D.C.; Hanover, J.A.; Hochman, J. The signal peptide of mouse mammary tumor virus-env: A phosphoprotein tumor modulator. Mol. Cancer Res. 2012, 10, 1077–1086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Bar-Sinai, A.; Bassa, N.; Fischette, M.; Gottesman, M.M.; Love, D.C.; Hanover, J.A.; Hochman, J. Mouse mammary tumor virus Env-derived peptide associates with nucleolar targets in lymphoma, mammary carcinoma, and human breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2005, 65, 7223–7230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  88. Pfister, A.S. An Update on Nucleolar Stress: The Transcriptional Control of Autophagy. Cells 2023, 12, 2071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Dultz, E.; Hildenbeutel, M.; Martoglio, B.; Hochman, J.; Dobberstein, B.; Kapp, K. The signal peptide of the mouse mammary tumor virus Rem protein is released from the endoplasmic reticulum membrane and accumulates in nucleoli. J. Biol. Chem. 2008, 283, 9966–9976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Indik, S.; Gunzburg, W.H.; Salmons, B.; Rouault, F. A novel, mouse mammary tumor virus encoded protein with Rev-like properties. Virology 2005, 337, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Mertz, J.A.; Simper, M.S.; Lozano, M.M.; Payne, S.M.; Dudley, J.P. Mouse mammary tumor virus encodes a self-regulatory RNA export protein and is a complex retrovirus. J. Virol. 2005, 79, 14737–14747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Civita, P.; Menicagli, M.; Scopelliti, C.; Lessi, F.; Millanta, F.; Borsacchi, S.; Parisi, F.; Freer, G.; Pistello, M.; Mazzanti, C.M.; et al. Mouse mammary tumour virus-like env nucleotide and p14 signal peptide are present in feline mammary carcinomas, but not in neoplastic or dysplastic canine mammary lesions. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0200839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Metzner, C.; Salmons, B.; Gunzburg, W.H.; Gemeiner, M.; Miller, I.; Gesslbauer, B.; Kungl, A.; Dangerfield, J.A. MMTV accessory factor Naf affects cellular gene expression. Virology 2006, 346, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Afzal, S.; Fiaz, K.; Noor, A.; Sindhu, A.S.; Hanif, A.; Bibi, A.; Asad, M.; Nawaz, S.; Zafar, S.; Ayub, S.; et al. Interrelated Oncogenic Viruses and Breast Cancer. Front. Mol. Biosci. 2022, 9, 781111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Singh, G.B.; Byun, H.; Ali, A.F.; Medina, F.; Wylie, D.; Shivram, H.; Nash, A.K.; Lozano, M.M.; Dudley, J.P. A Protein Antagonist of Activation-Induced Cytidine Deaminase Encoded by a Complex Mouse Retrovirus. mBio 2019, 10, e01678-19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Rulli, S.J., Jr.; Mirro, J.; Hill, S.A.; Lloyd, P.; Gorelick, R.J.; Coffin, J.M.; Derse, D.; Rein, A. Interactions of murine APOBEC3 and human APOBEC3G with murine leukemia viruses. J. Virol. 2008, 82, 6566–6575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Stewart, T.H.; Sage, R.D.; Stewart, A.F.; Cameron, D.W. Breast cancer incidence highest in the range of one species of house mouse, Mus domesticus. Br. J. Cancer 2000, 82, 446–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Stewart, A.F.R.; Chen, H.H. Revisiting the MMTV Zoonotic Hypothesis to Account for Geographic Variation in Breast Cancer Incidence. Viruses 2022, 14, 559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Golovkina, T.V.; Jaffe, A.B.; Ross, S.R. Coexpression of exogenous and endogenous mouse mammary tumor virus RNA in vivo results in viral recombination and broadens the virus host range. J. Virol. 1994, 68, 5019–5026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Golovkina, T.V.; Piazzon, I.; Nepomnaschy, I.; Buggiano, V.; de Olano Vela, M.; Ross, S.R. Generation of a tumorigenic milk-borne mouse mammary tumor virus by recombination between endogenous and exogenous viruses. J. Virol. 1997, 71, 3895–3903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Lessi, F.; Grandi, N.; Mazzanti, C.M.; Civita, P.; Scatena, C.; Aretini, P.; Bandiera, P.; Fornaciari, A.; Giuffra, V.; Fornaciari, G.; et al. A human MMTV-like betaretrovirus linked to breast cancer has been present in humans at least since the copper age. Aging 2020, 12, 15978–15994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cimb 48 00157 g001
