P207 Feasibility of Mammaprint risk assessment using vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (Mammotome) in early breast cancer

Osaki, Akihiko; Takeuchi, Hideyuki; Nakamiya, Noriko; Shigekawa, Takashi; Matsuura, Kazuki; Misumi, Motohiro; Fujiuchi, Nobuko; Stork‐Sloots, Lisette; Ouchi, Takehiro; Saeki, Toshio

doi:10.1016/s0960-9776(11)70148-5

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This common technique provides more tissue than standard CNB, but less tissue than SE. A study by Osaki et al [22] studied 67 patients with early-stage breast cancer. For each patient, five to 10 biopsies were taken, two of which were used for the analysis.…”

Section: Validation Of the Toolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is a prospective trial involving 10,273 women with ER-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer. The women were divided into a low-risk group (score below 10, who were given adjuvant endocrine therapy only), a high-risk group (score above 26, who received chemoendocrine therapy) and those with intermediate risk (score of [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] [36].…”

Section: Validation Of the Tool In Older Womenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…VAB is also an emerging tool, although the evidence for its use in combination with the genomic tools is scant; only MammaPrint [22] had been tested in a small population for feasibility in this source.…”

Section: Sample Requiredmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Potential Use of Tumour-Based Prognostic and Predictive Tools in Older Women with Primary Breast Cancer: A Narrative Review

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A move is under way towards personalised cancer treatment, where tumour biology of an individual patient is examined to give unique predictive and prognostic information. This is extremely important in the setting of older women, who have treatment-specific goals which may differ from their younger counterparts, and may include conservation of quality of life rather than curative intent of treatment. One method employed to assist with this is the use of tumour-based prognostic and predictive tools. This article explores six of the most common tumour-based tools currently available on the market: MammaPrint, Oncotype DX, Mammostrat, Prosigna, EndoPredict, IHC4. The article discusses the creation and validation of these tools, their use and validation in older women, and future directions in the field. With the exception of Oncotype Dx, which has also been licensed for prediction of response from adjuvant chemotherapy, these tools have been licensed for use as prognostic tools only, mainly in the setting of adjuvant therapy following surgery. The evidence base for use in older women is strongest for Mammostrat and PAM50, although overall the evidence is much weaker than that in younger women. Where older women have been included in validation studies, this is often in small numbers, or the exact proportion of older women is unknown. In practice, all six of the tools are recommended to be utilised on surgical excision specimens, as well as in core needle biopsy (CNB) specimens in all of the tools except Mammostrat. This is extremely important in the setting of older women, of whom a large proportion do not undergo surgery. The suggested nature of the sample is formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded in all the tools except MammaPrint, which can also be performed on fresh-frozen samples. Future development of prognostic tools in older women with breast cancer should focus on treatment dilemmas specific to this population. This includes the decision of primary treatment between surgery or endocrine therapy and decisions regarding adjuvant therapy, in particular, chemotherapy.

show abstract

Section: Validation Of the Toolmentioning

confidence: 99%