Intrinsic Molecular Subtyping of Breast Cancer in Low Resource Setting
Asian Oncology Research Journal,
Page 1-9
Abstract
Background: Immunohistochemistry is an invaluable technique used clinically in the characterisation of breast cancer in various intrinsic subtypes. Such characterisation into the intrinsic subtypes is of great prognostic value in the management of breast cancer.
Methodology: Two hundred and seventy-six cases of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue blocks were selected from 2012 – 2016 cases from Korle Bu Teaching Hospital (KBTH). The hormonal markers Estrogen Receptor (ER), Progesterone Receptor (PR), HER 2 and Ki67 were determined for cases using a semi-automated immunohistochemical method with commercially prepared antibodies from BioSB.
Results: The commonest intrinsic molecular subtype is luminal type A (42.2%), luminal B (12.3%), Her 2+ (10.5) and TNBC (35.0%). There is a significant association between tumour size and all the intrinsic subtypes (P < 0.05). The luminal type A and B were associated with size <5cm while TNBC was associated with size ≥5cm. Ki67 was unfavourable for 65.5% of the cases with 21.8% favourable and 12.7% being borderline. The various subtypes are significantly associated with vascular invasion.
Discussion and Conclusion: This study has shown that a greater percentage of breast cancer among Ghanaian patients are hormonal positive and should have done well on hormonal treatment but did not because of the late presentation and tumour characteristics. The study confirmed previous results of the higher incidence of TNBC in African women as compared to other ethnic groups.
Keywords:
- Immunohistochemistry
- intrinsic molecular subtyping (IMS)
- breast cancer
How to Cite
References
Liu ZF. et al. [Clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of different molecular types of breast cancer]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi, 2016;96(22):1733-7.
Su Y. et al. Distinct distribution and prognostic significance of molecular subtypes of breast cancer in Chinese women: a population-based cohort study. BMC Cancer. 2011;11:292.
Ferrari N. et al. Expression of RUNX1 correlates with poor patient prognosis in triple-negative breast cancer. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e100759.
Park HS. et al. High EGFR gene copy number predicts poor outcome in triple-negative breast cancer. Mod Pathol. 2014;27(9):1212-22.
Li CY. et al. [Clinicopathological features and prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2013;35(6):463-7.
Phipps AI. et al. Reproductive history and oral contraceptive use in relation to risk of triple-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(6):470-7.
Galukande M. et al., Molecular breast cancer subtypes prevalence in an indigenous Sub Saharan African population. Pan Afr Med J. 2014;17: 249.
Foulkes WD, Smith IE, Reis-Filho JS. Triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med, 2010;363(20):1938-48.
Carey LA. et al. Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA. 2006; 295(21):2492-502.
Dent R. et al., Pattern of metastatic spread in triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;115(2):423-8.
McCormack VA. et al., Breast cancer receptor status and stage at diagnosis in over 1,200 consecutive public hospital patients in Soweto, South Africa: a case series. Breast Cancer Res. 2013;15(5): R84.
Dean SJ, Rhodes A. Triple-negative breast cancer: the role of metabolic pathways. Malays J Pathol. 2014;36(3): 155-62.
Rakha EA et al. Biologic and clinical characteristics of breast cancer with single hormone receptor-positive phenotype. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(30):4772-8.
Dent R. et al., Triple-negative breast cancer: clinical features and patterns of recurrence. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(15 Pt 1):4429-34.
Reddy GM, Suresh PK, Pai RR. Clinicopathological Features of Triple-Negative Breast Carcinoma. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(1):Ec05-ec08.
Ismail-Khan R, Bui MM. A review of triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Control. 2010;17(3): 173-6.
Chacon RD, Costanzo MV. Triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2010;12 Suppl 2: S3.
De Ruijter TC. et al. Characteristics of triple-negative breast cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2011;137(2):183-92.
Matt L, et al. The Tri-State Experience. Outcome Analysis of Patients with Triple Negative Breast Cancer Treated at Marshall University. W V Med J. 2015;111(5): 30-4.
Otvos L, Jr., Surmacz E. Targeting the leptin receptor: a potential new mode of treatment for breast cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2011; 11(8):1147- 50.
Steward L, et al. Predictive factors and patterns of recurrence in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(7):2165-71.
Sun H, et al. Anti-angiogenic treatment promotes triple-negative breast cancer invasion via vasculogenic mimicry. Cancer Biol Ther. 2017;18(4):205-213.
Shih Ie M, Wang TL. Notch signalling, gamma-secretase inhibitors, and cancer therapy. Cancer Res. 2007;67(5):1879- 82.
King TD, Suto MJ, Li Y. The Wnt/beta-catenin signalling pathway: a potential therapeutic target in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer. J Cell Biochem, 2012;113(1):13-8.
Merchant AA, Matsui W. Targeting Hedgehog--a cancer stem cell pathway. Clin Cancer Res, 2010;16(12): 3130-40.
Ueno NT, Zhang D. Targeting EGFR in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. J Cancer. 2011;2:324-8.
Tutt A. et al, Oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and advanced breast cancer: a proof-of-concept trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9737): 235-44.
Jamdade VS. et al. Therapeutic targets of triple-negative breast cancer: a review. Br J Pharmacol. 2015;172(17): 4228-37.
Bhola NE, et al. TGF-beta inhibition enhances chemotherapy action against triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Invest. 2013;123(3):1348-58.
-
Abstract View: 36 times
PDF Download: 127 times
