Literature DB >> 29622545

PAM50 and Risk of Recurrence Scores for Interval Breast Cancers.

Samantha Puvanesarajah1, Sarah J Nyante2, Cherie M Kuzmiak2, Mengjie Chen3, Chiu-Kit Tse4, Xuezheng Sun4, Emma H Allott5, Erin L Kirk4, Lisa A Carey6,7, Charles M Perou6, Andrew F Olshan4, Louise M Henderson2, Melissa A Troester4.   

Abstract

Breast cancers detected after a negative breast screening examination and prior to the next screening are referred to as interval cancers. These cancers generally have poor clinical characteristics compared with screen-detected cancers, but associations between interval cancer and genomic cancer characteristics are not well understood. Mammographically screened women diagnosed with primary invasive breast cancer from 1993 to 2013 (n = 370) were identified by linking the Carolina Breast Cancer Study and the Carolina Mammography Registry. Among women with a registry-identified screening mammogram 0 to 24 months before diagnosis, cancers were classified as screen-detected (N = 165) or interval-detected (N = 205). Using logistic regression, we examined the association of mode of detection with cancer characteristics (clinical, IHC, and genomic), overall, and in analyses stratified on mammographic density and race. Interval cancer was associated with large tumors [>2 cm; OR, 2.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.5-3.7], positive nodal status (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.8), and triple-negative subtype (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-5.5). Interval cancers were more likely to have non-Luminal A subtype (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.5-5.7), whereas screen-detected cancers tended to be more indolent (96% had low risk of recurrence genomic scores; 71% were PAM50 Luminal A). When stratifying by mammographic density and race, associations between interval detection and poor prognostic features were similar by race and density status. Strong associations between interval cancers and poor-prognosis genomic features (non-Luminal A subtype and high risk of recurrence score) suggest that aggressive tumor biology is an important contributor to interval cancer rates. Cancer Prev Res; 11(6); 327-36. ©2018 AACR. ©2018 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29622545      PMCID: PMC5984721          DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-17-0368

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)        ISSN: 1940-6215


  39 in total

1.  Comparison of clinical-pathologic characteristics and outcomes of true interval and screen-detected invasive breast cancer among participants of a Canadian breast screening program: a nested case-control study.

Authors:  Daniel Rayson; Jennifer Isabelle Payne; Mohamed Abdolell; Penny J Barnes; Rebecca F MacIntosh; Theresa Foley; Tallal Younis; Ariel Burns; Judy Caines
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Efficacy of screening mammography among women aged 40 to 49 years and 50 to 69 years: comparison of relative and absolute benefit.

Authors:  K Kerlikowske
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  1997

3.  Molecular Differences between Screen-Detected and Interval Breast Cancers Are Largely Explained by PAM50 Subtypes.

Authors:  Jingmei Li; Emma Ivansson; Daniel Klevebring; Nicholas P Tobin; Linda Sofie Lindström; Johanna Holm; Gabriela Prochazka; Camilla Cristando; Juni Palmgren; Sven Törnberg; Keith Humphreys; Johan Hartman; Jan Frisell; Mattias Rantalainen; Johan Lindberg; Per Hall; Jonas Bergh; Henrik Grönberg; Kamila Czene
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 12.531

4.  Big data for population-based cancer research: the integrated cancer information and surveillance system.

Authors:  Anne-Marie Meyer; Andrew F Olshan; Laura Green; Adrian Meyer; Stephanie B Wheeler; Ethan Basch; William R Carpenter
Journal:  N C Med J       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug

5.  Tumor characteristics associated with mammographic detection of breast cancer in the Ontario breast screening program.

Authors:  Victoria A Kirsh; Anna M Chiarelli; Sarah A Edwards; Frances P O'Malley; Rene S Shumak; Martin J Yaffe; Norman F Boyd
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-05-03       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Identification of a basal-like subtype of breast ductal carcinoma in situ.

Authors:  Chad A Livasy; Charles M Perou; Gamze Karaca; David W Cowan; Diane Maia; Susan Jackson; Chiu-Kit Tse; Sarah Nyante; Robert C Millikan
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 3.466

7.  Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes.

Authors:  Joel S Parker; Michael Mullins; Maggie C U Cheang; Samuel Leung; David Voduc; Tammi Vickery; Sherri Davies; Christiane Fauron; Xiaping He; Zhiyuan Hu; John F Quackenbush; Inge J Stijleman; Juan Palazzo; J S Marron; Andrew B Nobel; Elaine Mardis; Torsten O Nielsen; Matthew J Ellis; Charles M Perou; Philip S Bernard
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-02-09       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Predicting distant recurrence in receptor-positive breast cancer patients with limited clinicopathological risk: using the PAM50 Risk of Recurrence score in 1478 postmenopausal patients of the ABCSG-8 trial treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone.

Authors:  M Gnant; M Filipits; R Greil; H Stoeger; M Rudas; Z Bago-Horvath; B Mlineritsch; W Kwasny; M Knauer; C Singer; R Jakesz; P Dubsky; F Fitzal; R Bartsch; G Steger; M Balic; S Ressler; J W Cowens; J Storhoff; S Ferree; C Schaper; S Liu; C Fesl; T O Nielsen
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2013-12-16       Impact factor: 32.976

9.  Breast cancer screening programmes: the development of a monitoring and evaluation system.

Authors:  N E Day; D R Williams; K T Khaw
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Breast cancer biologic and etiologic heterogeneity by young age and menopausal status in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study: a case-control study.

Authors:  Lynn Chollet-Hinton; Carey K Anders; Chiu-Kit Tse; Mary Beth Bell; Yang Claire Yang; Lisa A Carey; Andrew F Olshan; Melissa A Troester
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2016-08-04       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  4 in total

1.  Evaluation of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Early Detection via Mammography Screening and Outcomes in African American and White American Patients.

Authors:  Yalei Chen; Laura Susick; Melissa Davis; Jessica Bensenhaver; S David Nathanson; Jessica Burns; Lisa A Newman
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 14.766

2.  Acute Leukemia Classification Using Transcriptional Profiles From Low-Cost Nanopore mRNA Sequencing.

Authors:  Jeremy Wang; Nickhill Bhakta; Vanessa Ayer Miller; Mahler Revsine; Mark R Litzow; Elisabeth Paietta; Yuri Fedoriw; Kathryn G Roberts; Zhaohui Gu; Charles G Mullighan; Corbin D Jones; Thomas B Alexander
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2022-04

3.  Integrating biology and access to care in addressing breast cancer disparities: 25 years' research experience in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study.

Authors:  Marc A Emerson; Katherine E Reeder-Hayes; Heather J Tipaldos; Mary E Bell; Marina R Sweeney; Lisa A Carey; H Shelton Earp; Andrew F Olshan; Melissa A Troester
Journal:  Curr Breast Cancer Rep       Date:  2020-05-14

4.  Comparison of Mortality Among Participants of Women's Health Initiative Trials With Screening-Detected Breast Cancers vs Interval Breast Cancers.

Authors:  Veronica L Irvin; Zhenzhen Zhang; Michael S Simon; Rowan T Chlebowski; Shiuh-Wen Luoh; Aladdin H Shadyab; Jessica L Krok-Schoen; Fred K Tabung; Lihong Qi; Marcia L Stefanick; Pepper Schedin; Sonali Jindal
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2020-06-01
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.