Breast cancer molecular class ERBB2: Preponderance of tumors with apocrine differentiation and expression of basal phenotype markers CK5, CK5/6, and EGFR

Applied Immunohistochemistry and Molecular Morphology

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 113-118

  Bhargava, Rohit ^a   Beriwal, Sushil ^a   Striebel, Joan M ^a   Dabbs, David J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Apocrine differentiation; Basal Phenotype Markers; EGFR; Molecular class ERBB2

Indexed keywords

CYTOKERATIN 5; CYTOKERATIN 6; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; HYBRID PROTEIN; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR;

APOCRINE CARCINOMA; APOCRINE GLAND; ARTICLE; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER GRADING; CANCER MORPHOLOGY; CANCER SUSCEPTIBILITY; CELL DEATH; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; GENE OVEREXPRESSION; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; IMMUNOHISTOLOGY; IMMUNOREACTIVITY; INVASIVE CARCINOMA; LYMPHOCYTIC INFILTRATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MOLECULAR CLONING; NECROSIS; PHENOTYPE; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; SCORING SYSTEM; TISSUE DIFFERENTIATION; TISSUE MICROARRAY; TUMOR DIFFERENTIATION;

APOCRINE GLANDS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA; CARCINOMA, BASAL CELL; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; FEMALE; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION, NEOPLASTIC; HUMANS; KERATIN-5; KERATIN-6; LYMPHOCYTES, TUMOR-INFILTRATING; PHENOTYPE; RECEPTOR, EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR; RECEPTOR, ERBB-2; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 77649147150     PISSN: 15412016     EISSN: 15334058     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PAI.0b013e3181b94ff1     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, et al.. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406:747-752.
2. Sorlie T. Molecular classification of breast tumors: toward improved diagnostics and treatments. Methods Mol Biol. 2007;360:91-114.
3. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al.. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:10869-10874.
4. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, et al.. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:8418-8423.
5. Cheang MC, Voduc D, Bajdik C, et al.. Basal-like breast cancer defined by five biomarkers has superior prognostic value than triplenegative phenotype. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:1368-1376.
6. Livasy CA, Karaca G, Nanda R, et al.. Phenotypic evaluation of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2006;19:264-271.
7. Nielsen TO, Hsu FD, Jensen K, et al.. Immunohistochemical and clinical characterization of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:5367-5374.
8. Bhargava R, Gerald WL, Li AR, et al.. EGFR gene amplification in breast cancer: correlation with epidermal growth factor receptor mRNA and protein expression and HER-2 status and absence of EGFR-activating mutations. Mod Pathol. 2005;18:1027-1033.
9. Flanagan MB, Dabbs DJ, Brufsky AM, et al.. Histopathologic variables predict oncotype DXt recurrence score. Mod Pathol. 2008;21:1255-1261.
10. McCarty KS Jr, Miller LS, Cox EB, et al.. Estrogen receptor analyses. correlation of biochemical and immunohistochemical methods using monoclonal antireceptor antibodies. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1985;109:716-721.
11. Bhargava R, Beriwal S, McManus K, et al.. CK5 is more sensitive than CK5/6 in identifying the basal-like phenotype of breast carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008;130:724-730.
12. Bhargava R, Goldman F, Beriwal S, et al.. Breast cancer molecular classification using immunohistochemical surrogate markers predicts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. 2008;Abstract 6071.
13. Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L, et al.. The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:2329-2334.
14. Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, et al.. Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA. 2006;295:2492-2502.
15. Tamimi RM, Baer HJ, Marotti J, et al.. Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10:R67.
16. Bhargava R, Dabbs DJ. Luminal B breast tumors are not HER2 positive. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10:404-405.
17. Chivukula M, Striebel JM, Ersahin C, et al.. Evaluation of morphologic features to identify ''basal-like phenotype'' on core needle biopsies of breast. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2008;16:411-416.
18. Lal P, Salazar PA, Hudis CA, et al.. HER-2 testing in breast cancer using immunohistochemical analysis and fluorescence in situ hybridization: a single-institution experience of 2279 cases and comparison of dual-color and single-color scoring. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;121:631-636.
19. Owens MA, Horten BC, Da Silva MM. HER2 amplification ratios by fluorescence in situ hybridization and correlation with immunohistochemistry in a cohort of 6556 breast cancer tissues. Clin Breast Cancer. 2004;5:63-69.
20. Tubbs RR, Hicks DG, Cook J, et al.. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) as primary methodology for the assessment of HER2 Status in adenocarcinoma of the breast: a single institution experience. Diagn Mol Pathol. 2007;16:207-210.
21. Bratthauer GL, Lininger RA, Man YG, et al.. Androgen and estrogen receptor mRNA status in apocrine carcinomas. Diagn Mol Pathol. 2002;11:113-118.
22. Gatalica Z. Immunohistochemical analysis of apocrine breast lesions consistent over-expression of androgen receptor accompanied by the loss of estrogen and progesterone receptors in apocrine metaplasia and apocrine carcinoma in situ. Pathol Res Pract. 1997;193:753-758.
23. Leal C, Henrique R, Monteiro P, et al.. Apocrine ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: histologic classification and expression of biologic markers. Hum Pathol. 2001;32:487-493.
24. Matsuo K, Fukutomi T, Hasegawa T, et al.. Histological and immunohistochemical analysis of apocrine breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer. 2002;9:43-49.
25. Mossler JA, Barton TK, Brinkhous AD, et al.. Apocrine differentiation in human mammary carcinoma. Cancer. 1980;46:2463-2471.
26. Farmer P, Bonnefoi H, Becette V, et al.. Identification of molecular apocrine breast tumours by microarray analysis. Oncogene. 2005; 24:4660-4671.
27. Niemeier LA, Dabbs DJ, Striebel JM, et al.. Androgen receptor expression in breast cancer molecular classes: an immunohistochemical study of 190 consecutive cases. Mod Pathol. 2009; 22:60-259.
28. Burris HA III, Hurwitz HI, Dees EC, et al.. Phase I safety, pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity study of lapatinib (GW572016), a reversible dual inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases, in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic carcinomas. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5305-5313.
29. Medina PJ, Goodin S. Lapatinib: a dual inhibitor of human epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases. Clin Ther. 2008; 30:1426-1447.
30. Nelson MH, Dolder CR. Lapatinib: a novel dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity in solid tumors. Ann Pharmacother. 2006; 40:261-269.
31. Geyer CE, Forster J, Lindquist D, et al.. Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355:2733-2743.
32. Cameron D, Casey M, Press M, et al.. A phase III randomized comparison of lapatinib plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in women with advanced breast cancer that has progressed on trastuzumab: updated efficacy and biomarker analyses. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;112:533-543.