Molecular pathology of breast cancer: What a pathologist needs to know

American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Volumn 138, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 770-780

  Allison, Kimberly H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast; HER2 FISH testing; Molecular diagnostics; Oncotype DX

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2;

BREAST CANCER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; PATHOGENESIS; PATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVERSE TRANSCRIPTION POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; REVIEW;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; PATHOLOGY, MOLECULAR;

EID: 84869213708     PISSN: 00029173     EISSN: 19437722     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1309/AJCPIV9IQ1MRQMOO     Document Type: Review

References (125)

1. Foulkes WD, Reis-Filho JS, Narod SA. Tumor size and survival in breast cancer: a reappraisal. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2010;7:348-353.
2. Foulkes WD, Grainge MJ, Rakha EA, et al. Tumor size is an unreliable predictor of prognosis in basal-like breast cancers and does not correlate closely with lymph node status. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;117:199-204.
3. Reis-Filho JS, Pusztai L. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: classification, prognostication, and prediction. Lancet. 2011;378:1812-1823.
4. Hu Z, Fan C, Oh DS, et al. The molecular portraits of breast tumors are conserved across microarray platforms. BMC Genomics. 2006;7:96.
5. Sotiriou C, Neo SY, McShane LM, et al. Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:10393-10398. (Pubitemid 37071889)
6. Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Loi S, et al. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:262-272. (Pubitemid 43264710)
7. Weigelt B, Baehner FL, Reis-Filho JS. The contribution of gene expression profiling to breast cancer classification, prognostication and prediction: a retrospective of the last decade. J Pathol. 2010;220:263-280.
8. Weigelt B, Reis-Filho JS. Histological and molecular types of breast cancer: is there a unifying taxonomy? Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2009;6:718-730.
9. Perou CM. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406:747-752.
10. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98:10869-10874. (Pubitemid 32878711)
11. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:8418-8423. (Pubitemid 36842560)
12. The Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2012;490:61-70.
13. van't Veer LJ. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature. 2002;415:530-536.
14. 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. (Pubitemid 39100473)
15. Tang P, Skinner KA, Hicks DG. Molecular classification of breast carcinomas by immunohistochemical analysis: are we ready? Diagn Mol Pathol. 2009;18:125-132.
16. Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:736-750.
17. Desmedt C, Haibe-Kains B, Wirapati P, et al. Biological processes associated with breast cancer clinical outcome depend on the molecular subtypes. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:5158-5165.
18. Reis-Filho JS, Weigelt B, Fumagalli D, et al. Molecular profiling: moving away from tumor philately. Sci Transl Med. 2010;2:47ps3.
19. Wirapati P, Sotiriou C, Kunkel S, et al. Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10:R65.
20. Foulkes WD, Smith IE, Reis-Filho JS. Triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363:1938-1948.
21. Dent R, Trudeau M, Pritchard KI, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer: clinical features and patterns of recurrence. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(15 Pt 1):4429-4434. (Pubitemid 47219710)
22. Fulford LG, Easton DF, Reis-Filho JS, et al. Specific morphological features predictive for the basal phenotype in grade 3 invasive ductal carcinoma of breast. Histopathology. 2006;49:22-34. (Pubitemid 43972917)
23. Jacquemier J, Padovani L, Rabayrol L, et al. Typical medullary breast carcinomas have a basal/myoepithelial phenotype. J Pathol. 2005;207:260-268. (Pubitemid 41556449)
24. 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. (Pubitemid 43117611)
25. Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Reis-Filho J, et al. Patho-biological aspects of basal-like breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;113:411-422.
26. Cheang MC, Voduc D, Bajdik C, et al. Basal-like breast cancer defined by five biomarkers has superior prognostic value than triple-negative phenotype. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:1368-1376. (Pubitemid 351413917)
27. Rakha EA, Elsheikh SE, Aleskandarany MA, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer: distinguishing between basal and nonbasal subtypes. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:2302-2310.
28. Badve S, Dabbs DJ, Schnitt SJ, et al. Basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers: a critical review with an emphasis on the implications for pathologists and oncologists. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:157-167.
