Histopathological Patterns and Outcomes of Triple-Positive Versus Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Study at a Tertiary Cancer Center

被引:0
|
作者
Kadi, Mai S. [1 ]
Alhebshi, Alhasan H. [2 ]
Shabkah, Alaa A. [2 ]
Alzahrani, Walaa A. [3 ]
Enani, Ghada N. [4 ]
Samkari, Ali A. [4 ]
Iskanderani, Omar [5 ]
Saleem, Abdulaziz M. [4 ]
Farsi, Ali H.
Trabulsi, Nora H. [4 ]
机构
[1] King Abdulaziz Univ, Fac Med, Dept Community Med, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
[2] Int Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
[3] King Faisal Specialist Hosp & Res Ctr, Dept Pediat, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
[4] King Abdulaziz Univ, Fac Med, Dept Surg, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
[5] King Abdulaziz Univ, Fac Med, Dept Radiol, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
关键词
progression-free survival; overall survival (os); triple-negative breast carcinoma; breast cancer outcomes; breast cancer research; LYMPHOVASCULAR INVASION; SURVIVAL; WOMEN;
D O I
10.7759/cureus.42389
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background One of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths in females under 45 years old is breast cancer (BC). The definition of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the lack of expression of estrogen receptors (ERs) as well as progesterone receptors (PRs) and Erb-B2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (HER2) gene amplification. Triple-positive breast cancer (TPBC), on the other hand, is defined as tumors expressing a high level of ER, PR, and HER2 receptors. This study aims to assess the phenotypes of TNBC and TPBC by comparing their individual clinical behavior patterns and prognosis throughout the course of the disease in a tertiary cancer center in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). MethodsOur study is a retrospective study using electronic medical records (EMRs) to identify all female patients diagnosed with BC using the International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) codes (between C50 and C50.9). About 1209 cases with primary BC female patients were recognized based on histopathology reports. Further subclassification into TPBC and TNBC was performed. Statistical analysis was performed using Rv3.6.2 (R Studio, version 3.5.2, Boston, MA, USA). The descriptive data were presented as means and standard deviations (SD). Survival curves were approximated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The comparison between survival curves between both groups was achieved using the log-rank test. The multivariate model was constructed based on the identified predictors using univariate analysis. ResultsUnivariate analysis of overall survival (OS) showed that mortality was higher in TNBC compared to TPBC (HR = 2.82, P-value <0.05). However, in a multivariate analysis, molecular subtypes did not show a significant effect on OS with a P-value of 0.94. We found that age at diagnosis has been associated with a 4% increase in mortality risk with a yearly rise in age. ConclusionIn this limited retrospective cohort study, we found that TNBC may not be associated with a higher risk of death than TPBC. However, other factors, including age at diagnosis, surgical intervention, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI), have been observed to increase the risk of mortality. On the other hand, patients with TNBC were found to have a worse prognosis in terms of local recurrence. This information cannot be generalized to all patients with BC given the limitations of this study. Further, larger cohorts are needed to explore biological and treatment-related outcomes in patients with TNBC and TPBC.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] A study of triple negative breast cancer at a tertiary cancer care center in southern India
    Lakshmaiah, K. C.
    Das, U.
    Suresh, T. M.
    Lokanatha, D.
    Babu, G. K.
    Jacob, L. A.
    Babu, S.
    ANNALS OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES RESEARCH, 2014, 4 (06) : 933 - 937
  • [32] Cathepsin D inhibitors as potential therapeutics for breast cancer treatment: Molecular docking and bioevaluation against triple-negative and triple-positive breast cancers
    Anantaraju, Hasitha Shilpa
    Battu, Madhu Babu
    Viswanadha, Srikant
    Sriram, Dharmarajan
    Yogeeswari, Perumal
    MOLECULAR DIVERSITY, 2016, 20 (02) : 521 - 535
  • [33] Cathepsin D inhibitors as potential therapeutics for breast cancer treatment: Molecular docking and bioevaluation against triple-negative and triple-positive breast cancers
    Hasitha Shilpa Anantaraju
    Madhu Babu Battu
    Srikant Viswanadha
    Dharmarajan Sriram
    Perumal Yogeeswari
    Molecular Diversity, 2016, 20 : 521 - 535
  • [34] Outcomes of Metaplastic Breast Cancer Versus Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis
    Tan, Yuping
    Yang, Biao
    Chen, Yuhong
    Yan, Xi
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2023, 47 (12) : 3192 - 3202
  • [35] Outcomes of Metaplastic Breast Cancer Versus Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis
    YuPing Tan
    Biao Yang
    YuHong Chen
    Xi Yan
    World Journal of Surgery, 2023, 47 : 3192 - 3202
  • [36] Triple Negative Breast Cancer - Experience of a Single Tertiary Center
    Allameddine, R.
    Shamseddine, A.
    Mukherji, D.
    Elias, E.
    Faraj, W.
    Hattoum, H.
    Saleh, A.
    El Saghir, N. S.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2012, 48 : S54 - S54
  • [37] A study of triple-negative breast cancer at a cancer institute in India
    Prabu, M. P. Ram
    Raina, V.
    Shukla, N. K.
    Mohanti, B. K.
    Deo, S. V. S.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2011, 29 (15)
  • [38] Triple-negative and triple-positive breast cancer cells reciprocally control their growth and migration via the S100A4 pathway
    Dukhanina, Elena A.
    Portseva, Tatiana N.
    Dukhanin, Alexander S.
    Georgieva, Sofia G.
    CELL ADHESION & MIGRATION, 2022, 16 (01) : 65 - 71
  • [39] Prognostic factors in triple-negative breast cancer: a retrospective cohort
    Assuncao Ribeiro da Costa, Rafael Everton
    Rocha de Oliveira, Fergus Tomas
    Nascimento Araujo, Ana Lucia
    Vieira, Sabas Carlos
    REVISTA DA ASSOCIACAO MEDICA BRASILEIRA, 2021, 67 (07): : 950 - 957
  • [40] A retrospective review of demographics and stage of triple-negative breast cancer
    Rana, F. N.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2009, 27 (15)