Breast Cancer Tissue Markers, Genomic Profiling, and Other Prognostic Factors: A Primer for Radiologists

Abstract

An understanding of prognostic factors in breast cancer is imperative for guiding patient care. Increased tumor size and more advanced nodal status are established independent prognostic factors of poor outcomes and are incorporated into the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM (primary tumor, regional lymph node, distant metastasis) staging system. However, other factors including imaging findings, histologic evaluation results, and molecular findings can have a direct effect on a patient's prognosis, including risk of recurrence and relative survival. Several microarray panels for gene profiling of tumors are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and endorsed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology. This article highlights prognostic factors currently in use for individualizing and guiding breast cancer therapy and is divided into four sections. The first section addresses patient considerations, in which modifiable and nonmodifiable prognostic factors including age, race and ethnicity, and lifestyle factors are discussed. The second part is focused on imaging considerations such as multicentric and/or multifocal disease, an extensive intraductal component, and skin or chest wall involvement and their effect on treatment and prognosis. The third section is about histopathologic findings such as the grade and presence of lymphovascular invasion. Last, tumor biomarkers and tumor biology are discussed, namely hormone receptors, proliferative markers, and categorization of tumors into four recognized molecular subtypes including luminal A, luminal B, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-enriched, and triple-negative tumors. By understanding the clinical effect of these prognostic factors, radiologists, along with a multidisciplinary team, can use these tools to achieve individualized patient care and to improve patient outcomes. ©

Development and Validation of a Prognostic Nomogram to Predict Cancer-Specific Survival in Adult Patients With Pineoblastoma

“…In addition, Huang et al (36) demonstrated that the risks of recurrence and death gradually increased when tumor size increased. By contrast, some studies suggested that smaller tumor size is associated with poor survival (37,38). Consistent with those, the results of this study showed that a larger tumor size was an independent prognostic factor of good outcomes (HR = 0.96, P < 0.01), which revealed that for every 1 mm increase in tumor size, the risk of death is reduced by 4%.…”

The Association Between Ultrasound Features and Biological Properties of Invasive Breast Carcinoma Is Modified by Age, Tumor Size, and the Preoperative Axilla Status

“…In addition, not all cases of IBC show the typical US features indicated for certain biological characteristics, and variations may occur depending on the patient's individual characteristics. In the literature, it was reported that the tumor size, patient age, and nodal status were significantly associated with the biological characteristics of tumors . For instance, a tumor size larger than 2 cm was more common in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 and triple‐negative subtypes of IBC; patients younger than 50 years showed more hormone receptor–negative cancers compared with older patients; and nodal metastases were more frequent in patients with the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 subtype .…”

Overview of Breast Cancer and Implications of Overtreatment of Early-Stage Breast Cancer: An Indian Perspective

“…The status of a patient with respect to these prognostic markers is intended to guide clinical decision making about initiating adjuvant chemotherapy and/or endocrine therapy after initial treatment of the breast cancer, depending on the risk of distant recurrence of the cancer. 61 , 62 In the United States, Oncotype DX is the most widely used among these breast cancer assays, followed by MammaPrint. 63 Other prognostic markers discussed in the literature include MapQuant Dx, 64 the Theros breast cancer index, 65 the Rotterdam signature, 66 and the Invasiveness gene signature.…”