Clinicopathological Characteristics and Breast Cancer–Specific Survival of Patients With Single Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer

Li, Yunhai; Yang, Dejuan; Yin, Xuedong; Zhang, Xiang; Huang, Jiefeng; Wu, Yu‐Sheng; Wang, Mengxue; Yi, Zhiying; Li, Hongyuan; Li, Hongzhong; Ren, Guo Sheng

doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.18160

Cited by 91 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The logical and attractive rationale notwithstanding, however, PgR assays have not had a transformative effect on the predictive value of an ER-positive result, particular in advanced disease. In fact, the value of PgR measurements remains an area of active disagreement in recommendations for best clinical practice in breast cancer [ 164 , 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 ].…”

Section: Considerations For How Pet Imaging Of Steroid Receptors Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

PET Imaging Agents (FES, FFNP, and FDHT) for Estrogen, Androgen, and Progesterone Receptors to Improve Management of Breast and Prostate Cancers by Functional Imaging

Katzenellenbogen

2020

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many breast and prostate cancers are driven by the action of steroid hormones on their cognate receptors in primary tumors and in metastases, and endocrine therapies that inhibit hormone production or block the action of these receptors provide clinical benefit to many but not all of these cancer patients. Because it is difficult to predict which individuals will be helped by endocrine therapies and which will not, positron emission tomography (PET) imaging of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) in breast cancer, and androgen receptor (AR) in prostate cancer can provide useful, often functional, information on the likelihood of endocrine therapy response in individual patients. This review covers our development of three PET imaging agents, 16α-[18F]fluoroestradiol (FES) for ER, 21-[18F]fluoro-furanyl-nor-progesterone (FFNP) for PgR, and 16β-[18F]fluoro-5α-dihydrotestosterone (FDHT) for AR, and the evolution of their clinical use. For these agents, the pathway from concept through development tracks with an emerging understanding of critical performance criteria that is needed for successful PET imaging of these low-abundance receptor targets. Progress in the ongoing evaluation of what they can add to the clinical management of breast and prostate cancers reflects our increased understanding of these diseases and of optimal strategies for predicting the success of clinical endocrine therapies.

show abstract

Section: Considerations For How Pet Imaging Of Steroid Receptors Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

PET Imaging Agents (FES, FFNP, and FDHT) for Estrogen, Androgen, and Progesterone Receptors to Improve Management of Breast and Prostate Cancers by Functional Imaging

Katzenellenbogen

2020

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It turns out that the same mix can account for many of the differences in eTable 1. 1 One exception is age at diagnosis, which was shown to be significantly lower among patients with ER-negative/PR-positive tumors compared with patients with all other hormone receptor subgroups.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Other evidence from the study by Li et al1 comes from the difference in tumor characteristics. If the pathologists misclassified ER status when they assigned an ER-negative/PR-positive subtype to a patient with ER-positive/PR-positive subtype, then the patients with ER-negative/PR-positive subtype should resemble the ER-positive/PR-positive subtype in terms of clinical outcomes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Single Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer—Signal or Noise?

Giannakeas

2020

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Canonical predictors for the prognosis of breast cancer include estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and ERBB2 (formerly HER2) receptor. In most cases, positive ER status is auspicious, but there are exceptions (young women, black women, and BRCA2 mutation carriers). The simplest designation, hormone receptor-positive cancers, includes tumors that express ER and/or PR (hormone receptor-negative cancers express neither). A complementary classification scheme

show abstract

“…ER+ breast cancers are well‐differentiated and less aggressive relative to ER− breast cancers. Coexpression of both ER and PR receptors carries a better prognosis when compared with ER+/PR− or ER−/PR+ cases 2 . HER2+ carcinomas, cancers comprising about 25% of all breast cancer cases, feature the most aggressive phenotype among invasive breast cancer 3 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Coexpression of both ER and PR receptors carries a better prognosis when compared with ER+/PR− or ER−/PR+ cases. 2…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Breast cancer stem cells: A review of their characteristics and the agents that affect them

Shan

Shin

Yang

et al. 2021

Molecular Carcinogenesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evolving concept that cancer stem cells (CSCs) are the driving element in cancer development, evolution and heterogeneity, has overridden the previous model of a tumor consisting of cells all with similar sequentially acquired mutations and a similar potential for renewal, invasion and metastasis. This paradigm shift has focused attention on therapeutically targeting CSCs directly as a means of eradicating the disease. In breast cancers, CSCs can be identified by cell surface markers and are characterized by their ability to self-renew and differentiate, resist chemotherapy and radiation, and initiate new tumors upon serial transplantation in xenografted mice. These functional properties of CSCs are regulated by both intracellular and extracellular factors including pluripotency-related transcription factors, intracellular signaling pathways and external stimuli. Several classes of natural products and synthesized compounds have been studied to target these regulatory elements and force CSCs to lose stemness and/or terminally differentiate and thereby achieve a therapeutic effect. However, realization of an effective treatment for breast cancers, focused on the biological effects of these agents on breast CSCs, their functions and signaling, has not yet been achieved. In this review, we delineate the intrinsic and extrinsic factors identified to date that control or promote stemness in breast CSCs and provide a comprehensive compilation of potential agents that have been studied to target breast CSCs, transcription factors and stemness-related signaling. Our aim is to stimulate further study of these agents that could become the basis for their use as standalone treatments or components of combination therapies effective against breast cancers.

show abstract

Clinicopathological Characteristics and Breast Cancer–Specific Survival of Patients With Single Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer

Cited by 91 publications

References 34 publications

PET Imaging Agents (FES, FFNP, and FDHT) for Estrogen, Androgen, and Progesterone Receptors to Improve Management of Breast and Prostate Cancers by Functional Imaging

PET Imaging Agents (FES, FFNP, and FDHT) for Estrogen, Androgen, and Progesterone Receptors to Improve Management of Breast and Prostate Cancers by Functional Imaging

Single Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer—Signal or Noise?

Breast cancer stem cells: A review of their characteristics and the agents that affect them

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About