AIM: To assess the expression and coexpression of a range of different biomarkers that have been used to define breast carcinomas with a basal phenotype (BP) and their relationship with prognosis in an attempt to refine the definition of BP and to evaluate the reliability of using a single biomarker to identify these tumours. METHODS AND RESULTS: The expression pattern of basal cytokeratins (CK5/6 and CK14), oestrogen, progesterone and androgen receptors, epidermal growth factor receptor, HER2, BRCA1, P-cadherin and myoepithelial markers (smooth muscle actin and p63) were studied in a well-characterized series of invasive breast carcinoma (1872 cases) with long-term follow-up using immunohistochemistry and tissue microarray. Although the additional markers were associated with basal CK expression, they did not serve to improve recognition of cases with differing outcome when compared with basal CKs alone and, if used to define cases, reduced considerably the proportion of cases allocated to this poor prognostic type of breast cancer. CONCLUSION: BP can be defined based on the expression of basal CKs regardless of the expression of other markers.
AIM: To assess the expression and coexpression of a range of different biomarkers that have been used to define breast carcinomas with a basal phenotype (BP) and their relationship with prognosis in an attempt to refine the definition of BP and to evaluate the reliability of using a single biomarker to identify these tumours. METHODS AND RESULTS: The expression pattern of basal cytokeratins (CK5/6 and CK14), oestrogen, progesterone and androgen receptors, epidermal growth factor receptor, HER2, BRCA1, P-cadherin and myoepithelial markers (smooth muscle actin and p63) were studied in a well-characterized series of invasive breast carcinoma (1872 cases) with long-term follow-up using immunohistochemistry and tissue microarray. Although the additional markers were associated with basal CK expression, they did not serve to improve recognition of cases with differing outcome when compared with basal CKs alone and, if used to define cases, reduced considerably the proportion of cases allocated to this poor prognostic type of breast cancer. CONCLUSION: BP can be defined based on the expression of basal CKs regardless of the expression of other markers.
Authors: Dongwei Zhang; Ana M Tari; Ugur Akar; Banu K Arun; Tiffany A LaFortune; Rene Nieves-Alicea; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Naoto T Ueno Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2010-11-02 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Fiona M Blows; Kristy E Driver; Marjanka K Schmidt; Annegien Broeks; Flora E van Leeuwen; Jelle Wesseling; Maggie C Cheang; Karen Gelmon; Torsten O Nielsen; Carl Blomqvist; Päivi Heikkilä; Tuomas Heikkinen; Heli Nevanlinna; Lars A Akslen; Louis R Bégin; William D Foulkes; Fergus J Couch; Xianshu Wang; Vicky Cafourek; Janet E Olson; Laura Baglietto; Graham G Giles; Gianluca Severi; Catriona A McLean; Melissa C Southey; Emad Rakha; Andrew R Green; Ian O Ellis; Mark E Sherman; Jolanta Lissowska; William F Anderson; Angela Cox; Simon S Cross; Malcolm W R Reed; Elena Provenzano; Sarah-Jane Dawson; Alison M Dunning; Manjeet Humphreys; Douglas F Easton; Montserrat García-Closas; Carlos Caldas; Paul D Pharoah; David Huntsman Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2010-05-25 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Alfonso Sánchez-Muñoz; Elena Gallego; Vanessa de Luque; Luís G Pérez-Rivas; Luís Vicioso; Nuria Ribelles; José Lozano; Emilio Alba Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2010-04-13 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: David S Guttery; Rachael A Hancox; Kellie T Mulligan; Simon Hughes; Sinead M Lambe; J Howard Pringle; Rosemary A Walker; J Louise Jones; Jacqueline A Shaw Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2010-08-02 Impact factor: 6.466