A simple and reproducible prognostic index in luminal ER-positive breast cancers

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 24, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 2292-2297

  Castellano, I ^a   Chiusa, L ^a   Vandone, A M ^b   Beatrice, S ^b   Goia, M ^a   Donadio, M ^b   Arisio, R ^b   Muscara F ^b   Durando, A ^b   Viale, G ^c   Cassoni, P ^a   Sapino, A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

^b CITTÀ DELLA SALUTE E DELLA SCIENZA HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

Author keywords

AR expression; Breast cancer; ER expression; Lymph nodal status; Prognostic index; Tumor size

Indexed keywords

ANDROGEN RECEPTOR; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR;

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER GRADING; CANCER HORMONE THERAPY; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; DISEASE SPECIFIC SURVIVAL; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR PROGNOSTIC INDEX; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INSTRUMENT VALIDATION; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NAMED INVENTORIES, QUESTIONNAIRES AND RATING SCALES; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; TUMOR VOLUME;

AR EXPRESSION; BREAST CANCER; ER EXPRESSION; LYMPH NODAL STATUS; PROGNOSTIC INDEX; TUMOR SIZE;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; RECEPTOR, ERBB-2; RECEPTORS, ANDROGEN; RECEPTORS, ESTROGEN; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 84883409415     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt183     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000; 406: 747-752.
2. Varga Z, Diebold J, Dommann-Scherrer C et al. How reliable is Ki-67 immunohistochemistry in grade 2 breast carcinomas? A QA Study of the Swiss Working Group of Breast- and Gynecopathologists. PLoSOne 2012; 7: e37379.
3. Longacre TA, Ennis M, Quenneville LA et al. Interobserver agreement and reproducibility in classification of invasive breast carcinoma: an NCI breast cancer family registry study. Mod Pathol 2006; 19: 195-207.
4. Dalton LW, Page DL, Dupont WD. Histologic grading of breast carcinoma. A reproducibility study. Cancer 1994; 73: 2765-2770.
5. Tsuda H, Kurosumi M, Umemura S et al. HER2 testing on core needle biopsy specimens from primary breast cancers: interobserver reproducibility and concordance with surgically resected specimens. BMC Cancer 2010; 10: 534.
6. Haybittle JL, Blamey RW, Elston CW et al. A prognostic index in primary breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1982; 45: 361-366.
7. Galea MH, Blamey RW, Elston CE et al. The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1992; 22: 207-219.
8. Blamey RW, Ellis IO, Pinder SE et al. Survival of invasive breast cancer according to the Nottingham Prognostic Index in cases diagnosed in 1990-1999. Eur J Cancer 2007; 43: 1548-1555.
9. Lee AH, Ellis IO. The Nottingham prognostic index for invasive carcinoma of the breast. Pathol Oncol Res 2008; 14: 113-115.
10. Ravdin PM, SiminoffLA, Davis GJ et al. Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 980-991.
11. Hajage D, de Rycke Y, Bollet M et al. External validation of Adjuvant! Online breast cancer prognosis tool. Prioritising recommendations for improvement. PLoS One 2011; 6: e27446.
12. Castellano I, Allia E, Accortanzo V et al. Androgen receptor expression is a significant prognostic factor in estrogen receptor positive breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010; 124: 607-617.
13. Hickey TE, Robinson JL, Carroll JS et al. Minireview: the androgen receptor in breast tissues: growth inhibitor, tumor suppressor, oncogene? Mol Endocrinol 2012; 26: 1252-1267.
14. Sapino A, Marchiò C, Senetta R et al. Routine assessment of prognostic factors in breast cancer using a multicore tissue microarray procedure. Virchows Arch 2006; 449: 288-296.
15. Fisher B, Slack NH, Bross ID. Cancer of the breast: size of neoplasm and prognosis. Cancer 1969; 24: 1071-1080.
16. Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 1989; 63: 181-187.
17. Arisio R, Sapino A, Cassoni P et al. What modifies the relation between tumour size and lymph node metastases in T1 breast carcinomas? J Clin Pathol 2000; 53: 846-850.
18. O'Reilly SM, Camplejohn RS, Barnes DM et al. Node-negative breast cancer: prognostic subgroups defined by tumor size and flow cytometry. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 2040-2046.
19. Duffy SW, Tabar L, Vitak B et al. Tumor size and breast cancer detection: what might be the effect of a less sensitive screening tool than mammography? Breast J 2006; 12(Suppl 1): S91-S95.
20. Verschraegen C, Vinh-Hung V, Cserni G et al. Modeling the effect of tumor size in early breast cancer. Ann Surg 2005; 241: 309-318.
21. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS et al. Strategies for subtypes-dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 1736-1747.
22. Peters AA, Buchanan G, Ricciardelli C et al. Androgen receptor inhibits estrogen receptor-alpha activity and is prognostic in breast cancer. Cancer Res 2009; 69: 6131-6140.
23. Park S, Koo JS, Kim MS et al. Androgen receptor expression is significantly associated with better outcomes in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 1755-1762.
24. Hu R, Dawood S, Holmes MD et al. Androgen receptor expression and breast cancer survival in postmenopausal women. Clin Cancer Res 2011; 17: 1867-1874.
25. Cianfrocca M, Goldstein LJ. Prognostic and predictive factors in early-stage breast cancer. Oncologist 2004; 9: 606-616.
26. Warwick J, Tabàr L, Vitak B et al Time-dependent effects on survival in breast carcinoma: results of 20 years of follow-up from the Swedish Two-County Study. Cancer 2004; 1007: 1331-1336.
27. Donegan WL. Tumor-related prognostic factors for breast cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 1997; 47: 28-51.
28. Chagpar AB, Camp RL, Rimm DL. Lymph node ratio should be considered for incorporation into staging for breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2011; 18: 3143-3148.
29. Danko ME, Bennett KM, Zhai J et al. Improved staging in node-positive breast cancer patients using lymph node ratio: results in 1,788 patients with long-term follow-up. J Am Coll Surg 2010; 210: 797-807.
30. Fisher ER, Anderson S, Redmond C et al. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project Protocol B-06: 10-year pathologic and clinical prognostic discriminants. Cancer 1993; 71: 2507-2514.
31. Heimann R, Hellman SJ. Clinical progression of breast cancer malignant behavior: what to expect and when to expect it. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 591-599.
32. Yerushalmi R, Woods R, Ravdin PM et al. Ki67 in breast cancer: prognostic and predictive potential. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 174-183.
33. Fasching PA, Heusinger K, Haeberle L et al. Ki67, chemotherapy response, and prognosis in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment. BMC Cancer 2011; 11: 486.