Literature DB >> 32236827

Racial differences in estrogen receptor staining levels and implications for treatment and survival among estrogen receptor positive, HER2-negative invasive breast cancers.

Kristen S Purrington1,2, David Gorski3,4,5, Michael S Simon3,6, Theresa A Hastert3,6, Seongho Kim3,6, Rayna Rosati3,5, Ann G Schwartz3,6, Manohar Ratnam3,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: African American women (AAW) die more frequently from estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer than European American women (EAW). We investigated the relationship between race, percent ER staining, treatment, and clinical outcomes.
METHODS: Percent ER staining (weakly ER+: 1-10%, moderately ER+: 11-50%, strongly ER+: > 50%) was abstracted from pathology reports for 1573 women with ER+/HER2- invasive breast cancer treated at a single cancer center in Detroit, MI from 2010 to 2017. Clinical outcomes and tumor characteristics were obtained from the Metropolitan Detroit Cancer Surveillance System. Associations of ER levels with demographic and clinical characteristics were evaluated using logistic regression. Overall and breast cancer-specific (BCS) survival were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models.
RESULTS: AAW were more likely to have tumors with lower ER staining levels than EAW (weakly ER+: Odds ratio (OR) 2.19, p = 0.019; moderately ER+: OR 2.80, p = 0.005). Women with weakly compared to strongly ER+ tumors were less likely to receive endocrine therapy (ET) regardless of race (OR 0.79, p < 0.001). Mortality was predicted by both AA race (Overall hazard ratio (HR) = 1.72, p < 0.001; BCS HR 1.45, p = 0.08) and low (1-50%) ER (Overall HR 1.57, p = 0.083; BCS HR 2.11, p = 0.017) adjusting for clinic-pathologic characteristics. ET was associated with improved BCS survival in all women (1-50%: HR 0.11, p < 0.001; > 50%: HR 0.24, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The biology of ER+/HER2- tumors varies by race, although this does not appear to account for racial differences in survival. Although ET substantially reduces mortality among women with weakly ER+ tumors, these women are less likely to be treated with ET and have poorer outcomes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical outcomes; Gene expression; Pathology; Racial disparities

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32236827      PMCID: PMC8327620          DOI: 10.1007/s10549-020-05607-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  36 in total

1.  A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Soonmyung Paik; Steven Shak; Gong Tang; Chungyeul Kim; Joffre Baker; Maureen Cronin; Frederick L Baehner; Michael G Walker; Drew Watson; Taesung Park; William Hiller; Edwin R Fisher; D Lawrence Wickerham; John Bryant; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-12-10       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer.

Authors:  J M Harvey; G M Clark; C K Osborne; D C Allred
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  A Validated Model for Identifying Patients Unlikely to Benefit From the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay.

Authors:  Michele M Gage; Martin Rosman; W Charles Mylander; Erica Giblin; Hyun-Seok Kim; Leslie Cope; Christopher Umbricht; Antonio C Wolff; Lorraine Tafra
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Epidemiology of basal-like breast cancer.

Authors:  Robert C Millikan; Beth Newman; Chiu-Kit Tse; Patricia G Moorman; Kathleen Conway; Lynn G Dressler; Lisa V Smith; Miriam H Labbok; Joseph Geradts; Jeannette T Bensen; Susan Jackson; Sarah Nyante; Chad Livasy; Lisa Carey; H Shelton Earp; Charles M Perou
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2007-06-20       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Racial Differences in PAM50 Subtypes in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study.

Authors:  Melissa A Troester; Xuezheng Sun; Emma H Allott; Joseph Geradts; Stephanie M Cohen; Chiu-Kit Tse; Erin L Kirk; Leigh B Thorne; Michelle Mathews; Yan Li; Zhiyuan Hu; Whitney R Robinson; Katherine A Hoadley; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Katherine E Reeder-Hayes; H Shelton Earp; Andrew F Olshan; Lisa A Carey; Charles M Perou
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Prospective Validation of a 21-Gene Expression Assay in Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Joseph A Sparano; Robert J Gray; Della F Makower; Kathleen I Pritchard; Kathy S Albain; Daniel F Hayes; Charles E Geyer; Elizabeth C Dees; Edith A Perez; John A Olson; JoAnne Zujewski; Tracy Lively; Sunil S Badve; Thomas J Saphner; Lynne I Wagner; Timothy J Whelan; Matthew J Ellis; Soonmyung Paik; William C Wood; Peter Ravdin; Maccon M Keane; Henry L Gomez Moreno; Pavan S Reddy; Timothy F Goggins; Ingrid A Mayer; Adam M Brufsky; Deborah L Toppmeyer; Virginia G Kaklamani; James N Atkins; Jeffrey L Berenberg; George W Sledge
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-09-27       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Racial Differences in 21-Gene Recurrence Scores Among Patients With Hormone Receptor-Positive, Node-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Andreana N Holowatyj; Michele L Cote; Julie J Ruterbusch; Kristina Ghanem; Ann G Schwartz; Fawn D Vigneau; David H Gorski; Kristen S Purrington
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 8.  American Society of Clinical Oncology/College Of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer.

Authors:  M Elizabeth H Hammond; Daniel F Hayes; Mitch Dowsett; D Craig Allred; Karen L Hagerty; Sunil Badve; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Glenn Francis; Neil S Goldstein; Malcolm Hayes; David G Hicks; Susan Lester; Richard Love; Pamela B Mangu; Lisa McShane; Keith Miller; C Kent Osborne; Soonmyung Paik; Jane Perlmutter; Anthony Rhodes; Hironobu Sasano; Jared N Schwartz; Fred C G Sweep; Sheila Taube; Emina Emilia Torlakovic; Paul Valenstein; Giuseppe Viale; Daniel Visscher; Thomas Wheeler; R Bruce Williams; James L Wittliff; Antonio C Wolff
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-04-19       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975-2011, Featuring Incidence of Breast Cancer Subtypes by Race/Ethnicity, Poverty, and State.

Authors:  Betsy A Kohler; Recinda L Sherman; Nadia Howlader; Ahmedin Jemal; A Blythe Ryerson; Kevin A Henry; Francis P Boscoe; Kathleen A Cronin; Andrew Lake; Anne-Michelle Noone; S Jane Henley; Christie R Eheman; Robert N Anderson; Lynne Penberthy
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-03-30       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Thresholds for therapies: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2009.

Authors:  A Goldhirsch; J N Ingle; R D Gelber; A S Coates; B Thürlimann; H-J Senn
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2009-06-17       Impact factor: 32.976

View more
  2 in total

1.  Cancer stem cells: Culprits in endocrine resistance and racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes.

Authors:  Nicole Mavingire; Petreena Campbell; Jonathan Wooten; Joyce Aja; Melissa B Davis; Andrea Loaiza-Perez; Eileen Brantley
Journal:  Cancer Lett       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 8.679

Review 2.  Vitamin D in Triple-Negative and BRCA1-Deficient Breast Cancer-Implications for Pathogenesis and Therapy.

Authors:  Janusz Blasiak; Elzbieta Pawlowska; Jan Chojnacki; Joanna Szczepanska; Michal Fila; Cezary Chojnacki
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-05-23       Impact factor: 5.923

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.