Prevalence of molecular subtypes and prognosis of invasive breast cancer in north-east of Morocco: retrospective study

BMC Research Notes

Afaf Amarti²  Omar El Mesbahi¹  Khalid Amrani Joutei³  Kaoutar Znati²  Yousra Akasbi¹  Fouad Abbass³  Sanae Bennis² 

[1]Medical Oncology unit, Hassan II University Hospital, Fez, Morocco

[2]Department of Pathology, Hassan II University Hospital, Fez, Morocco

[3]Faculty of Sciences and Technology, Fez, Morocco

关键词: Disease free Survival (DFS);    Overall survival (OS);    Prognosis;    Molecular subtypes;    Breast cancer;   

Others  :  1165943
DOI  :  10.1186/1756-0500-5-436

 received in 2012-04-20, accepted in 2012-08-02,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Breast carcinoma is known as a heterogeneous disease because gene expression analyses identify several subtypes and the molecular profiles are prognostic and predictive for patients. Our aim, in this study, is to estimate the prevalence of breast cancer subtypes and to determine the relationship between clinico-pathological characteristics, overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) for patients coming from north-east of Morocco.

Methods

We reviewed 366 cases of breast cancer diagnosed between January 2007 to June 2010 at the Department of pathology. Age, size tumor, metastatic profile, node involvement profile, OS and DFS were analyzed on 181 patients. These last parameters were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test to estimate outcome differences among subgroups.

Results

The average age was 45 years, our patients were diagnosed late (57% stage III, 17.5% stage IV) with a high average tumor size. Luminal A subtype was more prevalent (53.6%) associated with favorable clinic-pathological characteristics, followed by luminal B (16.4%), Her2-overexpressing (12.6%), basal-like (12.6%) and unclassified subtype (4.9%).

Survival analysis showed a significant difference between subtypes. The triple negative tumors were associated with poor prognosis (49% OS, 39% DFS), whereas the luminal A were associated with a better prognosis (88% OS, 59% DFS). The luminal B and the Her2-overexpressing subtypes were associated with an intermediate prognosis (77% and 75% OS, and 41% and 38% DFS respectively).

Conclusion

This study showed that molecular classification by immunohistochemistry was necessary for therapeutic decision and prognosis of breast carcinoma. The luminal A subtype was associated with favorable biological characteristics and a better prognosis than triple negative tumors that were associated with a poor prognosis and unfavorable clinic-pathological characteristics.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Bennis et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1 .

【 参考文献 】

• [1]World Health Organization: Cancer. Fact Sheet No. 297. 2006. Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs297/en/index.html, webcite (accessed 2 August 2007)
• [2]Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, et al.: Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000, 406:747-752.
• [3]Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al.: Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001, 98:10869-10874.
• [4]Sorlie T: Molecular portraits of breast cancer: tumour subtypes as distinct disease entities. Eur J Cancer 2004, 40:2667-2675.
• [5]Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, et al.: Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. Jama 2006, 295:2492-2502.
• [6]Bhargava R, Striebel J, Beriwal S, et al.: Prevalence, Morphologic Features and Proliferation Indices of Breast Carcinoma Molecular Classes Using Immunohistochemical Surrogate Markers. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2009, 2:444-455.
• [7]Tang P, Wang J, Bourne P: Molecular classifications of breast carcinoma with similar terminology and different definitions: are they the same? Hum Pathol 2008, 39:506-513.
• [8]Wolff AC, Elizabeth M, Hammond H, et al.: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Recommendations for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:118-145.
• [9]Merrill RM, Capocaccia R, Feuer EJ, Mariotto A: Cancer prevalence estimates based on tumour registry data in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. Int J Epidemiol 2000, 29:197-207.
• [10]Allred DC, Harvey JM, Berardo M, et al.: Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis. Mod Pathol 1998, 11:155-168.
• [11]Ross JS, Fletcher JA, Bloom KJ, et al.: Targeted therapy in breast cancer. Mol & Cell Proteomics 2004, 3:379-398.
• [12]Junichi K, Takoya M, Takanori I, et al.: The prevalence of intrinsic subtypes and prognosis in breast cancer patients of different races [abstract]. Breast 2007, 16(Suppl 2):S72-S77.
• [13]Calza S, Hall P, Auer G, et al.: Intrinsic molecular signature of breast cancer in a population-based cohort of 412 patients. Breast Cancer Res 2006, 8(suppl 4):R34.
• [14]Jumppanen M, Gruvberger-Saal S, Kauraniemi P, et al.: Basal-like phenotype is not associated with patient survival in estrogen-receptor-negative breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res 2007, 9(suppl 1):R16.
• [15]Fulford LG, Reis-Filho JS, Ryder K, et al.: Basal-like grade III invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: patterns of metastasis and long-term survival. Breast Cancer Res 2007, 9(suppl 1):R4.
• [16]Bauer KR, Brown M, Cress RD, et al.: Descriptive analysis of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, and HER2- negative invasive breast cancer, the so-called triplenegative phenotype. A population-based study from the California Cancer Registry. Cancer 2007, 109:1721-1728.
• [17]Dawson SJ, Provenzano E, Caldas C: Triple negative breast cancers: Clinical and prognostic implications. Eur J Cancer 2009, 45(Suppl 1):27-40.
• [18]Fadare O, Tavassoli FA: The phenotypic spectrum of basal-like breast cancers: a critical appraisal. Adv Anat Pathol 2007, 14(Suppl 5):358-373.
• [19]Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Green AR, et al.: Prognostic markers in triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer 2007, 109(Suppl 1):25-32.
• [20]Tischkowitz M, Brunet JS, Begin LR, et al.: Use of immunohistochemical markers can refine prognosis in triple negative breast cancer. BMC Cancer 2007, 7:134. BioMed Central Full Text
• [21]Fulford LG, Easton DF, Reis-Fiho JS, et al.: Specific morphological features predictive for the basal phenotype in grade 3 invasive ductal carcinoma of breast. Histopathology 2006, 49:22-34.
• [22]Siziopikou KP, Cobleigh M: The basal subtype of breast carcinomas may represent the group of breast tumors that could benefit from EGFR-targeted therapies. Breast 2007, 16:104-107.
• [23]Goldestein S, Decker D, Severson D, et al.: Molecular classification system identifies invasive breast carcinoma patients who are most likely and those who are least likely to achieve a complete pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer 2007, 110:1687-1696.
• [24]Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L, et al.: The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res 2007, 13:2329-2334.
• [25]Tang P, Skinner KA, Hicks DG: Molecular Classification of Breast Carcinomas by Immunohistochemical Analysis. Diagn Mol Pathol 2009, 18:125-132.