Does triple-negative phenotype accurately identify basal-like tumour? An immunohistochemical analysis based on 143 ‘triple-negative’ breast cancers

Bidard, François-Clément; Conforti, Rosa; Boulet, Thomas; Michiels, Stefan; Delaloge, S; André, Fabrice

doi:10.1093/annonc/mdm360

Cited by 74 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there are several lines of evidence that triple negative phenotype is not an ideal surrogate for the identification of basal-like breast cancers. In fact, there are several lines of evidence that both BLC and triplenegative are not exactly the same [58,[81][82][83]. In two expression profiling studies where the expression of hormone receptors were analysed in tumours classified according to the 'intrinsic gene list', ER expression was seen in 5-45% of BLCs.…”

Section: Blc and Triple-negative Breast Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Patho-biological aspects of basal-like breast cancer

Rakha

El-Sayed

Reis‐Filho³

et al. 2008

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast cancer comprises a remarkably diverse group of diseases in terms of presentation, morphology, molecular profile and response to therapy. Recent gene expression profiling of breast cancer has identified specific molecular subtypes of clinical significance. Basal-like cancers (BLC) comprise a group of tumours that are characterised by an expression signature similar to that of the basal/myoepithelial cells of the breast and cluster together with BRCA1 associated tumours. Although BLC has fascinated oncologists and scientists alike due to its enigmatic clinical and pathological parameters, there is no consensus about the definition and method of identification in routine practice of this rather heterogeneous group of cancers. Furthermore, the prognostic significance of BLCs and response to specific chemotherapy regimens are still a matter debate. In this review, we discuss the molecular and morphological features, prognostic significance of BLC, and explore its impact on the concept of the breast cancer stem cell.

show abstract

Section: Blc and Triple-negative Breast Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Patho-biological aspects of basal-like breast cancer

Rakha

El-Sayed

Reis‐Filho³

et al. 2008

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Basal-like and unclassified tumors both have a 'triple-negative' phenotype (i.e., ER-/PR-/HER2-), although approximately 70% of triple-negative tumors are basal-like (Nielsen et al, 2007). Triple-negative breast cancer has been associated with younger age groups and patients presenting with later stages of the disease, and is thought to have a worse prognosis (Bidard et al, 2007). This subgroup accounts for 10-15% of all types of breast cancer (Anders and Carey, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinicopathologic and Demographic Evaluation of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Patients among a Turkish Patient Population: a Single Center Experience

Somali

Ustaoglu²,

Tarhan³

et al. 2013

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Linden et al demonstrated that the degree of FES uptake has the ability to predict response to endocrine therapy: low or absent FES uptake can identify patients unlikely to obtain an objective response and can lead to the exclusion of an ineffective treatment in patient management [29]. We can also hypothesize that the presence of FES uptake in triple-negative breast cancer could in vivo identify non-basal-like subtypes, that can show ER expression, even if decreased, as reported by Bidard et al [30]. These patients could therefore be treated with targeted endocrine therapies, which would otherwise be denied.…”

mentioning

confidence: 68%

PET/CT and breast cancer subtypes

Gilardi

Colleoni

Paganelli

2013

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast cancer is a profoundly heterogeneous disease that includes a number of distinct entities with specific pathological features, biological behaviours and different sensitivities to systemic and targeted therapies [1][2][3][4].The recent development of high-throughput molecular methods offers new opportunities to capture the wide range of this variability. Indeed, the novel molecular techniques of gene expression profiling permit evaluation of the expression of thousands of genes in a large number of tumours, so that a fully comprehensive portrait or profile of the different molecular pathways can be obtained. The reproducibility and the clinical usefulness of assays based on gene expression have been demonstrated with increasing confidence over the past decade, but cost considerations limit the wide availability of these techniques [5]. Immunohistochemical (IHC) determination of oestrogen and progesterone receptors (ER and PgR), the detection of overexpression and/or amplification of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and the Ki67 labelling index have been defined as a convenient alternative to molecular subtyping and are considered a sufficient to guide therapeutic choices [6].Several studies have investigated the correlation between these clinical/pathological prognostic and predictive markers and the levels of radiotracer uptake by primary breast tumours, measured as maximum standardized uptake value (SUV max ), during 18 F-FDG PET/CT. High SUV max was found to be significantly correlated with ER negativity, PgR negativity, triple negativity and Ki67 values, while conflicting results were found for the relationship with HER2 status [7][8][9][10][11][12].In the present issue of the European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, García Vicente et al. take a step forward in this approach to evaluation. They analysed the correlation between the glycolytic characteristics of primary breast tumours and their molecular subtypes. The authors prospectively evaluated 168 patients who were submitted to FDG PET/CT before neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced breast cancer. Tumour subtypes were classified by IHC surrogates as luminal A, luminal B-HER2(−), luminal B-HER2(+), HER2(+) or basal (triple negative), following the recommendations of the 12th St Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference. Statistically significant differences were found in semiquantitative metabolic parameters among the different subtypes, with greater values in HER2(+) and basal tumours [13]. These results are not unexpected, as the relationship between increased glucose metabolism and tumour aggressiveness is well known. This is one of the first studies demonstrating a correlation between molecular and glycolytic phenotypes of breast cancer.Humbert et al. found that baseline FDG uptake of primary tumours and its early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy may vary according to the IHC subtype of the breast cancer. Triple-negative tumours showed the highest baseline SUV. After the first course of therapy the de...

show abstract

Does triple-negative phenotype accurately identify basal-like tumour? An immunohistochemical analysis based on 143 ‘triple-negative’ breast cancers

Cited by 74 publications

References 4 publications

Patho-biological aspects of basal-like breast cancer

Patho-biological aspects of basal-like breast cancer

Clinicopathologic and Demographic Evaluation of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Patients among a Turkish Patient Population: a Single Center Experience

PET/CT and breast cancer subtypes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About