SpringerLink
Log in

Prognostic and predictive factors and genetic analysis of early breast cancer

  • Educational Series
  • Molecular and Cellular Biology of Cancer
  • Published:
Clinical and Translational Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The great heterogeneity of breast cancer makes it impossible to firmly predict which patients with early-stage tumours will or will not need systemic treatments according to the conventional prognostic factors currently employed. In fact, a substantial percentage of patients receive medical treatment for a disease that will not relapse, while another proportion of patients regarded as having good prognostic factors according to the classic criteria do not receive treatment and suffer disease relapse. Considering that most oncological treatments have short- and long-term toxic effects, new methods capable of offering a more precise prognosis need to be developed. The individualisation of the diagnosis of patients with breast cancer based on molecular and gene expression studies is bringing about a veritable revolution in our understanding of the biology of the disease. The new molecular classification of breast cancer, based on these profiles, allows us to establish a prognosis according to the genetic characteristics of each tumour. Such individualisation of the diagnosis of patients with breast cancer will lead to the application of more specific treatments, thereby improving patient survival with lesser toxicity and increased economic savings. Of the different genetic analytical tests available, MammaPrint™ has been shown to be the option offering the most information on the behaviour of early breast cancer; as a result, it is the most useful technique in deciding the need for oncological treatment as a complement to surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E et al (2008) Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin 58:71–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD et al (2005) Meeting highlights: international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2005. Ann Oncol 16:1569–1583

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brenton JD, Carey LA, Ahmed AA et al (2005) Molecular classification and molecular forecasting of breast cancer: ready for clinical application? J Clin Oncol 23:7350–7360

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. (1991) NIH consensus conference. Treatment of early-stage breast cancer. JAMA 265:391–395

  5. Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE (1989) Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 63:181–187

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher B, Dignam J, Tan-Chiu E et al (2001) Prognosis and treatment of patients with breast tumors of one centimeter or less and negative axillary lymph nodes. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:112–120

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Moatamed NA, Apple SK (2006) Extensive sampling changes T-staging of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of breast: A comparative study of gross versus microscopic tumor sizes. Breast J 12:511–517

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C et al (eds) (2006) European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis, 4th Edn. European Communities, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pritt B, Weaver DL (2005) Accurate determination of breast cancer size: the role of histopathology and imaging. Curr Diag Pathol 11435–11442

  10. Russo J, Frederick J, Ownby HE et al (1987) Predictors of recurrence and survival of patients with breast cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 88:123–131

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fisher ER, Anderson S, Redmond C, Fisher B (1993) Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project protocol B-06. 10-year pathologic and clinical prognostic discriminants. Cancer 71:2507–2514

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Saez RA, McGuire WL, Clark GM (1989) Prognostic factors in breast cancer. Semin Surg Oncol 5:102–110

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cserni G, Amendoeira I, Apostolikas N et al (2004) Discrepancies in current practice of pathological evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Results of a questionnaire based survey by the European Working Group for Breast Screening Tathology. J Clin Pathol 57:695–701

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Turner RR, Weaver DL, Cserni G et al (2008) Nodal stage classification for breast carcinoma: Improving interobserver reproducibility through standardized histologic criteria and imaged-based training. J Clin Oncol 26:258–263

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. European Working Group for Breast Screening Pathology. Cserni G, Amendoeira I, Apostolikas N et al (2003) Pathological work-up of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Review of current data to be considered for the formulation of guidelines. Eur J Cancer 39:1654–1667

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nasser IA, Lee AK, Bosari S et al (1993) Occult axillary lymph node metastases in “node-negative” breast carcinoma. Hum Pathol 24:950–957

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hainsworth PJ, Tjandra JJ, Stillwell RG et al (1993) Detection and significance of occult metastases in node-negative breast cancer. Br J Surg 80:459–463

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. McGuckin MA, Cummings MC, Walsh MD et al (1996) Occult axillary node metastases in breast cancer: their detection and prognostic significance. Br J Cancer 73:88–95

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. de Boer M, van Deurzen CH, van Dijck JA et al (2008) Micrometastases and isolated tumor cells: relevant and robust or rubbish? (MIRROR): preliminary results of the MIRROR study from the Dutch Breast Cancer Trialists’ Group (BOOG). Program and abstracts of the 31st Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, December 10–14, San Antonio, TX, Abstract 23

  20. Elston CW, Ellis IO (1991) Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 19:403–410

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bloom HJ, Richardson WW (1957) Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer; a study of 1409 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years. Br J Cancer 11:359–377

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Lee AH et al (2008) Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 26:3153–3158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Harris GC, Denley HE, Pinder SE et al (2003) Correlation of histologic prognostic factors in core biopsies and therapeutic excisions of invasive breast carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 27:11–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Loi S et al (2006) Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 98:262–272

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee AHS, Pinder SE, Macmillan RD et al (2006) Prognostic value of lymphovascular invasion in women with lymph node negative invasive breast carcinoma. Eur J Cancer 42:357–362

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mohsin SK, Bardou VJ, Arpino G et al (2003) Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer: an evidence-based medicine approach. In: Nabholtz JM, Tonkin K, Reese DM et al (eds) Breast cancer management, 2nd Edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Hagerstown, MD, pp 391–410

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wenger CR, Beardslee S, Owens MA et al (1993) DNA ploidy, S-phase, and steroid receptors in more than 127,000 breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 28:9–20

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Robbins P, Pinder S, de Klerk N et al (1995) Histological grading of breast carcinomas: a study of interobserver agreement. Hum Pathol 26:873–879

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rhodes A, Jasani B, Balaton AJ et al (2001) Study of interlaboratory reliability and reproducibility of estrogen and progesterone receptor assays in Europe: documentation of poor reliability and identification of insufficient microwave antigen retrieval time as a major contributory element of unreliable assays. Am J Clin Pathol 115:44–58

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Goldstein NS, Ferkowicz M, Odish E et al (2003) Minimun formalin fixation time for consistent estrogen receptor immunohistochemical staining of invasive breast carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol 120:86–92

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Schnitt SJ (2006) Estrogen receptor testing of breast cancer in current clinical practice: what’s the question? J Clin Oncol 24:1797–1799

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ross JS, Symmans WF, Pusztai L et al (2007) Standardizing slide-based assays in breast cancer: hormone receptors, HER2, and sentinel lymph nodes. Clin Cancer Res 13:2831–2835

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kroman N, Jensen MB, Wohlfahrt J et al (2000) Factors influencing the effect of age on prognosis in breast cancer: population based study. BMJ 320:474–478

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG et al (1987) Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER2/neu oncogene. Science 235:177–182

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Slamon DJ, Godolphin W, Jones LA et al (1989) Studies of the HER2/neu proto-oncogene in human breast and ovarian cancer. Science 244:707–712

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Palacios J, Andreu X, Calasanz MJ et al (2009) Guidelines for HER2 testing in breast cancer. A national consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology. Rev Esp Patología 42:3–16

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wolff AC, Hammond EH, Schwartz JN et al (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:118–145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Davis BW, Gelber R, Goldhirsch A et al (1985) Prognostic significance of peritumoral vessel invasion in clinical trials of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer with axillary lymph node metastasis. Hum Pathol 16:1212–1218

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. de Mascarel I, Bonichon F, Durand M et al (1998) Obvious peritumoral emboli: an elusive prognostic factor reappraised. Multivariate analysis of 1320 node-negative breast cancers. Eur J Cancer 34:58–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Eppenberger U, Kueng W, Schlaeppi JM et al (1998) Markers of tumor angiogenesis and proteolysis independently define high- and low-risk subsets of node-negative breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 16:3129–3136

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Foekens JA, Peters HA, Look MP et al (2000) The urokinase system of plasminogen activation and prognosis in 2780 breast cancer patients. Cancer Res 60:636–643

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Harbeck N, Thomssen C, Berger U et al (1999) Invasion marker PAI-1 remains a strong prognostic factor after long-term follow-up both for primary breast cancer and following first relapse. Breast Cancer Res Treat 54:147–157

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Prechtl A, Harbeck N, Thomssen C et al (2000) Tumor-biological factors uPA and PAI-1 as stratification criteria of a multicenter adjuvant chemotherapy trial in node-negative breast cancer. Int J Biol Markers 15:73–78

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB et al (2000) Molecular portraits of human breast tumors. Nature 406:747–752

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R et al (2001) Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:10869–10874

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ et al (2002) Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 415:530–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. van de Vijver MJ, van’t Veer LJ, Dai H et al (2002) A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347: 1999–2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G et al (2004) A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, nodenegative patients. N Engl J Med 351:2817–2226

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Buyse M, Loi S, van’t Veer L et al (2006) Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 98:1183–1192

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. de Snoo FA, Knauer M, Bender RA et al (2009) Outcome prediction by the 70-gene profile in the context of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. J Clin Oncol 15[Suppl]:abstr 535

  51. Bender RA, Knauer M, Rutgers EJ et al (2009) The 70-gene profile and chemotherapy benefit in 1,600 breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 27[Suppl]:abstr 512

  52. Bogaerts J, Cardoso F, Buyse M et al (2006) Gene signature evaluation as a prognostic tool: challenges in the design of the MINDACT trial. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 3:540–551

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Sparano JA (2006) TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx). Clin Breast Cancer 7:347–350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Wirapati P, Sotiriou C, Kunkel S et al (2008) Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subty** and prognosis signatures. Breast Cancer Res 10:R65

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Sotiriou C, Pusztai L (2009) Gene-expression signatures in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 360:790–800

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Hornberger J, Cosler LE, Lyman GH (2005) Economic analysis of targeting chemotherapy using a 21-gene RT-PCR assay in lymph-node-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer. Am J Manag Care 11:313–324

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Tong KB, Chen E, Brink G (2009) Cost-effectiveness of targeting chemotherapy with the 70-gene prognostic signature in early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) patients. J Clin Oncol 27[Suppl]:abstr 6570

    Google Scholar 

  58. Straver ME, Glas AM, Hannemann J et al (2009) The 70-gene signature as a response predictor for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat (in press)

  59. Goldhirsch A, Ingle JN, Gelber RD et al (2009) Thresholds for therapies: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2009. Ann Oncol 20:1319–1329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, C/ Doctor Esquerdo, 46, ES-28007, Madrid, Spain

    Miguel Martín

  2. Pathology Unit, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain

    Fernando González Palacios

  3. Medical Oncology Unit, Hospital Vall d’Hebrón, Barcelona, Spain

    Javier Cortés

  4. Oncology Unit, Hospital Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain

    Juan de la Haba

  5. Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain

    José Schneider

Authors
  1. Miguel Martín
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fernando González Palacios
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Javier Cortés
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Juan de la Haba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. José Schneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miguel Martín.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Martín, M., González Palacios, F., Cortés, J. et al. Prognostic and predictive factors and genetic analysis of early breast cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 11, 634–642 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-009-0418-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-009-0418-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation