Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situand invasive breast cancer
Open Access
- 5 August 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in Breast Cancer Research
- Vol. 10 (4) , R67
- https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2128
Abstract
Introduction: At least four major categories of invasive breast cancer that are associated with different clinical outcomes have been identified by gene expression profiling: luminal A, luminal B, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and basal-like. However, the prevalence of these phenotypes among cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has not been previously evaluated in detail. The purpose of this study was to compare the prevalence of these distinct molecular subtypes among cases of DCIS and invasive breast cancer. Methods: We constructed tissue microarrays (TMAs) from breast cancers that developed in 2897 women enrolled in the Nurses' Health Study (1976 to 1996). TMA slides were immunostained for oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), HER2, cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Using these immunostain results, cases were grouped into molecularly defined subtypes. Results: The prevalence of the distinct molecular phenotypes differed significantly between DCIS (n = 272) and invasive breast cancers (n = 2249). The luminal A phenotype was significantly more frequent among invasive cancers (73.4%) than among DCIS lesions (62.5%) (p = 0.0002). In contrast, luminal B and HER2 molecular phenotypes were both more frequent among DCIS (13.2% and 13.6%, respectively) as compared with invasive tumours (5.2% and 5.7%, respectively) (p < 0.0001). The basal-like phenotype was more frequent among the invasive cancers (10.9%) than DCIS (7.7%), although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.15). High-grade DCIS and invasive tumours were more likely to be HER2 type and basal-like than low- or intermediate-grade lesions. Among invasive tumours, basal-like and HER2 type tumours were more likely to be more than 2 cm in size, high-grade and have nodal involvement compared with luminal A tumours. Conclusion: The major molecular phenotypes previously identified among invasive breast cancers were also identified among cases of DCIS. However, the prevalence of the luminal A, luminal B and HER2 phenotypes differed significantly between DCIS and invasive breast cancers.This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- Basal-Like Breast Cancer Defined by Five Biomarkers Has Superior Prognostic Value than Triple-Negative PhenotypeClinical Cancer Research, 2008
- Abrogated Response to Cellular Stress Identifies DCIS Associated with Subsequent Tumor Events and Defines Basal-like Breast TumorsCancer Cell, 2007
- Epidemiology of basal-like breast cancerBreast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2007
- Differences in Risk Factors for Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes in a Population-Based StudyCancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 2007
- Race, Breast Cancer Subtypes, and Survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer StudyJAMA, 2006
- Molecular Classification and Molecular Forecasting of Breast Cancer: Ready for Clinical Application?Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2005
- High‐throughput protein expression analysis using tissue microarray technology of a large well‐characterised series identifies biologically distinct classes of breast cancer confirming recent cDNA expression analysesInternational Journal of Cancer, 2005
- Expression of luminal and basal cytokeratins in human breast carcinomaThe Journal of Pathology, 2004
- Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data setsProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2003
- Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implicationsProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2001