BACKGROUND: Metaplastic breast cancer (MBC) is a rare histologic subtype needing further characterization. The aim of our study was to compare MBC to infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC) of the breast and to identify demographic, clinicopathologic, treatment, and survival differences. METHODS: MBC and IDC patients were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) public-use data set. Disease-specific survival (DSS) differences were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess factors prognostic for DSS. To control for hormone receptor status, a subsequent planned analysis was completed for receptor-negative MBC and IDC. Lastly, a matched case-control analysis was conducted to minimize potential bias due to baseline demographic, clinical, and pathologic differences. RESULTS: The SEER data set included 1,011 MBC and 253,818 IDC patients diagnosed from 2001 to 2010. MBC patients had larger, higher grade tumors, had less frequent axillary nodal involvement, and were more likely to be treated with mastectomy. Five-year DSS rates were significantly worse for patients with MBC than for IDC patients (78 vs. 93 %, p < 0.0001) and for patients with receptor-negative MBC than receptor-negative IDC (77 vs. 85 %, p < 0.0001). The findings were confirmed on matched analysis. Prognostic factors identified on multivariate analyses included age, MBC histology, tumor grade, T stage, and axillary lymph node involvement. CONCLUSIONS: MBC patients have shorter DSS than IDC patients. Improved clinical and biological understanding of MBC may result in more effective therapy and better cancer outcomes.
BACKGROUND:Metaplastic breast cancer (MBC) is a rare histologic subtype needing further characterization. The aim of our study was to compare MBC to infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC) of the breast and to identify demographic, clinicopathologic, treatment, and survival differences. METHODS:MBC and IDC patients were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) public-use data set. Disease-specific survival (DSS) differences were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess factors prognostic for DSS. To control for hormone receptor status, a subsequent planned analysis was completed for receptor-negative MBC and IDC. Lastly, a matched case-control analysis was conducted to minimize potential bias due to baseline demographic, clinical, and pathologic differences. RESULTS: The SEER data set included 1,011 MBC and 253,818 IDC patients diagnosed from 2001 to 2010. MBCpatients had larger, higher grade tumors, had less frequent axillary nodal involvement, and were more likely to be treated with mastectomy. Five-year DSS rates were significantly worse for patients with MBC than for IDC patients (78 vs. 93 %, p < 0.0001) and for patients with receptor-negative MBC than receptor-negative IDC (77 vs. 85 %, p < 0.0001). The findings were confirmed on matched analysis. Prognostic factors identified on multivariate analyses included age, MBC histology, tumor grade, T stage, and axillary lymph node involvement. CONCLUSIONS:MBCpatients have shorter DSS than IDC patients. Improved clinical and biological understanding of MBC may result in more effective therapy and better cancer outcomes.
Authors: Cecilia T Ong; Brittany M Campbell; Samantha M Thomas; Rachel A Greenup; Jennifer K Plichta; Laura H Rosenberger; Jeremy Force; Allison Hall; Terry Hyslop; E Shelley Hwang; Oluwadamilola M Fayanju Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2018-05-31 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Charlotte K Y Ng; Salvatore Piscuoglio; Felipe C Geyer; Kathleen A Burke; Fresia Pareja; Carey A Eberle; Raymond S Lim; Rachael Natrajan; Nadeem Riaz; Odette Mariani; Larry Norton; Anne Vincent-Salomon; Y Hannah Wen; Britta Weigelt; Jorge S Reis-Filho Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2017-02-02 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Bracha Erlanger Avigdor; Katie Beierl; Christopher D Gocke; Daniel J Zabransky; Karen Cravero; Kelly Kyker-Snowman; Berry Button; David Chu; Sarah Croessmann; Rory L Cochran; Roisin M Connolly; Ben H Park; Sarah J Wheelan; Ashley Cimino-Mathews Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2017-04-19 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Semra Salimoğlu; İsmail Sert; Mustafa Emiroğlu; Cem Karaali; Dilek Kuzukıran; Yasemin Akyüz Kırmızı; Gülden Diniz; Cengiz Aydın Journal: J Breast Health Date: 2016-04-01
Authors: Aron Gortman; Noel J Aherne; Justin Westhuyzen; Julan V Amalaseelan; Patrick M Dwyer; Matthew Hoffmann; Andrew T Last; Thomas P Shakespeare Journal: Mol Clin Oncol Date: 2021-07-01
Authors: Xue Chao; Wanlin Tan; Julia Y Tsang; Gary M Tse; Jintao Hu; Ping Li; Jinghui Hou; Mei Li; Jiehua He; Peng Sun Journal: Breast Cancer Date: 2021-05-03 Impact factor: 4.239
Authors: Brittany L Murphy; Robert T Fazzio; Tanya L Hoskin; Katrina N Glazebrook; Michael G Keeney; Elizabeth B Habermann; Tina J Hieken Journal: Gland Surg Date: 2018-04