29. 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. (Pubitemid 46698581)
30. Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, et al. Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA. 2006;295(21):2492-2502. (Pubitemid 43854964)
31. Morris GJ, Naidu S, Topham AK, et al. Differences in breast carcinoma characteristics in newly diagnosed African-American and Caucasian patients: a single-institution compilation compared with the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Cancer. 2007;110:876-884. (Pubitemid 47257667)
32. Foulkes WD, Stefansson IM, Chappuis PO, et al. Germline BRCA1 mutations and a basal epithelial phenotype in breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:1482-1485. (Pubitemid 37279334)
33. Joosse SA, Brandwijk KI, Mulder L, et al. Genomic signature of BRCA1 deficiency in sporadic basal-like breast tumors. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2011;50:71-81.
34. Turner NC, Reis-Filho JS. Basal-like breast cancer and the BRCA1 phenotype. Oncogene. 2006;25:5846-5853. (Pubitemid 44453440)
35. Turner NC, Reis-Filho JS, Russell AM, et al. BRCA1 dysfunction in sporadic basal-like breast cancer. Oncogene. 2007;26:2126-2132. (Pubitemid 46514749)
36. Collins LC, Martyniak A, Kandel MJ, et al. Basal cytokeratin and epidermal growth factor receptor expression are not predictive of BRCA1 mutation status in women with triple-negative breast cancers. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33:1093-1097.
37. Lakhani SR, Reis-Filho JS, Fulford L, et al. Prediction of BRCA1 status in patients with breast cancer using estrogen receptor and basal phenotype. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:5175-5180. (Pubitemid 41003703)
38. Chia SK, Bramwell VH, Tu D, et al. A 50-gene intrinsic subtype classifier for prognosis and prediction of benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:4465-4472.
39. Nielsen TO, Parker JS, Leung S, et al. A comparison of PAM50 intrinsic subtyping with immunohistochemistry and clinical prognostic factors in tamoxifen-treated estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16:5222-5232.
40. Nguyen B, Cusumano PG, Deck K, et al. Comparison of molecular subtyping with BluePrint, MammaPrint, and TargetPrint to local clinical subtyping in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3257-3263.
41. Pusztai L, Mazouni C, Anderson K, et al. Molecular classification of breast cancer: limitations and potential. Oncologist. 2006;11:868-877. (Pubitemid 44373759)
42. Weigelt B, Mackay A, A'Hern R, et al. Breast cancer molecular profiling with single sample predictors: a retrospective analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:339-349.
43. Kapp AV, Tibshirani R. Are clusters found in one dataset present in another dataset? Biostatistics. 2007;8:9-31. (Pubitemid 44906101)
44. Lusa L, McShane LM, Reid JF, et al. Challenges in projecting clustering results across gene expression-profiling datasets. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:1715-1723. (Pubitemid 351767219)
45. Mackay A, Weigelt B, Grigoriadis A, et al. Microarray-based class discovery for molecular classification of breast cancer: analysis of interobserver agreement. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:662-673.
46. Fan C, Oh DS, Wessels L, et al. Concordance among gene-expression-based predictors for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:560-569. (Pubitemid 44200649)
47. Elloumi F, Hu Z, Li Y, et al. Systematic bias in genomic classification due to contaminating non-neoplastic tissue in breast tumor samples. BMC Medical Genomics. 2011;4:54.
48. Cleator SJ, Powles TJ, Dexter T, et al. The effect of the stromal component of breast tumours on prediction of clinical outcome using gene expression microarray analysis. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8:R32.
49. Natrajan R, Lambros MB, Rodriguez-Pinilla SM, et al. Tiling path genomic profiling of grade 3 invasive ductal breast cancers. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:2711-2722.
50. Natrajan R, Weigelt B, Mackay A, et al. An integrative genomic and transcriptomic analysis reveals molecular pathways and networks regulated by copy number aberrations in basal-like, HER2 and luminal cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;121:575-589.
51. Bombonati A, Sgroi DC. The molecular pathology of breast cancer progression. J Pathol. 2011;223:307-317.
52. Andre F, Job B, Dessen P, et al. Molecular characterization of breast cancer with high-resolution oligonucleotide comparative genomic hybridization array. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:441-451.
