Literature DB >> 36077734

Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis.

José A López-Ruiz1, Jon A Mieza2, Ignacio Zabalza3, María D M Vivanco4.   

Abstract

Precise prognosis is crucial for selection of adjuvant therapy in breast cancer. Molecular subtyping is increasingly used to complement immunohistochemical and pathological classification and to predict recurrence. This study compares both outcomes in a clinical setting. Molecular subtyping (MammaPrint®, TargetPrint®, and BluePrint®) and pathological classification data were compared in a cohort of 143 breast cancer patients. High risk clinical factors were defined by a value of the proliferation factor Ki67 equal or higher than 14% and/or high histological grade. The results from molecular classification were considered as reference. Core needle biopsies were found to be comparable to surgery samples for molecular classification. Discrepancies were found between molecular and pathological subtyping of the samples, including misclassification of HER2-positive tumors and the identification of a significant percentage of genomic high risk T1N0 tumors. In addition, 20% of clinical low-risk tumors showed genomic high risk, while clinical high-risk samples included 42% of cases with genomic low risk. According to pathological subtyping, a considerable number of breast cancer patients would not receive the appropriate systemic therapy. Our findings support the need to determine the molecular subtype of invasive breast tumors to improve breast cancer management.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IHC; MammaPrint; Symphony; TN; breast cancer; genomic profile; pathological and molecular subtyping; prognosis

Year:  2022        PMID: 36077734      PMCID: PMC9454811          DOI: 10.3390/cancers14174197

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancers (Basel)        ISSN: 2072-6694            Impact factor:   6.575


  45 in total

1.  A nationwide registry-based cohort study of the MammaPrint genomic risk classifier in invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Floris H Groenendijk; Agnes Jager; Fatima Cardoso; Carolien H M van Deurzen
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2018-01-06       Impact factor: 4.380

2.  An international study to increase concordance in Ki67 scoring.

Authors:  Mei-Yin C Polley; Samuel C Y Leung; Dongxia Gao; Mauro G Mastropasqua; Lila A Zabaglo; John M S Bartlett; Lisa M McShane; Rebecca A Enos; Sunil S Badve; Anita L Bane; Signe Borgquist; Susan Fineberg; Ming-Gang Lin; Allen M Gown; Dorthe Grabau; Carolina Gutierrez; Judith C Hugh; Takuya Moriya; Yasuyo Ohi; C Kent Osborne; Frédérique M Penault-Llorca; Tammy Piper; Peggy L Porter; Takashi Sakatani; Roberto Salgado; Jane Starczynski; Anne-Vibeke Lænkholm; Giuseppe Viale; Mitch Dowsett; Daniel F Hayes; Torsten O Nielsen
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 7.842

3.  Interlaboratory variability of Ki67 staining in breast cancer.

Authors:  Cornelia M Focke; Horst Bürger; Paul J van Diest; Kai Finsterbusch; Doreen Gläser; Eberhard Korsching; Thomas Decker
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2017-08-19       Impact factor: 9.162

4.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.

Authors:  J R Landis; G G Koch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Ki-67 index value and progesterone receptor status can predict prognosis and suitable treatment in node-negative breast cancer patients with estrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative tumors.

Authors:  Nobuyuki Arima; Reiki Nishimura; Tomofumi Osako; Yasuhiro Okumura; Masahiro Nakano; Mamiko Fujisue; Yasuyuki Nishiyama; Yasuo Toyozumi
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 2.967

6.  70-Gene Signature as an Aid to Treatment Decisions in Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Fatima Cardoso; Laura J van't Veer; Jan Bogaerts; Leen Slaets; Giuseppe Viale; Suzette Delaloge; Jean-Yves Pierga; Etienne Brain; Sylvain Causeret; Mauro DeLorenzi; Annuska M Glas; Vassilis Golfinopoulos; Theodora Goulioti; Susan Knox; Erika Matos; Bart Meulemans; Peter A Neijenhuis; Ulrike Nitz; Rodolfo Passalacqua; Peter Ravdin; Isabel T Rubio; Mahasti Saghatchian; Tineke J Smilde; Christos Sotiriou; Lisette Stork; Carolyn Straehle; Geraldine Thomas; Alastair M Thompson; Jacobus M van der Hoeven; Peter Vuylsteke; René Bernards; Konstantinos Tryfonidis; Emiel Rutgers; Martine Piccart
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries.

Authors:  Hyuna Sung; Jacques Ferlay; Rebecca L Siegel; Mathieu Laversanne; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Ahmedin Jemal; Freddie Bray
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 508.702

8.  A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer.

Authors:  Marc J van de Vijver; Yudong D He; Laura J van't Veer; Hongyue Dai; Augustinus A M Hart; Dorien W Voskuil; George J Schreiber; Johannes L Peterse; Chris Roberts; Matthew J Marton; Mark Parrish; Douwe Atsma; Anke Witteveen; Annuska Glas; Leonie Delahaye; Tony van der Velde; Harry Bartelink; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; Emiel T Rutgers; Stephen H Friend; René Bernards
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-12-19       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Sox2 promotes tamoxifen resistance in breast cancer cells.

Authors:  Marco Piva; Giacomo Domenici; Oihana Iriondo; Miriam Rábano; Bruno M Simões; Valentine Comaills; Inmaculada Barredo; Jose A López-Ruiz; Ignacio Zabalza; Robert Kypta; Maria d M Vivanco
Journal:  EMBO Mol Med       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 12.137

Review 10.  Diversity of Breast Carcinoma: Histological Subtypes and Clinical Relevance.

Authors:  Jaafar Makki
Journal:  Clin Med Insights Pathol       Date:  2015-12-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.