Burcu Çakar1, Zeki Sürmeli2, Pınar Gürsoy Öner3, Elif Sıla Yelim4, Bülent Karabulut1, Ruchan Uslu1. 1. Division of Medical Oncology, Tülay Aktaş Oncology Hospital, Ege University School of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey. 2. Division of Medical Oncology, Medical Park Hospital, Ankara,Turkey. 3. Division of Medical Oncology, Suat Seren Chest Hospital, İzmir, Turkey. 4. Division of Internal Medicine, Ege University School of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) has an unfavourable prognosis despite the advances made in the treatment of breast cancer. Our study aimed to define immunohistochemistry-based surrogate subtype distribution to determine whether the breast cancer subtype accompanied survival outcome differences in IBC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records of female breast cancer patients with non-metastatic inflammatory breast cancer admitted to our clinic between March 2000 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, clinical and pathological feature of the primary tumour, adjuvant treatment options and survival data were analysed. Intrinsic breast cancer subtypes were defined according to ER, PR, HER-2 and ki-67 status. RESULTS: We identified 129 non-metastatic inflammatory breast cancer patients. Median follow-up was 73 months. 10 (7.7%) were luminal A-like, 67 (51.9%) were luminal B-like, 37 (28.6%) were HER-2 positive, and 15 (11.6%) were triple negative (TNBC) by immunohistochemistry. There were no statistically significant differences between subtypes in terms of histological type, grade, tumour size and lymph node status. Median disease-free survival was 47 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 29.2-82.6) and median overall survival was 75 months (95% CI 64.7-90.8). Triple negative breast cancer showed poorer outcome than other subgroups. Presence of TNBC disease was associated with poorer outcome compared to luminal A (HR: 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.92, p: 0.039), luminal B (HR: 0.34, 95% CI 0.15-0.74, p: 0.007) and HER-2 positive subgroups (HR: 0.40, 95% CI 0.17-0.94, p:0.037). Luminal A patients had a trend to have a better overall survival which did not reach to a statistical significant difference. CONCLUSION: Our study put forth that IBC have a poor prognosis irrespective of breast cancer surrogate subtype distribution. Luminal A, the most frequent subtype of breast cancer was the least common in our IBC patient group. TNBC had the worst outcome when compared to other breast cancer subtypes.
OBJECTIVE: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) has an unfavourable prognosis despite the advances made in the treatment of breast cancer. Our study aimed to define immunohistochemistry-based surrogate subtype distribution to determine whether the breast cancer subtype accompanied survival outcome differences in IBC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records of female breast cancer patients with non-metastatic inflammatory breast cancer admitted to our clinic between March 2000 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, clinical and pathological feature of the primary tumour, adjuvant treatment options and survival data were analysed. Intrinsic breast cancer subtypes were defined according to ER, PR, HER-2 and ki-67 status. RESULTS: We identified 129 non-metastatic inflammatory breast cancer patients. Median follow-up was 73 months. 10 (7.7%) were luminal A-like, 67 (51.9%) were luminal B-like, 37 (28.6%) were HER-2 positive, and 15 (11.6%) were triple negative (TNBC) by immunohistochemistry. There were no statistically significant differences between subtypes in terms of histological type, grade, tumour size and lymph node status. Median disease-free survival was 47 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 29.2-82.6) and median overall survival was 75 months (95% CI 64.7-90.8). Triple negative breast cancer showed poorer outcome than other subgroups. Presence of TNBC disease was associated with poorer outcome compared to luminal A (HR: 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.92, p: 0.039), luminal B (HR: 0.34, 95% CI 0.15-0.74, p: 0.007) and HER-2 positive subgroups (HR: 0.40, 95% CI 0.17-0.94, p:0.037). Luminal A patients had a trend to have a better overall survival which did not reach to a statistical significant difference. CONCLUSION: Our study put forth that IBC have a poor prognosis irrespective of breast cancer surrogate subtype distribution. Luminal A, the most frequent subtype of breast cancer was the least common in our IBC patient group. TNBC had the worst outcome when compared to other breast cancer subtypes.
Entities:
Keywords:
Inflammatory breast cancer; breast cancer subtypes; survival
Authors: Kenneth W Hance; William F Anderson; Susan S Devesa; Heather A Young; Paul H Levine Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2005-07-06 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Lori F Gentile; George Plitas; Emily C Zabor; Michelle Stempel; Monica Morrow; Andrea V Barrio Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2017-09-15 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Ivan Bièche; Florence Lerebours; Sengül Tozlu; Marc Espie; Michel Marty; Rosette Lidereau Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2004-10-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Dang M Nguyen; Kathy Sam; Anna Tsimelzon; Xiaoxian Li; Helen Wong; Syed Mohsin; Gary M Clark; Susan G Hilsenbeck; Richard M Elledge; D Craig Allred; Peter O'Connell; Jenny C Chang Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2006-09-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: S Dawood; S D Merajver; P Viens; P B Vermeulen; S M Swain; T A Buchholz; L Y Dirix; P H Levine; A Lucci; S Krishnamurthy; F M Robertson; W A Woodward; W T Yang; N T Ueno; M Cristofanilli Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2010-07-05 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Bernhard C Pestalozzi; David Zahrieh; Elizabeth Mallon; Barry A Gusterson; Karen N Price; Richard D Gelber; Stig B Holmberg; Jurij Lindtner; Raymond Snyder; Beat Thürlimann; Elizabeth Murray; Giuseppe Viale; Monica Castiglione-Gertsch; Alan S Coates; Aron Goldhirsch Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-05-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Massimo Cristofanilli; Vicente Valero; Aman U Buzdar; Shu-Wan Kau; Kristine R Broglio; Ana Maria Gonzalez-Angulo; Nour Sneige; Rabiul Islam; Naoto T Ueno; Thomas A Buchholz; Sonja E Singletary; Gabriel N Hortobagyi Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-10-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: A Goldhirsch; E P Winer; A S Coates; R D Gelber; M Piccart-Gebhart; B Thürlimann; H-J Senn Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2013-08-04 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Tithi Biswas; Charulata Jindal; Timothy L Fitzgerald; Jimmy T Efird Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-01-04 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Sandra V Fernandez; Alexander W MacFarlane; Mowafaq Jillab; Maria F Arisi; Jennifer Yearley; Lakshmanan Annamalai; Yulan Gong; Kathy Q Cai; R Katherine Alpaugh; Massimo Cristofanilli; Kerry S Campbell Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2020-12-02 Impact factor: 6.466