53. Chin SF, Teschendorff AE, Marioni JC, et al. High-resolution aCGH and expression profiling identifies a novel genomic subtype of ER negative breast cancer. Genome Biol. 2007;8:R215.
54. Jonsson G, Staaf J, Vallon-Christersson J, et al. Genomic subtypes of breast cancer identified by array-comparative genomic hybridization display distinct molecular and clinical characteristics. Breast Cancer Res. 2010;12:R42.
55. Lopez-Garcia MA, Geyer FC, Lacroix-Triki M, et al. Breast cancer precursors revisited: molecular features and progression pathways. Histopathology. 2010;57:171-192.
56. Oyama T, Maluf H, Koerner F. Atypical cystic lobules: an early stage in the formation of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. Virchows Arch. 1999;435:413-421. (Pubitemid 29472200)
57. Nishizaki T, Chew K, Chu L, et al. Genetic alterations in lobular breast cancer by comparative genomic hybridization. Int J Cancer. 1997;74:513.
58. Weigelt B, Kreike B, Geyer FC, et al. The molecular underpinning of lobular histological growth pattern: a genome-wide transcriptomic analysis of invasive lobular carcinomas and grade- and molecular subtype-matched invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type. J Pathol. 2010;220:45-57.
59. Simpson PT, Reis-Filho JS, Gale T, et al. Molecular evolution of breast cancer. J Pathol. 2005;205:248-254.
60. Reis-Filho JS, Lakhani SR. The diagnosis and management of pre-invasive breast disease: genetic alterations in pre-invasive lesions. Breast Cancer Res. 2003;5:313-319.
61. Dabbs DJ, Carter G, Fudge M, et al. Molecular alterations in columnar cell lesions of the breast. Mod Pathol. 2006;19:344-349. (Pubitemid 43276987)
62. Lee S, Medina D, Tsimelzon A, et al. Alterations of gene expression in the development of early hyperplastic precursors of breast cancer. Am J Pathol. 2007;171:252-262. (Pubitemid 47339242)
63. Molyneux G, Geyer FC, Magnay FA, et al. BRCA1 basal-like breast cancers originate from luminal epithelial progenitors and not from basal stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 2010;7:403-417.
64. Bryan BB, Schnitt SJ, Collins LC. Ductal carcinoma in situ with basal-like phenotype: a possible precursor to invasive basal-like breast cancer. Mod Pathol. 2006;19:617-621.
65. Paredes J, Lopes N, Milanezi F, et al. P-cadherin and cytokeratin 5: useful adjunct markers to distinguish basal-like ductal carcinomas in situ. Virchows Arch. 2007;450:73-80. (Pubitemid 46360747)
66. 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.
67. Vincent-Salomon A, Lucchesi C, Gruel N, et al. Integrated genomic and transcriptomic analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:1956-1965. (Pubitemid 351551104)
68. Dabbs DJ, Chivukula M, Carter G, et al. Basal phenotype of ductal carcinoma in situ: recognition and immunohistologic profile. Mod Pathol. 2006;19:1506-1511. (Pubitemid 44624171)
69. Meijnen P, Peterse JL, Antonini N, et al. Immunohistochemical categorisation of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Br J Cancer. 2008;98:137-142.
70. Hannemann J, Velds A, Halfwerk JB, et al. Classification of ductal carcinoma in situ by gene expression profiling. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8:R61.
71. Nik-Zainal S, Van Loo P, Wedge DC, et al. The life history of 21 breast cancers. Cell. 2012;149:994-1007.
72. Geyer FC, Weigelt B, Natrajan R, et al. Molecular analysis reveals a genetic basis for the phenotypic diversity of metaplastic breast carcinomas. J Pathol. 2010;220:562-573.
73. Ding L, Ellis MJ, Li S, et al. Genome remodelling in a basal-like breast cancer metastasis and xenograft. Nature. 2010;464:999-1005.
74. Ding L, Ley TJ, Larson DE, et al. Clonal evolution in relapsed acute myeloid leukaemia revealed by whole-genome sequencing. Nature. 2012;481:506-510.
75. Schmitt MW, Prindle MJ, Loeb LA. Implications of genetic heterogeneity in cancer. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2012;1267:110-116.
