Molecular subtypes of screen-detected breast cancer

被引:20
|
作者
Farshid, Gelareh [1 ,2 ]
Walters, David [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Adelaide, Royal Adelaide Hosp, SA Pathol, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
[2] Univ Adelaide, Discipline Med, SA Pathol, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
[3] Univ Adelaide, Dept Surg, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
关键词
Breast cancer; HER2; Screening; Mammography; Molecular classification; INTERNATIONAL EXPERT CONSENSUS; HER2; AMPLIFICATION; PRIMARY THERAPY; SURVIVAL; MAMMOGRAPHY; EXPRESSION; CARCINOMA; COHORT;
D O I
10.1007/s10549-018-4899-3
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BackgroundDetection of breast cancers by mammographic screening confers a survival advantage of 20-50% compared to symptomatic presentations. The improved prognosis is only partly explained by stage migration. The distribution of the molecular subtypes of screen-detected breast cancer (SDBC) or their HER2 status has not been studied extensively. We wished to address these issues through the study of a large series of SDBC, with other presentations serving as controls.DesignDeidentified cases of female invasive cancer, diagnosed in Australia and New Zealand during 2005-2015, were retrieved from the BreastSurgANZ Quality Audit (BQA). Method of detection and selected patient, tumour and treatment data were assessed. Immunohistochemical surrogates for molecular subtypes were defined as Luminal A (ER+ and/or PR+, HER2-), Luminal B (ER+ and/or PR+, HER2+), HER2-enriched (ER-, PR- and HER2+) and basal-like (triple negative). Results were compared with the findings of controls and previous studies.Result100983 invasive cancers were diagnosed, including 32493 (32.7%) SDBC and 66907 (67.3%) with other presentations. The biomarker profile for SDBC versus other presentations in the same population was ER 89.3 versus 80.3%, PR 78.8 versus 69.8% and for HER2 11 versus 15.6%. The distribution of molecular subtypes was Luminal A 81.9 versus 70.74%, Luminal B 7.39 versus 9.52%, HER2-enriched 3.63 versus 6.06% and Basal-like 7.08 versus 13.68%. These differences were significant (p<0.0001).ConclusionMolecular profiles of SDBC are significantly different from those of symptomatic cancers, with over-representation of the Luminal A and proportionately lower rates of all other subtypes. We have shown, for the first time, significantly lower rates of HER2 positivity in SDBC. These differences may contribute to the better survival of SDBC and have implications for prognostication, targeted therapy decisions and for laboratory quality assurance programs in setting target ranges for proportions of ER-positive and HER2 results in heavily screened populations.
引用
收藏
页码:191 / 199
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Molecular subtypes of screen-detected breast cancer
    Gelareh Farshid
    David Walters
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2018, 172 : 191 - 199
  • [2] Comparison between screen-detected and symptomatic breast cancers according to molecular subtypes
    Jiyoung Kim
    SeKyung Lee
    SooYoun Bae
    Min-Young Choi
    Jeonghui Lee
    Seung Pil Jung
    Sangmin Kim
    Jun-Ho Choe
    Jung-Han Kim
    Jee Soo Kim
    Jeong Eon Lee
    Seok Jin Nam
    Jung-Hyun Yang
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2012, 131 : 527 - 540
  • [3] Overdiagnosis of screen-detected breast cancer
    Milch, Vivienne
    Aranda, Sanchia
    Canfell, Karen
    Varlow, Megan
    Roder, David M.
    Currow, David
    Anderiesz, Cleola
    Keefe, Dorothy
    MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 2021, 214 (10) : 455 - +
  • [4] Comparison between screen-detected and symptomatic breast cancers according to molecular subtypes
    Kim, Jiyoung
    Lee, SeKyung
    Bae, SooYoun
    Choi, Min-Young
    Lee, Jeonghui
    Jung, Seung Pil
    Kim, Sangmin
    Choe, Jun-Ho
    Kim, Jung-Han
    Kim, Jee Soo
    Lee, Jeong Eon
    Seok Jin Nam
    Yang, Jung-Hyun
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2012, 131 (02) : 527 - 540
  • [5] Stages of screen-detected breast cancer
    K Koufopoulos
    I Garas
    Ch Pateras
    E Ampatzoglou
    P Kakavoulis
    A Michas
    S Gravas
    V Sarrou
    D Tsitsimelis
    M Tsompanlioti
    N Papageorgiou
    K Kapridaki
    F De Waard
    Breast Cancer Research, 2 (Suppl 2)
  • [6] The Management of Screen-detected Breast Cancer
    Ahmed, Muneer
    Douek, Michael
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2014, 34 (03) : 1141 - 1146
  • [7] Comparison Between Screen-detected Invasive Breast Cancer and Symptomatic Breast Cancer According to Immunohistochemical Intrinsic Subtypes
    Kobayashi, N.
    Ushimado, K.
    Hikichi, M.
    Miyajima, S.
    Utsumi, T.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2012, 48 : S85 - S85
  • [8] Molecular comparison of interval and screen-detected breast cancers
    Cheasley, Dane
    Li, Na
    Rowley, Simone M.
    Elder, Kenneth
    Mann, G. Bruce
    Loi, Sherene
    Savas, Peter
    Goode, David L.
    Kader, Tanjina
    Zethoven, Magnus
    Semple, Tim
    Fox, Stephen B.
    Pang, Jia-Min
    Byrne, David
    Devereux, Lisa
    Nickson, Carolyn
    Procopio, Pietro
    Lee, Grant
    Hughes, Siobhan
    Saunders, Hugo
    Fujihara, Kenji M.
    Kuykhoven, Keilly
    Connaughton, Jacquie
    James, Paul A.
    Gorringe, Kylie L.
    Campbell, Ian G.
    JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY, 2019, 248 (02): : 243 - 252
  • [9] Diagnostic role of cytology in screen-detected breast cancer
    McKee, G
    Kissin, M
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1996, 83 (12) : 1797 - 1798
  • [10] Diagnostic role of cytology in screen-detected breast cancer
    Yiangou, C
    Davis, J
    Livni, N
    Barrett, NK
    Sinnett, HD
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1996, 83 (06) : 816 - 819