Literature DB >> 24609850

Regional differences in breast cancer biomarkers in american Indian and Alaska native women.

Judith S Kaur1, Robert A Vierkant, Timothy Hobday, Daniel Visscher.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is not a homogeneous disease, but several different and unique subtypes defined by gene expression analysis. Incidence and mortality rates vary by almost 3-fold between Alaska (highest) and the Southwestern tribes (lowest). We hypothesized that these differences may be due to, in part, varying levels of biologic tumor aggressiveness.
METHODS: A biorepository of the North Central Cancer Treatment Group with 95 cases of American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) women with adenocarcinoma of the breast surgically treated from 1990 to 2000 was tested for several biomarkers. Comparison distributions of biomarker values across state of residence using t tests for continuous (p53, MIB-1, cyclin D) and ordinally scaled markers [EGF receptor (EGFR), BCL-2, Her2] and χ(2) tests of significance for binary markers [estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR)] were done.
RESULTS: Significant regional differences in some biomarker expression levels were seen. No increase was observed in "triple-negative" breast cancer or Her2 overexpression in these cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite a 3-fold difference in breast cancer mortality in Alaska Native versus Southwestern American Indians, standard biomarkers such as ER, PR, and Her2 neu expression did not explain the disparity. IMPACT: There is a need for research to understand the biologic basis of breast cancer disparities in AIAN women. Potential for a prospective trial will be explored with tribes. ©2014 AACR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24609850      PMCID: PMC3955020          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-0738

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  51 in total

1.  The utility of mitotic index, oestrogen receptor and Ki-67 measurements in the creation of novel prognostic indices for node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  P C Clahsen; C J van de Velde; C Duval; C Pallud; A M Mandard; A Delobelle-Deroide; L van den Broek; M J van de Vijver
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 4.424

2.  Comparison of the prognostic and predictive utilities of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay and Adjuvant! for women with node-negative, ER-positive breast cancer: results from NSABP B-14 and NSABP B-20.

Authors:  Gong Tang; Steven Shak; Soonmyung Paik; Stewart J Anderson; Joseph P Costantino; Charles E Geyer; Eleftherios P Mamounas; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Comparison of mitotic index, in vitro bromodeoxyuridine labeling, and MIB-1 assays to quantitate proliferation in breast cancer.

Authors:  A D Thor; S Liu; D H Moore; S M Edgerton
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Comparative prognostic value of Ki-67 and MIB-1 proliferation indices in breast cancer.

Authors:  S M Veronese; C Maisano; J Scibilia
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  1995 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.480

5.  Cyclin D1 induction in breast cancer cells shortens G1 and is sufficient for cells arrested in G1 to complete the cell cycle.

Authors:  E A Musgrove; C S Lee; M F Buckley; R L Sutherland
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1994-08-16       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Randomized phase II study of the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody cetuximab with cisplatin versus cisplatin alone in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  José Baselga; Patricia Gómez; Richard Greil; Sofia Braga; Miguel A Climent; Andrew M Wardley; Bella Kaufman; Salomon M Stemmer; António Pêgo; Arlene Chan; Jean-Charles Goeminne; Marie-Pascale Graas; M John Kennedy; Eva Maria Ciruelos Gil; Andreas Schneeweiss; Angela Zubel; Jutta Groos; Helena Melezínková; Ahmad Awada
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-06-03       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Monoclonal antibodies against recombinant parts of the Ki-67 antigen (MIB 1 and MIB 3) detect proliferating cells in microwave-processed formalin-fixed paraffin sections.

Authors:  G Cattoretti; M H Becker; G Key; M Duchrow; C Schlüter; J Galle; J Gerdes
Journal:  J Pathol       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 7.996

8.  Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2004, featuring cancer in American Indians and Alaska Natives.

Authors:  David K Espey; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Judith Swan; Charles Wiggins; Melissa A Jim; Elizabeth Ward; Phyllis A Wingo; Holly L Howe; Lynn A G Ries; Barry A Miller; Ahmedin Jemal; Faruque Ahmed; Nathaniel Cobb; Judith S Kaur; Brenda K Edwards
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2007-11-15       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Breast carcinoma and Lynch syndrome: molecular analysis of tumors arising in mutation carriers, non-carriers, and sporadic cases.

Authors:  Johanna E Lotsari; Annette Gylling; Wael M Abdel-Rahman; Taina T Nieminen; Kristiina Aittomäki; Marjukka Friman; Reino Pitkänen; Markku Aarnio; Heikki J Järvinen; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Teijo Kuopio; Päivi Peltomäki
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2012-06-12       Impact factor: 6.466

10.  A switch role of Src in the biphasic EGF signaling of ER-negative breast cancer cells.

Authors:  XinTian Zhang; Jun Meng; Zhao-Yi Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-08-21       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Protein biomarkers for subtyping breast cancer and implications for future research.

Authors:  Claudius Mueller; Amanda Haymond; Justin B Davis; Alexa Williams; Virginia Espina
Journal:  Expert Rev Proteomics       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 3.940

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.