PURPOSE: The prognosis of women with triple-negative breast cancers (defined as cancers that are estrogen receptor-negative, progesterone receptor-negative and HER2/neu negative) is poor, compared to women with other subtypes of breast cancer. It is proposed that the underlying difference in recurrence rates may be explained in part by different routes of metastatic spread. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We studied a cohort of 1608 patients diagnosed with breast cancer, diagnosed between January 1987 and December 1997 at Women's College Hospital in Toronto. Triple-negative breast cancers were defined as those that were estrogen receptor-negative, progesterone receptor-negative and HER2/neu-negative. We compared the incidence rates of metastatic spread to bone and to other (non-bone) organs in women with triple-negative and other forms of breast cancer. RESULTS: Of the 1,608 patients, 180 (11.2%) had triple-negative breast cancer. The 1608 women were followed for a median of 9.0 years (range 0.1-19 years). Compared to other patients, those with triple-negative breast cancer had an increased likelihood of distant recurrence over the study period (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.9; 95% CI: 1.5-2.5, P < 0.0001). The relatively poor prognosis was apparent in the five years after diagnosis (HR 2.9; 95% CI: 2.1-3.9; P = 0.0001) but not thereafter (HR 0.5; 95% CI: 0.2-1.1; P = 0.07). In particular, women with triple-negative breast cancer were four times more likely to experience a visceral metastasis within five years of diagnosis than those with other types of cancer (HR 4.0; 95% CI: 2.7-5.9; P < 0.0001). The rates of bone metastases were comparable for triple-negative and for other forms of cancer in this time period (HR 0.8; 95% CI: 0.4-1.6 P = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: The excess risk of distant recurrence in triple-negative breast cancers, versus other forms of cancer, is attributable in large part to an excess of visceral metastases in the first five years following diagnosis.
PURPOSE: The prognosis of women with triple-negative breast cancers (defined as cancers that are estrogen receptor-negative, progesterone receptor-negative and HER2/neu negative) is poor, compared to women with other subtypes of breast cancer. It is proposed that the underlying difference in recurrence rates may be explained in part by different routes of metastatic spread. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We studied a cohort of 1608 patients diagnosed with breast cancer, diagnosed between January 1987 and December 1997 at Women's College Hospital in Toronto. Triple-negative breast cancers were defined as those that were estrogen receptor-negative, progesterone receptor-negative and HER2/neu-negative. We compared the incidence rates of metastatic spread to bone and to other (non-bone) organs in women with triple-negative and other forms of breast cancer. RESULTS: Of the 1,608 patients, 180 (11.2%) had triple-negative breast cancer. The 1608 women were followed for a median of 9.0 years (range 0.1-19 years). Compared to other patients, those with triple-negative breast cancer had an increased likelihood of distant recurrence over the study period (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.9; 95% CI: 1.5-2.5, P < 0.0001). The relatively poor prognosis was apparent in the five years after diagnosis (HR 2.9; 95% CI: 2.1-3.9; P = 0.0001) but not thereafter (HR 0.5; 95% CI: 0.2-1.1; P = 0.07). In particular, women with triple-negative breast cancer were four times more likely to experience a visceral metastasis within five years of diagnosis than those with other types of cancer (HR 4.0; 95% CI: 2.7-5.9; P < 0.0001). The rates of bone metastases were comparable for triple-negative and for other forms of cancer in this time period (HR 0.8; 95% CI: 0.4-1.6 P = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: The excess risk of distant recurrence in triple-negative breast cancers, versus other forms of cancer, is attributable in large part to an excess of visceral metastases in the first five years following diagnosis.
Authors: Huiping Liu; Manishkumar R Patel; Jennifer A Prescher; Antonia Patsialou; Dalong Qian; Jiahui Lin; Susanna Wen; Ya-Fang Chang; Michael H Bachmann; Yohei Shimono; Piero Dalerba; Maddalena Adorno; Neethan Lobo; Janet Bueno; Frederick M Dirbas; Sumanta Goswami; George Somlo; John Condeelis; Christopher H Contag; Sanjiv Sam Gambhir; Michael F Clarke Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-10-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Valeria Ossovskaya; Yipeng Wang; Adam Budoff; Qiang Xu; Alexander Lituev; Olga Potapova; Gordon Vansant; Joseph Monforte; Nikolai Daraselia Journal: Genes Cancer Date: 2011-09
Authors: Jamaica R Robinson; Polly A Newcomb; Sheetal Hardikar; Stacey A Cohen; Amanda I Phipps Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Nicholas K Howland; Teryn D Driver; Michael P Sedrak; Xianfeng Wen; Wenli Dong; Sandra Hatch; Mahmoud A Eltorky; Celia Chao Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2013-07-11 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Jennifer Shih; Babar Bashir; Karen S Gustafson; Mark Andrake; Roland L Dunbrack; Lori J Goldstein; Yanis Boumber Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 11.908