Literature DB >> 9504686

Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis.

D C Allred1, J M Harvey, M Berardo, G M Clark.   

Abstract

Most recent decisions for breast cancer patients are made on the basis of prognostic and predictive factors. In addition to the traditional tumor/nodal/metastasis staging variables, estrogen and progesterone receptor status as assessed by biochemical ligand-binding assays are the only other factors that have been adequately validated and recommended for routine clinical use. Pathologists today, however, are evaluating estrogen and progesterone receptors almost exclusively by immunohistochemical means. Although many studies suggest that these tests might have equivalent or even superior abilities to predict patient outcome, there are important methodologic shortcomings to resolve before this technology achieves the clinical and technical validation necessary to justify its routine use. Many laboratories are also evaluating other factors for clinical use by immunohistochemical techniques, including, in particular, c-erbB-2, p53, and Ki-67 proliferation indices. Although available studies suggest that these factors might indeed be helpful in making treatment decisions, their clinical usefulness is still controversial, and, like the assessment of hormone receptors, there are important unresolved technical issues, such as how to prepare the tissue, which reagents to use and, most importantly, how to interpret the results. A few laboratories have gone to considerable effort to develop reproducible methods for evaluating these factors, and they have performed comprehensive studies demonstrating the prognostic and predictive significance of their results. Nonetheless, most laboratories offering these tests have not adequately validated them and might not even be aware of the issues needing attention. Unless laboratories validate their tests or follow the procedures of others who have, they run the risk of reporting meaningless and potentially harmful results. In the future, these and other factors will be incorporated into a prognostic index that will better reflect the biologic diversity of breast cancer and that will more accurately predict clinical outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9504686

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mod Pathol        ISSN: 0893-3952            Impact factor:   7.842


  692 in total

Review 1.  Monoclonal antibodies.

Authors:  P N Nelson; G M Reynolds; E E Waldron; E Ward; K Giannopoulos; P G Murray
Journal:  Mol Pathol       Date:  2000-06

2.  Distinct expression patterns of ER alpha and ER beta in normal human mammary gland.

Authors:  V Speirs; G P Skliris; S E Burdall; P J Carder
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Partial plasma cell differentiation as a mechanism of lost major histocompatibility complex class II expression in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Authors:  Sarah T Wilkinson; Kristie A Vanpatten; Diane R Fernandez; Patrick Brunhoeber; Karl E Garsha; Betty J Glinsmann-Gibson; Thomas M Grogan; Julie Teruya-Feldstein; Lisa M Rimsza
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2011-12-13       Impact factor: 22.113

4.  Triple-negative and HER2 positive ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: characteristics, behavior, and biomarker profile.

Authors:  Satoshi Takahashi; Aye Aye Thike; Valerie Cui Yun Koh; Hironobu Sasano; Puay Hoon Tan
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 4.064

5.  Utility of Tru-Cut Biopsy of Breast Lesions - An Experience in a Regional Cancer Center of a Developing Country.

Authors:  Sagarika Samantaray; Niharika Panda; Kusumabati Besra; Lucy Pattanayak; Subrat Samantara; Sashibhusan Dash
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-03-01

6.  Abrogated response to cellular stress identifies DCIS associated with subsequent tumor events and defines basal-like breast tumors.

Authors:  Mona L Gauthier; Hal K Berman; Caroline Miller; Krystyna Kozakeiwicz; Karen Chew; Dan Moore; Joseph Rabban; Yunn Yi Chen; Karla Kerlikowske; Thea D Tlsty
Journal:  Cancer Cell       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 31.743

Review 7.  Steroid hormone receptors as prognostic markers in breast cancer.

Authors:  Maggie C Louie; Mary B Sevigny
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 6.166

8.  Amelioration of colorectal cancer using negative lipidoid nanoparticles to encapsulate siRNA against APRIL by enema delivery mode.

Authors:  Weifeng Ding; Guihua Wang; Keke Shao; Feng Wang; Hua Huang; Shaoqing Ju; Hui Cong; Huimin Wang
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2014-04-26       Impact factor: 3.201

9.  Favorable predictive value of thyroid autoimmunity in high aggressive breast cancer.

Authors:  E Fiore; E Giustarini; C Mammoli; F Fragomeni; D Campani; I Muller; A Pinchera; C Giani
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 4.256

10.  MAT2B-GIT1 interplay activates MEK1/ERK 1 and 2 to induce growth in human liver and colon cancer.

Authors:  Hui Peng; Lily Dara; Tony W H Li; Yuhua Zheng; Heping Yang; Maria Lauda Tomasi; Ivan Tomasi; Pasquale Giordano; Jose M Mato; Shelly C Lu
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2013-05-14       Impact factor: 17.425

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.