Literature DB >> 20957430

Immunohistochemistry compared to cytosol assays for determination of estrogen receptor and prediction of the long-term effect of adjuvant tamoxifen.

Mahmoud R Khoshnoud1, Britta Löfdahl, Helena Fohlin, Tommy Fornander, Olle Stål, Lambert Skoog, Jonas Bergh, Bo Nordenskjöld.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare immunohistochemistry (IHC) and cytosol-based assays for determination of estrogen receptor (ER) and prediction of response to adjuvant tamoxifen treatment in postmenopausal women with early-stage invasive breast cancer. The Stockholm Breast Cancer Study Group conducted a randomized trial during 1976 through 1990 comparing adjuvant tamoxifen versus control. The patients were stratified according to tumor size and lymph node status in high-risk and low-risk groups. In this study we evaluated 683 patients with "low risk" breast cancer (size ≤30 mm, lymph node-negative) for whom ER status had been determined by both the cytosol assays and IHC at one pathology laboratory. The median follow-up was 17 years. Six hundred eighty-three patients had tumors with ER determined by both methods, 536 (78.5%) were ER-positive by cytosol assays using the cutoff level at ≥0.05 fmol/μg DNA and 539 patients were ER-positive (79%) by IHC using the cutoff level at ≥10% cell stained. Thirty-nine tumors (5.7%) were ER-positive by cytosol but not by IHC, whereas the opposite pattern was found for 42 cases (6.1%). Only seven tumors had stained cells between 0 and 9% by IHC. The concordance between IHC and cytosol assays was high (88%). The kappa statistic was 0.65, 95% CI 0.58-0.72. Among patients classified as ER-negative no therapeutic benefit from tamoxifen was observed. Among patients with ER-expressing tumors, tamoxifen resulted in significantly better recurrence-free survival irrespective of the method (IHC: HR, 0.53, P < 0.001; cytosol: HR, 0.53, P < 0.001). The effect on overall survival was not statistically significant probably due to the limited sample size. Both IHC and cytosol assay accurately predict long-term response to adjuvant tamoxifen.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20957430     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-010-1202-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  19 in total

1.  Adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Kunal C Kadakia; N Lynn Henry
Journal:  Clin Adv Hematol Oncol       Date:  2015-10

2.  ESR1 gene status correlates with estrogen receptor protein levels measured by ligand binding assay and immunohistochemistry.

Authors:  Anne-Vibeke Laenkholm; Ann Knoop; Bent Ejlertsen; Tine Rudbeck; Maj-Britt Jensen; Sven Müller; Anne Elisabeth Lykkesfeldt; Birgitte Bruun Rasmussen; Kirsten Vang Nielsen
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2012-05-08       Impact factor: 6.603

3.  Nestin expression in breast cancer: association with prognosis and subtype on 3641 cases with long-term follow-up.

Authors:  Karama Asleh; Jennifer R Won; Dongxia Gao; K David Voduc; Torsten O Nielsen
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  Prognostic and predictive value of low estrogen receptor expression in breast cancer.

Authors:  A Bouchard-Fortier; L Provencher; C Blanchette; C Diorio
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 3.677

5.  Factors associated with concordant estrogen receptor expression at diagnosis and centralized re-assay in a Danish population-based breast cancer study.

Authors:  Deirdre P Cronin-Fenton; Ylva Hellberg; Kristina L Lauridsen; Thomas P Ahern; Jens Peter Garne; Carol Rosenberg; Rebecca A Silliman; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Timothy L Lash; Stephen Hamilton-Dutoit
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2011-11-30       Impact factor: 4.089

6.  High incidence of germline BRCA mutation in patients with ER low-positive/PR low-positive/HER-2 neu negative tumors.

Authors:  Rachel A Sanford; Juhee Song; Angelica M Gutierrez-Barrera; Jessica Profato; Ashley Woodson; Jennifer Keating Litton; Isabelle Bedrosian; Constance T Albarracin; Vicente Valero; Banu Arun
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Prognostic and predictive parameters in breast pathology: a pathologist's primer.

Authors:  Kimberly H Allison
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2020-11-05       Impact factor: 7.842

8.  Gene Expression Signatures and Immunohistochemical Subtypes Add Prognostic Value to Each Other in Breast Cancer Cohorts.

Authors:  Arian Lundberg; Linda S Lindström; J Chuck Harrell; Claudette Falato; Joseph W Carlson; Paul K Wright; Theodoros Foukakis; Charles M Perou; Kamila Czene; Jonas Bergh; Nicholas P Tobin
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-09-29       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Estrogen receptor status in relation to risk of contralateral breast cancer-a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Maria E C Sandberg; Per Hall; Mikael Hartman; Anna L V Johansson; Sandra Eloranta; Alexander Ploner; Kamila Czene
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-08       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Clinical relevance of the reappraisal of negative hormone receptor expression in breast cancer.

Authors:  António E Pinto; Filipa Areia; Teresa Pereira; Paula Cardoso; Mariana Aparício; Giovani L Silva; Mónica C Ferreira; Saudade André
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2013-08-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.