Basal-like breast tumors occurred at a higher prevalence among premenopausal African American patients compared with postmenopausal African American and non-African American patients in this population-based study. A higher prevalence of basal-like breast tumors and a lower prevalence of luminal A tumors could contribute to the poor prognosis of young African American women with breast cancer.
Purpose: Expression profiling studies classified breast carcinomas into estrogen receptor (ER)؉/luminal, normal breast-like, HER2 overexpressing, and basal-like groups, with the latter two associated with poor outcomes. Currently, there exist clinical assays that identify ER؉/luminal and HER2-overexpressing tumors, and we sought to develop a clinical assay for breast basal-like tumors.Experimental Design: To identify an immunohistochemical profile for breast basal-like tumors, we collected a series of known basal-like tumors and tested them for protein patterns that are characteristic of this subtype. Next, we examined the significance of these protein patterns using tissue microarrays and evaluated the prognostic significance of these findings.Results: Using a panel of 21 basal-like tumors, which was determined using gene expression profiles, we saw that this subtype was typically immunohistochemically negative for estrogen receptor and HER2 but positive for basal cytokeratins, HER1, and/or c-KIT. Using breast carcinoma tissue microarrays representing 930 patients with 17.4-year mean follow-up, basal cytokeratin expression was associated with low disease-specific survival. HER1 expression was observed in 54% of cases positive for basal cytokeratins (versus 11% of negative cases) and was associated with poor survival independent of nodal status and size. c-KIT expression was more common in basal-like tumors than in other breast cancers but did not influence prognosis.Conclusions: A panel of four antibodies (ER, HER1, HER2, and cytokeratin 5/6) can accurately identify basallike tumors using standard available clinical tools and shows high specificity. These studies show that many basal-like tumors express HER1, which suggests candidate drugs for evaluation in these patients.
Background: Validation of a novel gene expression signature in independent data sets is a critical step in the development of a clinically useful test for cancer patient risk-stratification. However, validation is often unconvincing because the size of the test set is typically small. To overcome this problem we used publicly available breast cancer gene expression data sets and a novel approach
The prognostication of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is largely based upon the tumor size and location and the presence of lymph node metastases. Here we show that gene expression patterns from 60 HNSCC samples assayed on cDNA microarrays allowed categorization of these tumors into four distinct subtypes. These subtypes showed statistically significant differences in recurrence-free survival and included a subtype with a possible EGFR-pathway signature, a mesenchymal-enriched subtype, a normal epithelium-like subtype, and a subtype with high levels of antioxidant enzymes. Supervised analyses to predict lymph node metastasis status were approximately 80% accurate when tumor subsite and pathological node status were considered simultaneously. This work represents an important step toward the identification of clinically significant biomarkers for HNSCC.
BACKGROUND Older women with breast cancer are underrepresented in clinical trials, and data on the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy in such patients are scant. We tested for the noninferiority of capecitabine as compared with standard chemotherapy in women with breast cancer who were 65 years of age or older. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with stage I, II, IIIA, or IIIB breast cancer to standard chemotherapy (either cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil or cyclophosphamide plus doxorubicin) or capecitabine. Endocrine therapy was recommended after chemotherapy in patients with hormone-receptor–positive tumors. A Bayesian statistical design was used with a range in sample size from 600 to 1800 patients. The primary end point was relapse-free survival. RESULTS When the 600th patient was enrolled, the probability that, with longer follow-up, capecitabine therapy was highly likely to be inferior to standard chemotherapy met a prescribed level, and enrollment was discontinued. After an additional year of follow-up, the hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death in the capecitabine group was 2.09 (95% confidence interval, 1.38 to 3.17; P<0.001). Patients who were randomly assigned to capecitabine were twice as likely to have a relapse and almost twice as likely to die as patients who were randomly assigned to standard chemotherapy (P = 0.02). At 3 years, the rate of relapse-free survival was 68% in the capecitabine group versus 85% in the standard-chemotherapy group, and the overall survival rate was 86% versus 91%. Two patients in the capecitabine group died of treatment-related complications; as compared with patients receiving capecitabine, twice as many patients receiving standard chemotherapy had moderate-to-severe toxic effects (64% vs. 33%). CONCLUSIONS Standard adjuvant chemotherapy is superior to capecitabine in patients with early-stage breast cancer who are 65 years of age or older. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00024102.)
Purpose: Previous research identified differences in breast cancer-specific mortality across 4 intrinsic tumor subtypes: luminal A, luminal B, basal-like, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive/ estrogen receptor negative (HER2Experimental Design: We used immunohistochemical markers to subtype 1,149 invasive breast cancer patients (518 African American, 631 white) in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, a population-based study of women diagnosed with breast cancer. Vital status was determined through 2006 using the National Death Index, with median follow-up of 9 years.Results: Cancer subtypes luminal A, luminal B, basal-like, and HER2 þ /ER À were distributed as 64%, 11%, 11%, and 5% for whites, and 48%, 8%, 22%, and 7% for African Americans, respectively. Breast cancer mortality was higher for participants with HER2 þ /ER À and basal-like breast cancer compared with luminal A and B. African Americans had higher breast cancer-specific mortality than whites, but the effect of race was statistically significant only among women with luminal A breast cancer. However, when compared with the luminal A subtype within racial categories, mortality for participants with basal-like breast cancer was higher among whites (HR ¼ 2.0, 95% CI: 1.2-3.4) than African Americans (HR ¼ 1.5, 95% CI: 1.0-2.4), with the strongest effect seen in postmenopausal white women (HR ¼ 3.9, 95% CI: 1.5-10.0). Conclusions: Our results confirm the association of basal-like breast cancer with poor prognosis and suggest that basal-like breast cancer is not an inherently more aggressive disease in African American women compared with whites. Additional analyses are needed in populations with known treatment profiles to understand the role of tumor subtypes and race in breast cancer mortality, and in particular our finding that among women with luminal A breast cancer, African Americans have higher mortality than whites. Clin Cancer Res; 16(24); 6100-10. Ó2010 AACR.
The expression or amplification, or both, of HER2 by a breast cancer is associated with a benefit from the addition of paclitaxel after adjuvant treatment with doxorubicin (<60 mg per square meter) plus cyclophosphamide in node-positive breast cancer, regardless of estrogen-receptor status. Patients with HER2-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer may gain little benefit from the administration of paclitaxel after adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.