Literature DB >> 31206365

Discordant Marker Expression Between Invasive Breast Carcinoma and Corresponding Synchronous and Preceding DCIS.

Lindy L Visser1, Lotte E Elshof1,2,3, Koen Van de Vijver4, Emma J Groen1,4, Mathilde M Almekinders1,4, Joyce Sanders4, Carolien Bierman4, Dennis Peters5, Ingrid Hofland5, Annegien Broeks5, Flora E van Leeuwen2, Emiel J Th Rutgers3, Marjanka K Schmidt1,2, Michael Schaapveld2, Esther H Lips1, Jelle Wesseling1,4.   

Abstract

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is considered a potential precursor of invasive breast carcinoma (IBC). Studies aiming to find markers involved in DCIS progression generally have compared characteristics of IBC lesions with those of adjacent synchronous DCIS lesions. The question remains whether synchronous DCIS and IBC comparisons are a good surrogate for primary DCIS and subsequent IBC. In this study, we compared both primary DCIS and synchronous DCIS with the associated IBC lesion, on the basis of immunohistochemical marker expression. Immunohistochemical analysis of ER, PR, HER2, p53, and cyclo-oxygenase 2 (COX-2) was performed for 143 primary DCIS and subsequent IBC lesions, including 81 IBC lesions with synchronous DCIS. Agreement between DCIS and IBC was assessed using kappa, and symmetry tests were performed to assess the pattern in marker conversion. The primary DCIS and subsequent IBC more often showed discordant marker expression than synchronous DCIS and IBC. Strikingly, 18 of 49 (36%) women with HER2-positive primary DCIS developed an HER2-negative IBC. Such a difference in HER2 expression was not observed when comparing synchronous DCIS and IBC. The frequency of discordant marker expression did not increase with longer time between primary DCIS and IBC. In conclusion, comparison of primary DCIS and subsequent IBC yields different results than a comparison of synchronous DCIS and IBC, in particular with regard to HER2 status. To gain more insight into the progression of DCIS to IBC, it is essential to focus on the relationship between primary DCIS and subsequent IBC, rather than comparing IBC with synchronous DCIS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31206365     DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001306

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol        ISSN: 0147-5185            Impact factor:   6.394


  11 in total

1.  Contrasting DCIS and invasive breast cancer by subtype suggests basal-like DCIS as distinct lesions.

Authors:  Helga Bergholtz; Tonje G Lien; David M Swanson; Arnoldo Frigessi; Maria Grazia Daidone; Jörg Tost; Fredrik Wärnberg; Therese Sørlie
Journal:  NPJ Breast Cancer       Date:  2020-06-17

Review 2.  Is loss of p53 a driver of ductal carcinoma in situ progression?

Authors:  Rhiannon L Morrissey; Alastair M Thompson; Guillermina Lozano
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 3.  Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: State-of-the-Art Review.

Authors:  Lars J Grimm; Habib Rahbar; Monica Abdelmalak; Allison H Hall; Marc D Ryser
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 4.  Learning to distinguish progressive and non-progressive ductal carcinoma in situ.

Authors:  Anna K Casasent; Mathilde M Almekinders; Charlotta Mulder; Proteeti Bhattacharjee; Deborah Collyar; Alastair M Thompson; Jos Jonkers; Esther H Lips; Jacco van Rheenen; E Shelley Hwang; Serena Nik-Zainal; Nicholas E Navin; Jelle Wesseling
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2022-10-19       Impact factor: 69.800

5.  Prognostic and Predictive Value of HER2 Expression in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Results from the UK/ANZ DCIS Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Mangesh A Thorat; Pauline M Levey; J Louise Jones; Sarah E Pinder; Nigel J Bundred; Ian S Fentiman; Jack Cuzick
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Preoperative ultrasound radiomics analysis for expression of multiple molecular biomarkers in mass type of breast ductal carcinoma in situ.

Authors:  Linyong Wu; Yujia Zhao; Peng Lin; Hui Qin; Yichen Liu; Da Wan; Xin Li; Yun He; Hong Yang
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 1.930

7.  Molecular subtyping reveals uniqueness of prognosis in breast ductal carcinoma in situ patients with lumpectomy.

Authors:  Libo Yang; Mengjia Shen; Yan Qiu; Tingting Tang; Hong Bu
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Contrasting DCIS and invasive breast cancer by subtype suggests basal-like DCIS as distinct lesions.

Authors:  Helga Bergholtz; Tonje G Lien; David M Swanson; Arnoldo Frigessi; Maria Grazia Daidone; Jörg Tost; Fredrik Wärnberg; Therese Sørlie
Journal:  NPJ Breast Cancer       Date:  2020-06-17

9.  Somatic mutations and copy number variations in breast cancers with heterogeneous HER2 amplification.

Authors:  Mieke R Van Bockstal; Marie Colombe Agahozo; Ronald van Marion; Peggy N Atmodimedjo; Hein F B M Sleddens; Winand N M Dinjens; Lindy L Visser; Esther H Lips; Jelle Wesseling; Carolien H M van Deurzen
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2020-03-05       Impact factor: 6.603

10.  Variability in grading of ductal carcinoma in situ among an international group of pathologists.

Authors:  Esther H Lips; Jelle Wesseling; Maartje van Seijen; Katarzyna Jóźwiak; Sarah E Pinder; Allison Hall; Savitri Krishnamurthy; Jeremy Sj Thomas; Laura C Collins; Jonathan Bijron; Joost Bart; Danielle Cohen; Wen Ng; Ihssane Bouybayoune; Hilary Stobart; Jan Hudecek; Michael Schaapveld; Alastair Thompson
Journal:  J Pathol Clin Res       Date:  2021-02-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.