Literature DB >> 21983862

Coexisting ductal carcinoma in situ independently predicts lower tumor aggressiveness in node-positive luminal breast cancer.

H Wong1, S Lau, R Leung, J Chiu, P Cheung, T T Wong, R Liang, R J Epstein, T Yau.   

Abstract

Primary breast invasive ductal carcinoma coexisting with ductal carcinoma in situ (IDC-DCIS) is characterized by lower proliferation rate and metastatic propensity than size-matched pure IDC. IDC-DCIS is also more often ER-positive, PR-positive and/or HER2-positive. This analysis aims to clarify whether the presence of coexisting DCIS in IDC affects tumor aggressiveness in various biological subtypes of breast cancer, respectively. Tumor data obtained from 1,355 consecutive female patients undergoing upfront surgery for primary breast cancer were analyzed retrospectively; 196 patients with pure DCIS were excluded. Based on evidence that immunohistochemistry (IHC) provides a reasonable approximation of molecular phenotypes, the tumor samples were divided into 4 groups: (1) luminal A (ER and/or PR-positive, HER2-negative, Ki67 ≤ 12), (2) luminal B (ER and/or PR-positive, HER2-negative, Ki67 > 12), (3) HER2 (HER2-positive) and (4) basal-like (triple-negative) disease. Ki67 expression and nodal involvement of IDC with or without DCIS in these groups were compared. The number of patients with luminal A, luminal B, HER2 and basal-like breast cancer were 396, 265, 258 and 117, respectively. Ki-67 was lower in IDC-DCIS than in size-adjusted pure IDC of both luminal A and luminal B subtypes (P = 0.15 and <0.005, respectively). In HER2 or basal-like tumors, there were no significant difference between pure IDC and IDC-DCIS. The presence of coexisting DCIS in IDC predicts lower biological aggressiveness in luminal cancers but not in the conventionally more aggressive HER2-positive and triple-negative subtypes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21983862     DOI: 10.1007/s12032-011-0082-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Oncol        ISSN: 1357-0560            Impact factor:   3.064


  52 in total

1.  Adjuvant chemotherapy for lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer: a tale of three trials.

Authors:  Kathy S Albain
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2004-12-15       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  High-throughput protein expression analysis using tissue microarray technology of a large well-characterised series identifies biologically distinct classes of breast cancer confirming recent cDNA expression analyses.

Authors:  Dalia M Abd El-Rehim; Graham Ball; Sarah E Pinder; Emad Rakha; Claire Paish; John F R Robertson; Douglas Macmillan; Roger W Blamey; Ian O Ellis
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Are the pure in situ breast ductal carcinomas and those associated with invasive carcinoma the same?

Authors:  Mario Casales Schorr; José Luiz Pedrini; Ricardo Francalacci Savaris; Cláudio Galleano Zettler
Journal:  Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol       Date:  2010-01

4.  Phenotypic evaluation of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma.

Authors:  Chad A Livasy; Gamze Karaca; Rita Nanda; Maria S Tretiakova; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Dominic T Moore; Charles M Perou
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 7.842

Review 5.  Prognostic factors in breast cancer. College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999.

Authors:  P L Fitzgibbons; D L Page; D Weaver; A D Thor; D C Allred; G M Clark; S G Ruby; F O'Malley; J F Simpson; J L Connolly; D F Hayes; S B Edge; A Lichter; S J Schnitt
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 5.534

6.  Quantitative assessment of promoter hypermethylation during breast cancer development.

Authors:  Ulrich Lehmann; Florian Länger; Henning Feist; Sabine Glöckner; Britta Hasemeier; Hans Kreipe
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 4.307

7.  Chemotherapy use for hormone receptor-positive, lymph node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Michael J Hassett; Melissa E Hughes; Joyce C Niland; Stephen B Edge; Richard L Theriault; Yu-Ning Wong; John Wilson; W Bradford Carter; Douglas W Blayney; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-10-27       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Immunohistochemical and clinical characterization of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma.

Authors:  Torsten O Nielsen; Forrest D Hsu; Kristin Jensen; Maggie Cheang; Gamze Karaca; Zhiyuan Hu; Tina Hernandez-Boussard; Chad Livasy; Dave Cowan; Lynn Dressler; Lars A Akslen; Joseph Ragaz; Allen M Gown; C Blake Gilks; Matt van de Rijn; Charles M Perou
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2004-08-15       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Ki67 expression and docetaxel efficacy in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Fabrice André; Christine Sagan; Magali Lacroix-Triki; Yves Denoux; Veronique Verriele; Jocelyne Jacquemier; Marie Christine Baranzelli; Frederic Bibeau; Martine Antoine; Nicole Lagarde; Anne-Laure Martin; Bernard Asselain; Henri Roché
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-04-20       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  erbB-2 is a potent oncogene when overexpressed in NIH/3T3 cells.

Authors:  P P Di Fiore; J H Pierce; M H Kraus; O Segatto; C R King; S A Aaronson
Journal:  Science       Date:  1987-07-10       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  7 in total

1.  Male breast cancer precursor lesions: analysis of the EORTC 10085/TBCRC/BIG/NABCG International Male Breast Cancer Program.

Authors:  Shusma C Doebar; Leen Slaets; Fatima Cardoso; Sharon H Giordano; John Ms Bartlett; Konstantinos Tryfonidis; Nizet H Dijkstra; Caroline P Schröder; Christi J van Asperen; Barbro Linderholm; Kim Benstead; Winan Nm Dinjens; Ronald van Marion; Paul J van Diest; John Wm Martens; Carolien Hm van Deurzen
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 7.842

2.  Breast cancer risk factor associations differ for pure versus invasive carcinoma with an in situ component in case-control and case-case analyses.

Authors:  Melanie Ruszczyk; Gary Zirpoli; Shicha Kumar; Elisa V Bandera; Dana H Bovbjerg; Lina Jandorf; Thaer Khoury; Helena Hwang; Gregory Ciupak; Karen Pawlish; Pepper Schedin; Patricia Masso-Welch; Christine B Ambrosone; Chi-Chen Hong
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 2.506

3.  Analysis of expression of membrane-bound tumor markers in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: paving the way for molecular imaging.

Authors:  Jeroen F Vermeulen; Elsken van der Wall; Arjen J Witkamp; Paul J van Diest
Journal:  Cell Oncol (Dordr)       Date:  2013-06-07       Impact factor: 6.730

4.  The prognostic significance of co-existence ductal carcinoma in situ in invasive ductal breast cancer: a large population-based study and a matched case-control analysis.

Authors:  Hongliang Chen; Fang Bai; Maoli Wang; Mingdi Zhang; Peng Zhang; Kejin Wu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-09

5.  Frequency of pathogenic germline variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2 and TP53 in ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed in women under the age of 50 years.

Authors:  Christos Petridis; Iteeka Arora; Vandna Shah; Anargyros Megalios; Charlotte Moss; Anca Mera; Angela Clifford; Cheryl Gillett; Sarah E Pinder; Ian Tomlinson; Rebecca Roylance; Michael A Simpson; Elinor J Sawyer
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2019-05-06       Impact factor: 6.466

6.  Overall survival is improved when DCIS accompanies invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Adam J Kole; Henry S Park; Skyler B Johnson; Jacqueline R Kelly; Meena S Moran; Abhijit A Patel
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-07-09       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Is there a difference in FDG PET findings of invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast with and without coexisting DCIS?

Authors:  Ismet Sarikaya; Ali Sarikaya; Ahmed N Albatineh; Ebru Tastekin; Yavuz Atakan Sezer
Journal:  Asia Ocean J Nucl Med Biol       Date:  2020
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.