76. Navin N, Kendall J, Troge J, et al. Tumour evolution inferred by single-cell sequencing. Nature 2011;472:90-94.
77. Shah SP, Morin RD, Khattra J, et al. Mutational evolution in a lobular breast tumour profiled at single nucleotide resolution. Nature. 2009;461:809-813.
78. Burrell RA, Juul N, Johnston SR, et al. Targeting chromosomal instability and tumour heterogeneity in HER2-positive breast cancer. J Cell Biochem. 2010;111:782-790.
79. Greaves M, Maley CC. Clonal evolution in cancer. Nature. 2012;481:306-313.
80. Amir E, Miller N, Geddie W, et al. Prospective study evaluating the impact of tissue confirmation of metastatic disease in patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:587-592.
81. Lindstrom LS, Karlsson E, Wilking UM, et al. Clinically used breast cancer markers such as estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 are unstable throughout tumor progression. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2601-2608.
82. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Breast Cancer Version 3.2012. Available at www.nccn.org/ professionals/physician-gls/recently-updated.asp. Accessed October 16, 2012.
83. Acs G, Simpson JF, Bleiweiss IJ, et al. Microglandular adenosis with transition into adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003;27:1052-1060. (Pubitemid 36909526)
84. Salarieh A, Sneige N. Breast carcinoma arising in microglandular adenosis: a review of the literature. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131:1397-1399. (Pubitemid 47427595)
85. Shin SJ, Simpson PT, Da Silva L, et al. Molecular evidence for progression of microglandular adenosis (MGA) to invasive carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33:496-504.
86. Wetterskog D, Lopez-Garcia MA, Lambros MB, et al. Adenoid cystic carcinomas constitute a genomically distinct subgroup of triple-negative and basal-like breast cancers. J Pathol. 2012;226:84-96.
87. Curtis C, Shah SP, Chin SF, et al. The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups. Nature. 2012;486:346-352.
88. Stephens PJ, Tarpey PS, Davies H, et al. The landscape of cancer genes and mutational processes in breast cancer. Nature. 2012;486:400-404.
89. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134:907-922.
90. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131:18-43. (Pubitemid 46174133)
91. Grimm EE, Schmidt RA, Swanson PE, et al. Achieving 95% cross-methodological concordance in HER2 testing: causes and implications of discordant cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 2010;134:284-292.
92. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Wolff AC. Clinical notice for American Society of Clinical Oncology-College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations on ER/PgR and HER2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:e458.
93. Allison KH, Dintzis SM, Schmidt RA. Frequency of HER2 heterogeneity by fluorescence in situ hybridization according to CAP expert panel recommendations: time for a new look at how to report heterogeneity. Am J Clin Pathol. 2011;136:864-871.
94. Yang YL, Fan Y, Lang RG, et al. Genetic heterogeneity of HER2 in breast cancer: impact on HER2 testing and its clinicopathologic significance. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;134:1095-1102.
95. Chang MC, Malowany JI, Mazurkiewicz J, et al. 'Genetic heterogeneity' in HER2/neu testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization: a study of 2,522 cases. Mod Pathol. 2012;25:683-688.
96. Ohlschlegel C, Zahel K, Kradolfer D, et al. HER2 genetic heterogeneity in breast carcinoma. J Clin Pathol. 2011;64:1112-1116.
97. Yang J, Luo H, Li Y, et al. Intratumoral heterogeneity determines discordant results of diagnostic tests for human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) 2 in gastric cancer specimens. Cell Biochem Biophys. 2012;62:221-228.
98. Bernasconi B, Chiaravalli AM, Finzi G, et al. Genetic heterogeneity in HER2 testing may influence therapy eligibility. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;133:161-168.
99. Bartlett AI, Starcyznski J, Robson T, et al. Heterogeneous HER2 gene amplification: impact on patient outcome and a clinically relevant definition. Am J Clin Pathol. 2011;136:266-274.
100. Ross JS, Hatzis C, Symmans WF, et al. Commercialized multigene predictors of clinical outcome for breast cancer. Oncologist. 2008;13:477-493. (Pubitemid 351872866)
101. Mook S, Schmidt MK, Rutgers EJ, et al. Calibration and discriminatory accuracy of prognosis calculation for breast cancer with the online Adjuvant! program: a hospital-based retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:1070-1076.
