4.5 Article

4-IHC classification of breast cancer subtypes in a large cohort of a clinical cancer registry: use in clinical routine for therapeutic decisions and its effect on survival

Journal

BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT
Volume 153, Issue 3, Pages 647-658

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-015-3572-3

Keywords

4-IHC; Tumor biological subtypes; Breast cancer; Cancer registry; Overall survival

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of the present study was to evaluate to what extent the combination of standard histopathological parameters determines the biology of breast cancer and the effect on therapy and prognosis. The Clinical Cancer Registry Regensburg (Bavaria, Germany) included n = 4,480 female patients with primary, non-metastatic (M0) invasive breast cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2012. Immuno-histochemical analyses, i.e., estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), HER2, and Ki-67 (4-IHC), defined the tumor biological subtypes Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2-like, and Basal-like. Subtype-related differences in therapies and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using multivariable statistical methods. 4344 patients (97.0 %) could be classified into the four common tumor biological subtypes. The two most frequent entities were Luminal A (48.4 %), Luminal B (24.8 %), HER2-like (17.8 %), and Basal-like subtype (9.0 %). A multivariable Cox regression model showed that the best 7-year OS was seen in Luminal A patients and that OS of Luminal B and HER2-like patients was comparable (HR = 1.59, P < 0.001 versus HR = 1.51, P = 0.03). Lowest OS was seen in patients with Basal-like tumors (HR = 2.18, P < 0.001). In conclusion, the classification of tumor biological subtypes by the ER, PR, HER2, and Ki-67 biomarkers is practical in routine clinical work. Providing that quality assurance of these markers is ensured, this classification is useful for making therapy decisions in the routine clinical management of breast cancer patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available