Literature DB >> 21990413

Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the Genomic Health recurrence score in early breast cancer.

Jack Cuzick1, Mitch Dowsett, Silvia Pineda, Christopher Wale, Janine Salter, Emma Quinn, Lila Zabaglo, Elizabeth Mallon, Andrew R Green, Ian O Ellis, Anthony Howell, Aman U Buzdar, John F Forbes.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We recently reported that the mRNA-based, 21-gene Genomic Health recurrence score (GHI-RS) provided additional prognostic information regarding distant recurrence beyond that obtained from classical clinicopathologic factors (age, nodal status, tumor size, grade, endocrine treatment) in women with early breast cancer, confirming earlier reports. The aim of this article is to determine how much of this information is contained in standard immunohistochemical (IHC) markers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The primary cohort comprised 1,125 estrogen receptor-positive (ER-positive) patients from the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) trial who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy, had the GHI-RS computed, and had adequate tissue for the four IHC measurements: ER, progesterone receptor (PgR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki-67. Distant recurrence was the primary end point, and proportional hazards models were used with sample splitting to control for overfitting. A prognostic model that used classical variables and the four IHC markers (IHC4 score) was created and assessed in a separate cohort of 786 patients.
RESULTS: All four IHC markers provided independent prognostic information in the presence of classical variables. In sample-splitting analyses, the information in the IHC4 score was found to be similar to that in the GHI-RS, and little additional prognostic value was seen in the combined use of both scores. The prognostic value of the IHC4 score was further validated in the second separate cohort.
CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the amount of prognostic information contained in four widely performed IHC assays is similar to that in the GHI-RS. Additional studies are needed to determine the general applicability of the IHC4 score.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21990413     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.2835

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  240 in total

1.  Immunohistochemistry profiles of breast ductal carcinoma: factor analysis of digital image analysis data.

Authors:  Arvydas Laurinavicius; Aida Laurinaviciene; Valerijus Ostapenko; Darius Dasevicius; Sonata Jarmalaite; Juozas Lazutka
Journal:  Diagn Pathol       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 2.644

2.  Value of pre-treatment biomarkers in prediction of response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive postmenopausal breast cancer.

Authors:  Min Ying; Yingjian He; Meng Qi; Bin Dong; Aiping Lu; Jinfeng Li; Yuntao Xie; Tianfeng Wang; Benyao Lin; Tao Ouyang
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 3.  [Molecular pathology for breast cancer: Importance of the gene expression profile].

Authors:  C Denkert; B M Pfitzner; B I Heppner; M Dietel
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.011

4.  Has discovery-based cancer research been a bust?

Authors:  R J Epstein
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 3.405

5.  Multigene Assays for Classification, Prognosis, and Prediction in Breast Cancer: a Critical Review on the Background and Clinical Utility.

Authors:  P Sinn; S Aulmann; R Wirtz; S Schott; F Marmé; Z Varga; A Lebeau; H Kreipe; A Schneeweiss
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 2.915

Review 6.  Clinical utility of gene-expression signatures in early stage breast cancer.

Authors:  Maryann Kwa; Andreas Makris; Francisco J Esteva
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  Evaluation of the stage IB designation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system in breast cancer.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Karla V Ballman; Linda M McCall; Min Yi; Aysegul A Sahin; Isabelle Bedrosian; Nora Hansen; Sheryl Gabram; Thelma Hurd; Armando E Giuliano; Kelly K Hunt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-12-08       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Multiparametric Genomic Assays for Breast Cancer: Time for the Next Generation?

Authors:  Adam M Brufsky; Nancy E Davidson
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Prognostic value of ki-67 in breast carcinoma: tissue microarray method versus whole section analysis- potentials and pitfalls.

Authors:  Natalija Dedić Plavetić; Jasminka Jakić-Razumović; Ana Kulić; Maja Sirotković-Skerlev; Marina Barić; Damir Vrbanec
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 3.201

Review 10.  [Translational research and diagnostics for breast cancer].

Authors:  H H Kreipe
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.011

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.