Figure 1. MMTV infection in the natural murine model. The vertical transmission of MMTV from mother to offspring via milk, the virus crossing the intestinal epithelium, the infection of dendritic and B cells in lymphoid tissues (GALT), the transport of the virus to the mammary gland by infected lymphocytes, and proviral integration near proto-oncogenes leading to tumor development. Proposed analogies to humans remain hypothetical and require direct in situ evidence. Created in BioRender. Osorio, J. (2026) https://BioRender.com/7ho47b0.
Figure 1. MMTV infection in the natural murine model. The vertical transmission of MMTV from mother to offspring via milk, the virus crossing the intestinal epithelium, the infection of dendritic and B cells in lymphoid tissues (GALT), the transport of the virus to the mammary gland by infected lymphocytes, and proviral integration near proto-oncogenes leading to tumor development. Proposed analogies to humans remain hypothetical and require direct in situ evidence. Created in BioRender. Osorio, J. (2026) https://BioRender.com/7ho47b0.
Cimb 48 00157 g001
Cimb 48 00157 g002
Figure 2. Proposed mechanism of MMTV provirus entry into B cells (Top) and MMTV-induced breast cancer in epithelial cells (Bottom). (Top) MMTV proviruses enter the host through M (Microfold) cells in Peyer’s patches. MMTV is then transferred to B cells, which express the transferrin receptor 1 (TfR1), allowing the virus to enter the cell (in mice). Inside the B cell, MMTV’s viral RNA is reverse transcribed into cDNA, which integrates into the host’s genome as a provirus. The provirus expresses viral RNA and a superantigen (SAg). The SAg binds to MHC II, stimulating B-cell proliferation. (Bottom) The MMTV provirus can also infect epithelial cells. (1) The MMTV cDNA integrates into the host cell’s genome, often near regulatory genes such as CIS1 or CIS2. (2) The integrated provirus undergoes transcription, producing viral mRNA with a poly-A tail. (3) The viral mRNA is translated into viral proteins, such as env. (4) The viral proteins are expressed on the cell surface. (5) The integration of the provirus can also lead to signaling changes within the cell, particularly due to the proximity of the provirus to the CIS1 and CIS2 genes. (6) These combined effects lead to the transformation of the epithelial cell, which can result in BC. Created in BioRender. Gangadaran, P. (2025). https://BioRender.com/g8k2s3b.
Figure 2. Proposed mechanism of MMTV provirus entry into B cells (Top) and MMTV-induced breast cancer in epithelial cells (Bottom). (Top) MMTV proviruses enter the host through M (Microfold) cells in Peyer’s patches. MMTV is then transferred to B cells, which express the transferrin receptor 1 (TfR1), allowing the virus to enter the cell (in mice). Inside the B cell, MMTV’s viral RNA is reverse transcribed into cDNA, which integrates into the host’s genome as a provirus. The provirus expresses viral RNA and a superantigen (SAg). The SAg binds to MHC II, stimulating B-cell proliferation. (Bottom) The MMTV provirus can also infect epithelial cells. (1) The MMTV cDNA integrates into the host cell’s genome, often near regulatory genes such as CIS1 or CIS2. (2) The integrated provirus undergoes transcription, producing viral mRNA with a poly-A tail. (3) The viral mRNA is translated into viral proteins, such as env. (4) The viral proteins are expressed on the cell surface. (5) The integration of the provirus can also lead to signaling changes within the cell, particularly due to the proximity of the provirus to the CIS1 and CIS2 genes. (6) These combined effects lead to the transformation of the epithelial cell, which can result in BC. Created in BioRender. Gangadaran, P. (2025). https://BioRender.com/g8k2s3b.
Cimb 48 00157 g002
Table 1. Prevalence of MMTV-like Sequences/Proteins in Human Breast Tissues Worldwide (Selected Studies).
Table 1. Prevalence of MMTV-like Sequences/Proteins in Human Breast Tissues Worldwide (Selected Studies).
First AuthorYearCountryMethodPositive/TotalPrevalence (%)Ref.
Moyret C1992FrancePCR, SBNA (Not reported)NA[32]
Wang Y1995USAPCR121/31438.5[33]
Melana SM2002USA (Arg.)PCR23/7431.0[68]
Ford CE2003Australia/
Vietnam		PCRA1: 19/45; A2: 1/120; V: NR (reported as % only)A1: 42.2; A2: 0.8; V: 1.8[37]
Witt A2003AustriaPCR0/500.0[45]
Mant C2004UKPCR7/4416.0[34]
Ford CE2004AustraliaPCR43/13632.0[69]
Levine PH2004USA(Tunisia)PCR29/3974.0[40]
Goedert JJ2006USAIB, IP0/920.0[52]
Luo T2006ChinaPCR22/13116.8[70]
Lawson JS2006AustraliaPCR, SB22/5937.3[38]
Zapata-Benavides P2007MexicoPCR5/1194.2[71]
Bindra A2007SwedenqPCR0/180.0[35]
Frank O2008GermanyMA0/230.0[36]
Fukuoka H2008JapanPCR, SB0/460.0[46]
Hachana M2008TunisiaPCR17/12213.9[72]
Mazzanti CM2011ItalyPCR,
qPCR,
ISH		ADH: 6/22; DCIS: 40/49; IDC: 7/20; Normal tissue: 6/32ADH: 27.0;
