Literature DB >> 14746851

The poor responsiveness of infiltrating lobular breast carcinomas to neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be explained by their biological profile.

M-C Mathieu1, R Rouzier, A Llombart-Cussac, L Sideris, S Koscielny, J P Travagli, G Contesso, S Delaloge, M Spielmann.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the chemosensitivity of infiltrating lobular breast carcinoma (ILC) in comparison with infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC). Between 1987 and 1995, 457 patients with invasive T2>3 cm-T4 breast carcinomas were treated with primary chemotherapy (CT), surgery, radiation therapy. Clinical response, the possibility of breast preservation, pathological response and survival were evaluated according to the histological type. In order to evaluate the biological differences between ILC and IDC patients and their implication with regard to tumour chemosensitivity, additional immunohistochemical stainings (oestrogen receptor (ER), Bcl2, p53, c-erbB-2 and Ki67) were performed on 129 pretherapeutical specimens. 38 (8.3%) ILC were diagnosed by core needle biopsy before CT. ILC was an independent predictor of a poor clinical response (P=0.02) and ineligibility for breast-conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P=0.03). Histological and biological factors predicting a poor response to CT (histological grade, ER, Ki67 and p53 status) were more frequent in ILC than in IDC patients. After a median follow-up of 98 months (range: 3-166), the low chemosensitivity of ILC did not result in a survival disadvantage. Our results demonstrate that ILC achieved a lower response to CT than IDC because of their immunohistochemical profile. Preoperative CT did not allow a high rate of conservative treatment for ILC and therefore the use of neoadjuvant CT for ILC patients should be questioned.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14746851     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2003.08.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  35 in total

1.  Predictive factors of pathologic complete response and clinical tumor progression after preoperative chemotherapy in patients with stage II and III breast cancer.

Authors:  Jae-Heon Jeong; So-Youn Jung; In Hae Park; Keun Seok Lee; Han-Sung Kang; Seok Won Kim; Youngmee Kwon; Eun A Kim; Kyung Lan Ko; Byung-Ho Nam; Seeyoun Lee; Jungsil Ro
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2010-10-05       Impact factor: 3.850

2.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive lobular carcinoma may not improve rates of breast conservation.

Authors:  Judy C Boughey; Jamie Wagner; Betsy J Garrett; Lori Harker; Lavinia P Middleton; Gildy V Babiera; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Anthony Lucci; Kelly K Hunt; Isabelle Bedrosian
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2009-03-12       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  Tau proteins expressions in advanced breast cancer and its significance in taxane-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Zhi-Hua Li; Qiu-Yun Xiong; Jian-Hong Tu; Yu Gong; Wei Qiu; Hui-Qin Zhang; Wen-Shong Wei; Yi-Feng Hou; Wei-Qi Cui
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2013-05-17       Impact factor: 3.064

Review 4.  Differences between invasive lobular and invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: results and therapeutic implications.

Authors:  Romualdo Barroso-Sousa; Otto Metzger-Filho
Journal:  Ther Adv Med Oncol       Date:  2016-04-25       Impact factor: 8.168

5.  Pathology parameters and adjuvant tamoxifen response in a randomised premenopausal breast cancer trial.

Authors:  K Jirström; L Rydén; L Anagnostaki; B Nordenskjöld; O Stål; S Thorstenson; G Chebil; P-E Jönsson; M Fernö; G Landberg
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Clinicopathological features of tumors as predictors of the efficacy of primary neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer.

Authors:  Tadahiko Shien; Sadako Akashi-Tanaka; Kunihisa Miyakawa; Takashi Hojo; Chikako Shimizu; Kunihiko Seki; Masashi Ando; Tsutomu Kohno; Naruto Taira; Hiroyoshi Doihara; Noriyuki Katsumata; Yasuhiro Fujiwara; Takayuki Kinoshita
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  The relevance of breast cancer subtypes in the outcome of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  M E Straver; E J Th Rutgers; S Rodenhuis; S C Linn; C E Loo; J Wesseling; N S Russell; H S A Oldenburg; N Antonini; M T F D Vrancken Peeters
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-04-06       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 8.  Histological and molecular types of breast cancer: is there a unifying taxonomy?

Authors:  Britta Weigelt; Jorge S Reis-Filho
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 66.675

9.  Lobular histology and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Esther H Lips; Rita A Mukhtar; Christina Yau; Jorma J de Ronde; Chad Livasy; Lisa A Carey; Claudette E Loo; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken-Peeters; Gabe S Sonke; Donald A Berry; Laura J Van't Veer; Laura J Esserman; Jelle Wesseling; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; E Shelley Hwang
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2012-09-08       Impact factor: 4.872

10.  State of the art of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: rationale, results and recent developments.

Authors:  Arnd Honig; Lorenz Rieger; Marc Sutterlin; Diethelm Wallwiener; Johannes Dietl; Erich-Franz Solomayer
Journal:  Ger Med Sci       Date:  2005-09-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.