Miguel Henriques Abreu1, Noémia Afonso2, Pedro Henriques Abreu3, Francisco Menezes4, Paula Lopes4, Rui Henrique5, Deolinda Pereira2, Carlos Lopes6. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, Portuguese Institute of Oncology of Porto, Porto, Portugal. Electronic address: p_abreu@sapo.pt. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, Portuguese Institute of Oncology of Porto, Porto, Portugal. 3. CISUC, Department of Informatics Engineering, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal. 4. Department of Pathology, Portuguese Institute of Oncology of Porto, Porto, Portugal. 5. Department of Pathology, Portuguese Institute of Oncology of Porto, Porto, Portugal; Department of Pathology and Molecular Immunology, Biomedical Sciences Institute of Abel Salazar, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. 6. Department of Pathology and Molecular Immunology, Biomedical Sciences Institute of Abel Salazar, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Male Breast Cancer (MBC) remains a poor understood disease. Prognostic factors are not well established and specific prognostic subgroups are warranted. PATIENTS/ METHODS: Retrospectively revision of 111 cases treated in the same Cancer Center. Blinded-central pathological revision with immunohistochemical (IHQ) analysis for estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR) and androgen (AR) receptors, HER2, ki67 and p53 was done. Cox regression model was used for uni/multivariate survival analysis. Two classifications of Female Breast Cancer (FBC) subgroups (based in ER, PR, HER2, 2000 classification, and in ER, PR, HER2, ki67, 2013 classification) were used to achieve their prognostic value in MBC patients. Hierarchical clustering was performed to define subgroups based on the six-IHQ panel. RESULTS: According to FBC classifications, the majority of tumors were luminal: A (89.2%; 60.0%) and B (7.2%; 35.8%). Triple negative phenotype was infrequent (2.7%; 3.2%) and HER2 enriched, non-luminal, was rare (≤1% in both). In multivariate analysis the poor prognostic factors were: size >2 cm (HR:1.8; 95%CI:1.0-3.4 years, p = 0.049), absence of ER (HR:4.9; 95%CI:1.7-14.3 years, p = 0.004) and presence of distant metastasis (HR:5.3; 95%CI:2.2-3.1 years, p < 0.001). FBC subtypes were independent prognostic factors (p = 0.009, p = 0.046), but when analyzed only luminal groups, prognosis did not differ regardless the classification used (p > 0.20). Clustering defined different subgroups, that have prognostic value in multivariate analysis (p = 0.005), with better survival in ER/PR+, AR-, HER2-and ki67/p53 low group (median: 11.5 years; 95%CI: 6.2-16.8 years) and worst in PR-group (median:4.5 years; 95%CI: 1.6-7.8 years). CONCLUSION: FBC subtypes do not give the same prognostic information in MBC even in luminal groups. Two subgroups with distinct prognosis were identified in a common six-IHQ panel. Future studies must achieve their real prognostic value in these patients.
PURPOSE:Male Breast Cancer (MBC) remains a poor understood disease. Prognostic factors are not well established and specific prognostic subgroups are warranted. PATIENTS/ METHODS: Retrospectively revision of 111 cases treated in the same Cancer Center. Blinded-central pathological revision with immunohistochemical (IHQ) analysis for estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR) and androgen (AR) receptors, HER2, ki67 and p53 was done. Cox regression model was used for uni/multivariate survival analysis. Two classifications of Female Breast Cancer (FBC) subgroups (based in ER, PR, HER2, 2000 classification, and in ER, PR, HER2, ki67, 2013 classification) were used to achieve their prognostic value in MBCpatients. Hierarchical clustering was performed to define subgroups based on the six-IHQ panel. RESULTS: According to FBC classifications, the majority of tumors were luminal: A (89.2%; 60.0%) and B (7.2%; 35.8%). Triple negative phenotype was infrequent (2.7%; 3.2%) and HER2 enriched, non-luminal, was rare (≤1% in both). In multivariate analysis the poor prognostic factors were: size >2 cm (HR:1.8; 95%CI:1.0-3.4 years, p = 0.049), absence of ER (HR:4.9; 95%CI:1.7-14.3 years, p = 0.004) and presence of distant metastasis (HR:5.3; 95%CI:2.2-3.1 years, p < 0.001). FBC subtypes were independent prognostic factors (p = 0.009, p = 0.046), but when analyzed only luminal groups, prognosis did not differ regardless the classification used (p > 0.20). Clustering defined different subgroups, that have prognostic value in multivariate analysis (p = 0.005), with better survival in ER/PR+, AR-, HER2-and ki67/p53 low group (median: 11.5 years; 95%CI: 6.2-16.8 years) and worst in PR-group (median:4.5 years; 95%CI: 1.6-7.8 years). CONCLUSION: FBC subtypes do not give the same prognostic information in MBC even in luminal groups. Two subgroups with distinct prognosis were identified in a common six-IHQ panel. Future studies must achieve their real prognostic value in these patients.
Authors: Matthew P Humphries; Sreekumar Sundara Rajan; Hedieh Honarpisheh; Gabor Cserni; Jo Dent; Laura Fulford; Lee B Jordan; J Louise Jones; Rani Kanthan; Maria Litwiniuk; Anna Di Benedetto; Marcella Mottolese; Elena Provenzano; Sami Shousha; Mark Stephens; Janina Kulka; Ian O Ellis; Akinwale N Titloye; Andrew M Hanby; Abeer M Shaaban; Valerie Speirs Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Tesa M Severson; Yongsoo Kim; Stacey E P Joosten; Karianne Schuurman; Petra van der Groep; Cathy B Moelans; Natalie D Ter Hoeve; Quirine F Manson; John W Martens; Carolien H M van Deurzen; Ellis Barbe; Ingrid Hedenfalk; Peter Bult; Vincent T H B M Smit; Sabine C Linn; Paul J van Diest; Lodewyk Wessels; Wilbert Zwart Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-02-02 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Marie Colombe Agahozo; Mieke A M Timmermans; Hein F B M Sleddens; Renée Foekens; Anita M A C Trapman-Jansen; Carolien P Schröder; Elise van Leeuwen-Stok; John W M Martens; Winand N M Dinjens; Carolien H M van Deurzen Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-03-09 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Carmen C van der Pol; Cathy B Moelans; Quirine F Manson; Marilot C T Batenburg; Elsken van der Wall; Inne Borel Rinkes; Lenny Verkooijen; Venu Raman; Paul J van Diest Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 4.064