Literature DB >> 25326808

Prognostic relevance of biological subtype overrides that of TNM staging in breast cancer: discordance between stage and biology.

Hyun Ae Jung1, Yeon Hee Park, Moonjin Kim, Sungmin Kim, Won Jin Chang, Moon Ki Choi, Jung Yong Hong, Seok Won Kim, Won Ho Kil, Jeong Eon Lee, Seok Jin Nam, Jin Seok Ahn, Young-Hyuck Im.   

Abstract

Recently, we faced difficult treatment decisions regarding appropriate adjuvant systemic treatment, especially for patients who show discordance between stage and tumor biology. The aim of this study was to compare the prognostic relevance of the TNM staging system with that of intrinsic subtype in breast cancer. We retrospectively identified women patients who received curative surgery for stage I-III breast cancer with available data on immunohistochemistry profiles including hormone receptor (HR) status, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status, and Ki 67 staining at the Samsung Medical Center from January 2004 to September 2008. Primary outcomes were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). A total of 1145 patients were diagnosed with breast cancer and received curative surgery. Of these, 463 (40.4%) patients were stage I, and 682 (59.6%) were stage II or III. In addition, 701 (61.2%) patients were HR positive, 239 (20.9%) were HER2 positive, and 205 (20.9%) had triple-negative breast cancer. The 5-year RFS for the patients who were HR positive and HER2 negative with a low Ki 67 staining score (0-25%) was 99%. The 5-year RFS for patients who were HER2-positive or had triple-negative breast cancer were 89 and 83%, respectively (P value = <0.001). In multivariate analysis, advanced stage (II/III) and unfavorable biology (HER2 positive or triple negative) retained their statistical significance as predictors of decreased RFS and OS. Patients with advanced-stage disease (II or III) but favorable tumor biology (HR positive and HER2 negative and low Ki 67) had better clinical outcomes than those with stage I disease and unfavorable tumor biology in terms of RFS (99 versus 92%, P value = 0.011) and OS (99 versus 96%, P value = 0.03) at 5 years. The current results showed that intrinsic subtype has a greater prognostic impact in predicting clinical outcomes in subpopulations of patients with stage I-III breast cancer who show discordance between stage and biologic subtypes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25326808     DOI: 10.1007/s13277-014-2730-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tumour Biol        ISSN: 1010-4283


  22 in total

1.  HORMONE dependence and breast cancer.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1959-05-30       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Small node-negative (T1b-cN0) invasive hormone receptor-positive breast cancers: is there a subpopulation that might have benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy?

Authors:  Yeon Hee Park; Seock-Ah Im; Eun Yoon Cho; Yoon-La Choi; Jeong Eon Lee; Seok Jin Nam; Jung Hyun Yang; Jin Seok Ahn; Young-Hyuck Im
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2012-01-21       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx).

Authors:  Joseph A Sparano
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Significantly higher pathologic complete remission rate after neoadjuvant therapy with trastuzumab, paclitaxel, and epirubicin chemotherapy: results of a randomized trial in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer.

Authors:  Aman U Buzdar; Nuhad K Ibrahim; Deborah Francis; Daniel J Booser; Eva S Thomas; Richard L Theriault; Lajos Pusztai; Marjorie C Green; Banu K Arun; Sharon H Giordano; Massimo Cristofanilli; Debra K Frye; Terry L Smith; Kelly K Hunt; Sonja E Singletary; Aysegul A Sahin; Michael S Ewer; Thomas A Buchholz; Donald Berry; Gabriel N Hortobagyi
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-02-28       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 5.  Triple-negative breast cancer: therapeutic options.

Authors:  Susan Cleator; Wolfgang Heller; R Charles Coombes
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 41.316

6.  Clinical relevance of TNM staging system according to breast cancer subtypes.

Authors:  Y H Park; S J Lee; E Y Cho; Y La Choi; J E Lee; S J Nam; J-H Yang; J H Shin; E Y Ko; B-K Han; J S Ahn; Y-H Im
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2011-01-17       Impact factor: 32.976

7.  Adjuvant chemotherapy and timing of tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Kathy S Albain; William E Barlow; Peter M Ravdin; William B Farrar; Gary V Burton; Steven J Ketchel; Charles D Cobau; Ellis G Levine; James N Ingle; Kathleen I Pritchard; Allen S Lichter; Daniel J Schneider; Martin D Abeloff; I Craig Henderson; Hyman B Muss; Stephanie J Green; Danika Lew; Robert B Livingston; Silvana Martino; C Kent Osborne
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2009-12-10       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Luminal breast cancer classification according to proliferative indices: clinicopathological characteristics and short-term survival analysis.

Authors:  Yan Sun; Gang Nie; Zhimin Wei; Zhidong Lv; Xiaoyi Liu; Haibo Wang
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 3.064

9.  Potential impact of the 70-gene signature in the choice of adjuvant systemic treatment for ER positive, HER2 negative tumors: a single institution experience.

Authors:  R Torrisi; C A Garcia-Etienne; A Losurdo; E Morenghi; L Di Tommaso; W Gatzemeier; A Sagona; B Fernandes; C Rossetti; M Eboli; A Rubino; E Barbieri; C Andreoli; S Orefice; C Gandini; S Rota; M Zuradelli; G Masci; A Santoro; C Tinterri
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 4.380

10.  The clinicopathologic characteristics and prognostic significance of triple-negativity in node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Jiyoung Rhee; Sae-Won Han; Do-Youn Oh; Jee Hyun Kim; Seock-Ah Im; Wonshik Han; In Ae Park; Dong-Young Noh; Yung-Jue Bang; Tae-You Kim
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 4.430

View more
  6 in total

1.  Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis.

Authors:  José A López-Ruiz; Jon A Mieza; Ignacio Zabalza; María D M Vivanco
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 6.575

2.  The tumor-to-breast volume ratio (TBR) predicts cancer-specific survival in breast cancer patients who underwent modified radical mastectomy.

Authors:  Jiahuai Wen; Feng Ye; Xiaojia Huang; Shuaijie Li; Lu Yang; Xiangsheng Xiao; Xiaoming Xie
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2015-12-17

3.  Long non-coding RNA LINC00968 attenuates drug resistance of breast cancer cells through inhibiting the Wnt2/β-catenin signaling pathway by regulating WNT2.

Authors:  Dian-Hui Xiu; Gui-Feng Liu; Shao-Nan Yu; Long-Yun Li; Guo-Qing Zhao; Lin Liu; Xue-Feng Li
Journal:  J Exp Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2019-02-21

4.  Prognostically Distinctive Subgroup in Pathologic N3 Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Yun Yeong Kim; Heung Kyu Park; Kyung Hee Lee; Kwan Il Kim; Yong Soon Chun
Journal:  J Breast Cancer       Date:  2016-06-24       Impact factor: 3.588

5.  The Practicability of a Novel Prognostic Index (PI) Model and Comparison with Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) in Stage I-III Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Surgical Treatment.

Authors:  Jiahuai Wen; Feng Ye; Shuaijie Li; Xiaojia Huang; Lu Yang; Xiangsheng Xiao; Xiaoming Xie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Breast Cancer in Basra Oncology Center: A Clinico- Epidemiological Analysis

Authors:  Rafid A Abood
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2018-10-26
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.