PURPOSE: To compare the prognostic and predictive features between in situ and invasive components of ductal breast carcinomas. METHODS: We selected 146 consecutive breast samples with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) associated with adjacent invasive breast carcinoma (IBC). We evaluated nuclear grade and immunohistochemical expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6), and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in both components, in situ and invasive, and the Ki-67 percentage of cells in the invasive part. The DCIS and IBC were classified in molecular surrogate types determined by the immunohistochemical profile as luminal (RE/PR-positive/ HER2-negative), triple-positive (RE/RP/HER2-positive), HER2-enriched (ER/PR-negative/HER2-positive), and triple-negative (RE/RP/HER2-negative). Discrimination between luminal A and luminal B was not performed due to statistical purposes. Correlations between the categories in the two groups were made using the Spearman correlation method. RESULTS: There was a significant correlation between nuclear grade (p<0.0001), expression of RE/RP (p<0.0001), overexpression of HER2 (p<0.0001), expression of EGFR (p<0.0001), and molecular profile (p<0.0001) between components in situ and IBC. CK 5/6 showed different distribution in DCIS and IBC, presenting a significant association with the triple-negative phenotype in IBC, but a negative association among DCIS. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that classical prognostic and predictive features of IBC are already determined in the preinvasive stage of the disease. However the role of CK5/6 in invasive carcinoma may be different from the precursor lesions.
PURPOSE: To compare the prognostic and predictive features between in situ and invasive components of ductal breast carcinomas. METHODS: We selected 146 consecutive breast samples with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) associated with adjacent invasive breast carcinoma (IBC). We evaluated nuclear grade and immunohistochemical expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6), and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in both components, in situ and invasive, and the Ki-67 percentage of cells in the invasive part. The DCIS and IBC were classified in molecular surrogate types determined by the immunohistochemical profile as luminal (RE/PR-positive/ HER2-negative), triple-positive (RE/RP/HER2-positive), HER2-enriched (ER/PR-negative/HER2-positive), and triple-negative (RE/RP/HER2-negative). Discrimination between luminal A and luminal B was not performed due to statistical purposes. Correlations between the categories in the two groups were made using the Spearman correlation method. RESULTS: There was a significant correlation between nuclear grade (p<0.0001), expression of RE/RP (p<0.0001), overexpression of HER2 (p<0.0001), expression of EGFR (p<0.0001), and molecular profile (p<0.0001) between components in situ and IBC. CK 5/6 showed different distribution in DCIS and IBC, presenting a significant association with the triple-negative phenotype in IBC, but a negative association among DCIS. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that classical prognostic and predictive features of IBC are already determined in the preinvasive stage of the disease. However the role of CK5/6 in invasive carcinoma may be different from the precursor lesions.
Authors: Christos Petridis; Mark N Brook; Vandna Shah; Kelly Kohut; Patricia Gorman; Michele Caneppele; Dina Levi; Efterpi Papouli; Nick Orr; Angela Cox; Simon S Cross; Isabel Dos-Santos-Silva; Julian Peto; Anthony Swerdlow; Minouk J Schoemaker; Manjeet K Bolla; Qin Wang; Joe Dennis; Kyriaki Michailidou; Javier Benitez; Anna González-Neira; Daniel C Tessier; Daniel Vincent; Jingmei Li; Jonine Figueroa; Vessela Kristensen; Anne-Lise Borresen-Dale; Penny Soucy; Jacques Simard; Roger L Milne; Graham G Giles; Sara Margolin; Annika Lindblom; Thomas Brüning; Hiltrud Brauch; Melissa C Southey; John L Hopper; Thilo Dörk; Natalia V Bogdanova; Maria Kabisch; Ute Hamann; Rita K Schmutzler; Alfons Meindl; Hermann Brenner; Volker Arndt; Robert Winqvist; Katri Pylkäs; Peter A Fasching; Matthias W Beckmann; Jan Lubinski; Anna Jakubowska; Anna Marie Mulligan; Irene L Andrulis; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Peter Devilee; Loic Le Marchand; Christopher A Haiman; Arto Mannermaa; Veli-Matti Kosma; Paolo Radice; Paolo Peterlongo; Frederik Marme; Barbara Burwinkel; Carolien H M van Deurzen; Antoinette Hollestelle; Nicola Miller; Michael J Kerin; Diether Lambrechts; Giuseppe Floris; Jelle Wesseling; Henrik Flyger; Stig E Bojesen; Song Yao; Christine B Ambrosone; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Thérèse Truong; Pascal Guénel; Anja Rudolph; Jenny Chang-Claude; Heli Nevanlinna; Carl Blomqvist; Kamila Czene; Judith S Brand; Janet E Olson; Fergus J Couch; Alison M Dunning; Per Hall; Douglas F Easton; Paul D P Pharoah; Sarah E Pinder; Marjanka K Schmidt; Ian Tomlinson; Rebecca Roylance; Montserrat García-Closas; Elinor J Sawyer Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 6.466