DCIS: 82.0;
IDC: 35.0;
Normal Tissue: 19.0		[62]
Motamedifar M2012IranPCR0/3000.0[48]
Glenn WK2012AustraliaPCR39/5078.0[73]
Morales-Sánchez A2013MexicoPCR0/860.0[50]
Slaoui M2014MoroccoPCR, Seq24/4257.1[41]
Cedro-Tanda A2014MexicoPCR, Seq.57/45812.4[51]
Reza MA2015IranPCR, IHC12/10012.0[49]
San TH2017MyanmarPCR, Seq.1/581.7[47]
Lawson JS2017AustraliaPCR9/2536.0[65]
Naushad W2017PakistanPCR73/25029.3[42]
Shariatpanahi S2017IranPCR19/5932.2[74]
Lawson JS2018AustraliaIHC/PCRIHC: 27/50;
PCR: 12/45		IHC: 54.0;
PCR: 27.0		[39]
Al Dossary R2018Saudi ArabiaPCR, Seq.6/1035.9[63]
Seo I2019South KoreaPCR12/1289.4[75]
Naccarato AG2019ItalyPCR, IHCHBC: 2/47;
SBC: 17/56		HBC: 4.2;
SBC: 30.3		[66]
Al Hamad M2020Italy (Jordan)qPCR, ISH11/10011.0[76]
de Sousa Pereira N2020BrazilPCR,
Sequencing		BC: 41/217
Blood: 17/32		BC: 19.0;
Blood: 53.0		[64]
Loutfy SA2021EgyptPCR,
Sequencing		HBC: 21/30
SBC: 38/50		HBC: 70.0;
SBC: 76.0		[44]
Wang FL2021ChinaNested PCR21/11917.6[77]
Khalid HF2021PakistanqPCR69/10565.7[43]
Gupta I2021QatarPCR5/707.0[78]
Abbreviations: BC, Breast Cancer; IDC, Invasive Ductal Carcinoma; DCIS, Ductal Carcinoma In Situ; ADH, Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia; SBC, Sporadic Breast Cancer; HBC, Hereditary Breast Cancer; PCR, Polymerase Chain Reaction; qPCR, Quantitative Real-Time PCR; ISH, In Situ Hybridization; IHC, Immunohistochemistry; SB: Southern blotting; Seq: Sequencing; MA: Microarrays.
Table 2. Evidence synthesis for MMTV-like sequences in human breast cancer: methodological requirements.
Table 2. Evidence synthesis for MMTV-like sequences in human breast cancer: methodological requirements.
Designs and Assays for a Causal InferenceWhat the Literature Currently ShowsEvidence Showed
Standardized multi-target assays (LTR/env/pol) plus RNA/protein localization in the same tumor cells, with pre-registered murine contamination controls.Highly variable MMTV-like detection across cohorts; enrichment in DCIS/ADH or adjacent epithelium is reported in some studies; negative studies also exist [32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,67].Detection in tumors (DNA/RNA/protein)
Prospective designs with explicit stratification (sporadic vs. hereditary/BRCA1/2) and harmonized pathology and molecular subtyping.Signals appear stronger in sporadic BC in at least one cohort and may be diluted by inclusion of hereditary/BRCA-driven tumors [62,63,64,65,66,67].Sporadic vs. hereditary disease
Integration-site mapping at clonal or single-cell resolution, coupled to viral transcription/protein expression and cellular pathway readouts.No reproducible map of common integration sites or clonal proviral structure has been established in human BC [24,28,29,79].Replication and integration benchmarks
Demonstration that proteins are expressed in human tumor cells in situ and that downstream signaling correlates with viral positivity and functional phenotypes.Env ITAM and p14 can reprogram signaling and cellular homeostasis in experimental systems, providing testable non-insertional mechanisms [80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95].Mechanistic plausibility
Phylogenetic evidence of viral evolution in humans, and reproducible detection in reservoirs (e.g., saliva) using orthogonal assays with stringent contamination exclusion.Zoonotic and human-adapted scenarios remain hypotheses; evidence is suggestive but not decisive [54,55,56,57,58,97,98,99,100,101].Transmission/origin
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Acevedo, M.L.; Aguayo, F.; Osorio, J.C.; Ardiles, L.N.; Calaf, G.M. MMTV-like Viruses and Human Breast Cancer: Evidence for Causality. Curr. Issues Mol. Biol. 2026, 48, 157. https://doi.org/10.3390/cimb48020157

AMA Style

Acevedo ML, Aguayo F, Osorio JC, Ardiles LN, Calaf GM. MMTV-like Viruses and Human Breast Cancer: Evidence for Causality. Current Issues in Molecular Biology. 2026; 48(2):157. https://doi.org/10.3390/cimb48020157

Chicago/Turabian Style

Acevedo, Mónica L., Francisco Aguayo, Julio C. Osorio, Luis N. Ardiles, and Gloria M. Calaf. 2026. "MMTV-like Viruses and Human Breast Cancer: Evidence for Causality" Current Issues in Molecular Biology 48, no. 2: 157. https://doi.org/10.3390/cimb48020157

APA Style

Acevedo, M. L., Aguayo, F., Osorio, J. C., Ardiles, L. N., & Calaf, G. M. (2026). MMTV-like Viruses and Human Breast Cancer: Evidence for Causality. Current Issues in Molecular Biology, 48(2), 157. https://doi.org/10.3390/cimb48020157

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop