Breast Cancer Survival Defined by the ER/PR/HER2 Subtypes and a Surrogate Classification According to Tumor Grade and Immunohistochemical Biomarkers

Overview

Journal J Cancer Epidemiol

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Oncology

Date 2014 Jun 24

PMID 24955090

Citations 117

Authors

Carol A Parise

Vincent Caggiano

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction. ER, PR, and HER2 are routinely available in breast cancer specimens. The purpose of this study is to contrast breast cancer-specific survival for the eight ER/PR/HER2 subtypes with survival of an immunohistochemical surrogate for the molecular subtype based on the ER/PR/HER2 subtypes and tumor grade. Methods. We identified 123,780 cases of stages 1-3 primary female invasive breast cancer from California Cancer Registry. The surrogate classification was derived using ER/PR/HER2 and tumor grade. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to assess differences in survival and risk of mortality for the ER/PR/HER2 subtypes and surrogate classification within each stage. Results. The luminal B/HER2- surrogate classification had a higher risk of mortality than the luminal B/HER2+ for all stages of disease. There was no difference in risk of mortality between the ER+/PR+/HER2- and ER+/PR+/HER2+ in stage 3. With one exception in stage 3, the ER-negative subtypes all had an increased risk of mortality when compared with the ER-positive subtypes. Conclusions. Assessment of survival using ER/PR/HER2 illustrates the heterogeneity of HER2+ subtypes. The surrogate classification provides clear separation in survival and adjusted mortality but underestimates the wide variability within the subtypes that make up the classification.

Citing Articles

Increasing RB1 Expression by Targeting EZH2 in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Yang R, Fei L, Xue Y, Zhang Y, Hu Q, Guo L J Cell Mol Med. 2025; 29(5):e70384.

PMID: 40070134 PMC: 11897054. DOI: 10.1111/jcmm.70384.

Burden of Disease and Cost of Illness of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Portugal.

Silva J, Sousa G, Costa L, Brito M, Oliveira S, Rodrigues B Pharmacoecon Open. 2025; .

PMID: 39932637 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-024-00552-0.

SPP1 mRNA Expression Is Associated with M2 Macrophage Infiltration and Poor Prognosis in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Chen Y, Chen C, Chen R, Chen H, Chen P Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2024; 46(12):13499-13513.

PMID: 39727934 PMC: 11674533. DOI: 10.3390/cimb46120806.

Targeting breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP/ABCG2) in cancer.

Chen R, Yu Y, Liu R, Chen Q Transl Cancer Res. 2024; 13(11):6550-6564.

PMID: 39697732 PMC: 11651813. DOI: 10.21037/tcr-24-1129.

Metabolomics-Based Machine Learning Models Accurately Predict Breast Cancer Estrogen Receptor Status.

Arumalla K, Haince J, Bux R, Huang G, Tappia P, Ramjiawan B Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(23).

PMID: 39684741 PMC: 11641454. DOI: 10.3390/ijms252313029.

References

Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Loi S, Harris A, Fox S, Smeds J . Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98(4):262-72. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djj052. View

Parise C, Bauer K, Caggiano V . Disparities in receipt of adjuvant radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery among the cancer-reporting regions of California. Cancer. 2011; 118(9):2516-24. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.26542. View

De Maeyer L, Van Limbergen E, De Nys K, Moerman P, Pochet N, Hendrickx W . Does estrogen receptor negative/progesterone receptor positive breast carcinoma exist?. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26(2):335-6. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.8411. View

Sorlie T, Perou C, Tibshirani R, Aas T, Geisler S, Johnsen H . Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001; 98(19):10869-74. PMC: 58566. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.191367098. View

Edwards B, Brown M, Wingo P, Howe H, Ward E, Ries L . Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2002, featuring population-based trends in cancer treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005; 97(19):1407-27. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dji289. View

Ferguson N, Bell J, Heidel R, Lee S, Vanmeter S, Duncan L . Prognostic value of breast cancer subtypes, Ki-67 proliferation index, age, and pathologic tumor characteristics on breast cancer survival in Caucasian women. Breast J. 2012; 19(1):22-30. DOI: 10.1111/tbj.12059. View

Parise C, Caggiano V . Disparities in race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status: risk of mortality of breast cancer patients in the California Cancer Registry, 2000-2010. BMC Cancer. 2013; 13:449. PMC: 3850736. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-449. View

Ma X, Wang Z, Ryan P, Isakoff S, Barmettler A, Fuller A . A two-gene expression ratio predicts clinical outcome in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen. Cancer Cell. 2004; 5(6):607-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2004.05.015. View

van de Vijver M, He Y, Vant Veer L, Dai H, Hart A, Voskuil D . A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347(25):1999-2009. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa021967. View

10.

Montemurro F, Di Cosimo S, Arpino G . Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive and hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: new insights into molecular interactions and clinical implications. Ann Oncol. 2013; 24(11):2715-24. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt287. View

11.

Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, Kim C, Baker J, Cronin M . A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351(27):2817-26. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa041588. View

12.

Cserni G, Francz M, Kalman E, Kelemen G, Komjathy D, Kovacs I . Estrogen receptor negative and progesterone receptor positive breast carcinomas-how frequent are they?. Pathol Oncol Res. 2011; 17(3):663-8. DOI: 10.1007/s12253-011-9366-y. View

13.

Linn S, J van t Veer L . Clinical relevance of the triple-negative breast cancer concept: genetic basis and clinical utility of the concept. Eur J Cancer. 2009; 45 Suppl 1:11-26. DOI: 10.1016/S0959-8049(09)70012-7. View

14.

Brown M, Tsodikov A, Bauer K, Parise C, Caggiano V . The role of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 in the survival of women with estrogen and progesterone receptor-negative, invasive breast cancer: the California Cancer Registry, 1999-2004. Cancer. 2008; 112(4):737-47. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23243. View

15.

Ou S, Zell J, Ziogas A, Anton-Culver H . Low socioeconomic status is a poor prognostic factor for survival in stage I nonsmall cell lung cancer and is independent of surgical treatment, race, and marital status. Cancer. 2008; 112(9):2011-20. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23397. View

16.

Rakha E, El-Sayed M, Green A, Paish E, Powe D, Gee J . Biologic and clinical characteristics of breast cancer with single hormone receptor positive phenotype. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25(30):4772-8. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.12.2747. View

17.

Parise C, Bauer K, Caggiano V . Variation in breast cancer subtypes with age and race/ethnicity. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2009; 76(1):44-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2009.09.002. View

18.

Izquierdo J, Schoenbach V . The potential and limitations of data from population-based state cancer registries. Am J Public Health. 2000; 90(5):695-8. PMC: 1446235. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.90.5.695. View

19.

Bauer K, Brown M, Cress R, Parise C, Caggiano V . Descriptive analysis of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, and HER2-negative invasive breast cancer, the so-called triple-negative phenotype: a population-based study from the California cancer Registry. Cancer. 2007; 109(9):1721-8. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22618. View

20.

Colozza M, Sidoni A, Piccart-Gebhart M . Value of Ki67 in breast cancer: the debate is still open. Lancet Oncol. 2010; 11(5):414-5. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70089-9. View