Saber Fallahpour1, Tanya Navaneelan1, Prithwish De1, Alessia Borgo1. 1. Affiliations: Surveillance and Cancer Registry (Fallahpour, Navaneelan, De) and ColonCancerCheck and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (Borgo), Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ont.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relation between breast cancer molecular subtype and survival has been studied in several jurisdictions, but limited information is available for Ontario. The aim of this study was to determine breast cancer survival by molecular subtype and to assess the effect on survival of selected demographic and tumour-based characteristics. METHODS: We extracted 29 833 breast cancer cases (in 26 538 girls and women aged ≥ 15 yr) diagnosed between 2010 and 2012 from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Cancers were categorized into 4 molecular subtypes: 1) luminal A (estrogen-receptor-positive and/or progesterone-receptor-positive [ER+ and/or PR+] and negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2-]), 2) luminal B (ER+ and/or PR+/HER2+), 3) HER2-enriched (ER- and PR-/HER2+) and 4) triple-negative (ER- and PR-/HER2-). We estimated associations with predictor variables (age, stage at diagnosis, histologic type, comorbidity and place of residence [urban or rural]) using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. Likelihood ratio testing was used to evaluate differences in risk of death. RESULTS: Luminal A was the most commonly diagnosed subtype (59.0%) and had the greatest survival, whereas triple-negative had the poorest survival. For all subtypes, a dose-response effect was observed between the hazard of death and age and stage at diagnosis, with the greatest effect found for the HER2-enriched subtype (age: hazard ratio [HR] 7.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.68-11.81]; stage at diagnosis: HR 37.71 [95% CI 34.64-41.27]). Moderate comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index score 1 or 2) was associated with increased risk of death for triple-negative cancers (HR 2.42 [95% CI 1.36-4.31]), and severe comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥ 3) increased the risk for all molecular subtypes. INTERPRETATION: The results indicate the importance of including molecular subtype, along with age, stage at diagnosis and comorbidity, in assessing breast cancer survival. They highlight the need to address outcomes related to hormone-receptor-negative cancers, for which survival lags behind that for hormone-receptor-positive cancers. Copyright 2017, Joule Inc. or its licensors.
BACKGROUND: The relation between breast cancer molecular subtype and survival has been studied in several jurisdictions, but limited information is available for Ontario. The aim of this study was to determine breast cancer survival by molecular subtype and to assess the effect on survival of selected demographic and tumour-based characteristics. METHODS: We extracted 29 833 breast cancer cases (in 26 538 girls and women aged ≥ 15 yr) diagnosed between 2010 and 2012 from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Cancers were categorized into 4 molecular subtypes: 1) luminal A (estrogen-receptor-positive and/or progesterone-receptor-positive [ER+ and/or PR+] and negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2-]), 2) luminal B (ER+ and/or PR+/HER2+), 3) HER2-enriched (ER- and PR-/HER2+) and 4) triple-negative (ER- and PR-/HER2-). We estimated associations with predictor variables (age, stage at diagnosis, histologic type, comorbidity and place of residence [urban or rural]) using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. Likelihood ratio testing was used to evaluate differences in risk of death. RESULTS: Luminal A was the most commonly diagnosed subtype (59.0%) and had the greatest survival, whereas triple-negative had the poorest survival. For all subtypes, a dose-response effect was observed between the hazard of death and age and stage at diagnosis, with the greatest effect found for the HER2-enriched subtype (age: hazard ratio [HR] 7.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.68-11.81]; stage at diagnosis: HR 37.71 [95% CI 34.64-41.27]). Moderate comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index score 1 or 2) was associated with increased risk of death for triple-negative cancers (HR 2.42 [95% CI 1.36-4.31]), and severe comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥ 3) increased the risk for all molecular subtypes. INTERPRETATION: The results indicate the importance of including molecular subtype, along with age, stage at diagnosis and comorbidity, in assessing breast cancer survival. They highlight the need to address outcomes related to hormone-receptor-negative cancers, for which survival lags behind that for hormone-receptor-positive cancers. Copyright 2017, Joule Inc. or its licensors.
Authors: Victor R Grann; Andrea B Troxel; Naseem J Zojwalla; Judith S Jacobson; Dawn Hershman; Alfred I Neugut Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-06-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Joseph A Sparano; Molin Wang; Fengmin Zhao; Vered Stearns; Silvana Martino; Jennifer A Ligibel; Edith A Perez; Tom Saphner; Antonio C Wolff; George W Sledge; William C Wood; Nancy E Davidson Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2012-01-16 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Harold C Sullivan; Gabriela Oprea-Ilies; Amy L Adams; Andrew J Page; Sungjin Kim; Jason Wang; Cynthia Cohen Journal: Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol Date: 2014-01
Authors: Darcie D Seachrist; Molly M Hannigan; Natasha N Ingles; Bryan M Webb; Kristen L Weber-Bonk; Peng Yu; Gurkan Bebek; Salendra Singh; Steven T Sizemore; Vinay Varadan; Donny D Licatalosi; Ruth A Keri Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Victoria M Youngblood; Ruth Nyirenda; Richard Nyasosela; Takondwa Zuze; Yi Yang; Evaristar Kudowa; Agnes Moses; Jennifer Kincaid; Chifundo Kajombo; Coxcilly Kampani; Fred Chimzimu; Maurice Mulenga; Chrissie Chilima; Grace K Ellis; Ryan Seguin; Maganizo Chagomerana; Rebecca Maine; Sheryl Jordan; Anthony Charles; Clara Lee; Satish Gopal; Tamiwe Tomoka Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2020-03-02 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Nathaniel J Robinson; Masaru Miyagi; Jessica A Scarborough; Jacob G Scott; Derek J Taylor; William P Schiemann Journal: Sci Signal Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 8.192