102. Albain KS. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor- positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:55-65.
103. Paik S, ShakS, Tang G, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2817-2826. (Pubitemid 40051905)
104. Habel LA. A population-based study of tumor gene expression and risk of breast cancer death among lymph node-negative patients. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8:R25.
105. Esteva FJ, Sahin AA, Cristofanilli M, et al. Prognostic role of a multigene reverse transcriptase-PCR assay in patients with node-negative breast cancer not receiving adjuvant systemic therapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:3315-3319. (Pubitemid 40627881)
106. Cuzick J, Dowsett M, Pineda S, et al. Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the Genomic Health recurrence score in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:4273-4278.
107. Gianni L, Zambetti M, Clark K, et al. Gene expression profiles in paraffin-embedded core biopsy tissue predict response to chemotherapy in women with locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7265-7277. (Pubitemid 46202341)
108. Mook S, Van't Veer LJ, Rutgers EJ, et al. Individualization of therapy using MammaPrint: from development to the MINDACT Trial. Cancer Genomics Proteomics. 2007;4:147-155.
109. Paik S. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3726-3734. (Pubitemid 46622311)
110. Sparano JA. TAILORx: Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment (Rx). Clin Breast Cancer. 2006;7:347-350. (Pubitemid 44717771)
111. Straver ME. The 70-gene signature as a response predictor for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;119:551-558.
112. Wittner BS. Analysis of the MammaPrint breast cancer assay in a predominantly postmenopausal cohort. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:2988-2993.
113. Mook S, Schmidt MK, Viale G, et al. The 70-gene prognosis-signature predicts disease outcome in breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes in an independent validation study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;116:295-302.
114. Mook S, Schmidt MK, Weigelt B, et al. The 70-gene prognosis signature predicts early metastasis in breast cancer patients between 55 and 70 years of age. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:717-722.
115. Paik S, Kim CY, Song YK, et al. Technology insight: application of molecular techniques to formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues from breast cancer. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2005;2:246-254. (Pubitemid 40812455)
116. Allison KH, Kandalaft PL, Sitlani CM, et al. Routine pathologic parameters can predict Oncotype DX recurrence scores in subsets of ER positive patients: who does not always need testing? Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;131:413-424.
117. Barton S, Zabaglo L, A'Hern R, et al. Assessment of the contribution of the IHC4+C score to decision making in clinical practice in early breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2012;106:1760-1765.
118. Yamamoto-Ibusuki M, Yamamoto Y, Yamamoto S, et al. Comparison of prognostic values between combined immunohistochemical score of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, Ki-67 and the corresponding gene expression score in breast cancer [published online ahead of print August 24, 2012]. Mod Pathol.
119. Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5287-5312. (Pubitemid 350232263)
120. Flanagan MB, Dabbs DJ, Brufsky AM, et al. Histopathologic variables predict Oncotype DX recurrence score. Mod Pathol. 2008;21:1255-1261.
121. Kelly CM, Krishnamurthy S, Bianchini G, et al. Utility of oncotype DX risk estimates in clinically intermediate risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-normal, grade II, lymph node-negative breast cancers. Cancer. 2010;116:5161-5167.
122. Gwin K, Pinto M, Tavassoli FA. Complementary value of the Ki-67 proliferation index to the oncotype DX recurrence score. Int J Surg Pathol. 2009;17:303-310.
123. Masuda N, Ohnishi T, Kawamoto S, et al. Analysis of chemical modification of RNA from formalin-fixed samples and optimization of molecular biology applications for such samples. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999;27:4436-4443. (Pubitemid 29533185)
124. Vance GH, Barry TS, Bloom KJ, et al. Genetic heterogeneity in HER2 testing in breast cancer: panel summary and guidelines. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133:611-612.
125. Starczynski J, Atkey N, Connelly Y, et al. HER2 gene amplification in breast cancer: a rogues' gallery of challenging diagnostic cases: UKNEQAS interpretation guidelines and research recommendations. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;137:595-605.