Histologic grade remains a prognostic factor for breast cancer regardless of the number of positive lymph nodes and tumor size: A study of 161 708 cases of breast cancer from the SEER program

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 138, Issue 8, 2014, Pages 1048-1052

  Schwartz, Arnold M ^a   Henson, Donald Earl ^b   Chen, Dechang ^c   Rajamarthandan, Sivasankari ^b  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^b GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIFORMED SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER GRADING; CANCER REGISTRY; CANCER STAGING; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAMMARY GLAND; PAGET NIPPLE DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; SURVIVAL; TUMOR VOLUME; UNITED STATES;

ALGORITHMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MAMMARY GLANDS, HUMAN; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; SEER PROGRAM; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TUMOR BURDEN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84907266302     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: 15432165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2013-0435-OA     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health. Surveillance Research Program, National Cancer Institute SEER Stat software version 8.0.2. http://seer.cancer.gov/seerstat. Accessed July 15, 2013.
2. Fritza A, Percy C, Jack A, et al. International Classification of Diseases for Oncology. 3rd ed. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2000: 80.
3. Henson DE, Ries L, Freedman L, Carriaga M. Relationship among outcome, stage of disease, and histologic grade for 22,616 cases of breast cancer. Cancer. 1991: 68(10): 2142-2149.
4. Chen D, Xing K, Henson D, Sheng l, Schwartz AM, Cheng X. Developing prognostic systems of cancer patients by ensemble clustering. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2009;2009: 632786. doi: 10.1155/2009/632786.
5. Greenough RB, Varying degrees of malignancy in cancer of the breast. J Cancer Res. 1925;9: 453-463.
6. Patey DH, Scarff RW. The position of histology in the prognosis of cancer of the breast. Lancet. 1928;1: 801-804.
7. Bloom HJG, Richardson WW. Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1957;11: 359-377.
8. Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer, I: the value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 1991;19(5): 403-410.
9. Gilchrist KW, Kalish L, Gould VE, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of histopathological features in stage II breast cancer: an ECOG study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1985;5(1): 3-10.
10. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A, eds. Cancer Staging Manual, American Joint Committee on Cancer. 7th ed. Geneva, Switzerland: Springer; 2010.
11. Field RW, Smith BJ, Platz CE, et al. Lung cancer histologic type in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Registry versus independent review. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(14): 1105-1107.
12. Chen LL, Nolan ME, Silverstein MJ, et al. The impact of primary tumor size, lymph node status, and other prognostic factors on the risk of cancer death. Cancer. 2009;115(21): 5071-5083.
13. Qi R, Wu D, Sheng L, et al. On an ensemble algorithm for clustering cancer patient data. BMC. In press.