Prakash Pandit1, Roshankumar Patil1, Vijay Palwe1, Sucheta Gandhe2, Rahul Patil2, Rajnish Nagarkar3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, HCG Manavata Cancer Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra, India. 2. Department of Pathology, HCG Manavata Cancer Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra, India. 3. Department of Surgical Oncology, HCG Manavata Cancer Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra, India.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to analyze the prevalence of molecular subtypes of all breast cancer patients treated at tertiary cancer centre in West India in 12 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study carried out in Tertiary Cancer Care Centre in Western India. Electronic medical records of all breast cancer patients were retrieved from the hospital database between March 2007 to March 2019. Patient's characteristic, histological features and molecular subtypes were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 2062 women fulfilled the criteria for this study and were analyzed. The median age of study population was 51 years (range 22-100 years). Among these, 1357 (65.8%) were of ≤55 years and 705 (34.2%) were over 55 years. The overall incidence of Hormonal Receptor-positive patients (either estrogen-receptor (ER) or progesterone-receptor (PR) or both) was 1162 (56.4%). The Mean tumor size was 3.8cm (range 0-18cm). The most common histology was IDC (96%). Axillary nodes were positive in 62.5%. Luminal type A was positive in 762 (37%) patients while Luminal type B was present in 157 (7.6%) patients. Basal-like subtype was observed in 537 (26%) patients while HER2 rich subtype was seen in 229 (11.1%). The incidence of Luminal A subtype increased with age. The highest observed among patients (72%) aged 70 years or more. Incidence of Basal like subtype was highest in patients less than 30 years (52%). CONCLUSION: Luminal-like disease is the most common molecular subtype in India. Identification of Basal like breast cancer, a highly aggressive, biologically and clinically distinct subtype different than its non-basal variant, is important for treatment planning and target therapy.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to analyze the prevalence of molecular subtypes of all breast cancer patients treated at tertiary cancer centre in West India in 12 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study carried out in Tertiary Cancer Care Centre in Western India. Electronic medical records of all breast cancer patients were retrieved from the hospital database between March 2007 to March 2019. Patient's characteristic, histological features and molecular subtypes were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 2062 women fulfilled the criteria for this study and were analyzed. The median age of study population was 51 years (range 22-100 years). Among these, 1357 (65.8%) were of ≤55 years and 705 (34.2%) were over 55 years. The overall incidence of Hormonal Receptor-positive patients (either estrogen-receptor (ER) or progesterone-receptor (PR) or both) was 1162 (56.4%). The Mean tumor size was 3.8cm (range 0-18cm). The most common histology was IDC (96%). Axillary nodes were positive in 62.5%. Luminal type A was positive in 762 (37%) patients while Luminal type B was present in 157 (7.6%) patients. Basal-like subtype was observed in 537 (26%) patients while HER2 rich subtype was seen in 229 (11.1%). The incidence of Luminal A subtype increased with age. The highest observed among patients (72%) aged 70 years or more. Incidence of Basal like subtype was highest in patients less than 30 years (52%). CONCLUSION: Luminal-like disease is the most common molecular subtype in India. Identification of Basal like breast cancer, a highly aggressive, biologically and clinically distinct subtype different than its non-basal variant, is important for treatment planning and target therapy.
Authors: Janet E Olson; James N Ingle; Cynthia X Ma; Linda L Pelleymounter; Daniel J Schaid; V Shane Pankratz; Robert A Vierkant; Zachary S Fredericksen; Yanhong Wu; Fergus J Couch; Celine M Vachon; Thomas A Sellers; Richard M Weinshilboum Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2006-09-27 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: T Sørlie; C M Perou; R Tibshirani; T Aas; S Geisler; H Johnsen; T Hastie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; T Thorsen; H Quist; J C Matese; P O Brown; D Botstein; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2001-09-11 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Charlotte K Y Ng; Anne M Schultheis; Francois-Clement Bidard; Britta Weigelt; Jorge S Reis-Filho Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2015-02-23 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Torsten O Nielsen; Forrest D Hsu; Kristin Jensen; Maggie Cheang; Gamze Karaca; Zhiyuan Hu; Tina Hernandez-Boussard; Chad Livasy; Dave Cowan; Lynn Dressler; Lars A Akslen; Joseph Ragaz; Allen M Gown; C Blake Gilks; Matt van de Rijn; Charles M Perou Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2004-08-15 Impact factor: 12.531
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
Authors: Mitch Dowsett; Torsten O Nielsen; Roger A'Hern; John Bartlett; R Charles Coombes; Jack Cuzick; Matthew Ellis; N Lynn Henry; Judith C Hugh; Tracy Lively; Lisa McShane; Soon Paik; Frederique Penault-Llorca; Ljudmila Prudkin; Meredith Regan; Janine Salter; Christos Sotiriou; Ian E Smith; Giuseppe Viale; Jo Anne Zujewski; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2011-09-29 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Sreekar Devarakonda; Shawn Sam Thomas; Supriya Sen; Varghese Thomas; Reka Karuppusami; Anish Jacob Cherian; Pooja Ramakant; Deepak Thomas Abraham; Paul Mazhuvanchary Jacob Journal: Indian J Surg Oncol Date: 2021-01-16
Authors: Kishan R Bharadwa; Kuheli Dasgupta; Suma Mysore Narayana; C Ramachandra; Suresh M C Babu; Annapoorni Rangarajan; Rekha V Kumar Journal: Eur J Breast Health Date: 2021-12-30