4.5 Article

Correlation of levels and patterns of genomic instability with histological grading of invasive breast tumors

Journal

BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT
Volume 107, Issue 2, Pages 259-265

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-007-9547-2

Keywords

invasive breast cancer; grade; allelic imbalance

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pathological grade is a useful prognostic factor for stratifying breast cancer patients into favorable (well-differentiated tumors) and less favorable (poorly-differentiated tumors) outcome groups. The current system of tumor grading, however, is subjective and a large proportion of tumors are characterized as intermediate-grade tumors, making determination of optimal treatments difficult. To determine whether molecular profiles can discriminate breast disease by grade, patterns and levels of allelic imbalance (AI) at 26 chromosomal regions frequently altered in breast disease were examined in 185 laser microdissected specimens representing well-differentiated (grade 1; n = 55), moderately-differentiated (grade 2; n = 71), and poorly-differentiated (grade 3; n = 59) stage I-IV breast tumors. Overall levels of AI were significantly higher in grade 3 compared to grade 1 tumors (P < 0.05). Grades 1 and 3 showed distinct genetic profiles - grade 1 tumors were associated with large deletions of chromosome 16q22, while alterations at 9p21, 11q23, 13q14, 17p13.1 and 17q12 were characteristics of grade 3 carcinomas. In general, levels and patterns of AI in grade 2 carcinomas were intermediate between grade 1 and grade 3 tumors. Patterns of AI accurately categorized similar to 70% of samples into high- or low-grade disease groups, suggesting that the majority of breast tumors have genetic profiles consistent with high- or low-grade, and that molecular signatures of breast tumors can be useful for more accurate characterization of invasive breast cancer.

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