Cargando…
Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future?
Prognosticators evaluating survival in breast cancer vary in significance in respect to lymph node status. Studies have shown e.g. that HER2/neu immunohistochemistry or HER2/neu gene amplification analysis do perform well as prognosticators in lymph node positive (LN +) patients but are less valuabl...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1654187/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17092354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1746-1596-1-41 |
_version_ | 1782131014274908160 |
---|---|
author | Elzagheid, A Kuopio, T Pyrhönen, S Collan, Y |
author_facet | Elzagheid, A Kuopio, T Pyrhönen, S Collan, Y |
author_sort | Elzagheid, A |
collection | PubMed |
description | Prognosticators evaluating survival in breast cancer vary in significance in respect to lymph node status. Studies have shown e.g. that HER2/neu immunohistochemistry or HER2/neu gene amplification analysis do perform well as prognosticators in lymph node positive (LN +) patients but are less valuable in lymph node negative (LN -) patients. We collected data from different studies and tried to evaluate the relative significance of different prognosticators in LN+/LN- patient groups. In LN+ patients HER2/neu and E-cadherin immunohistochemistry were the statistically most significant prognosticators followed by proliferation associated features (mitotic counts by SMI (standardised mitotic index) or MAI (mitotic activity index), or S-phase fraction). Bcl-2 immunohistochemistry was also significant but p53 and cystatin A had no significance as prognosticators. In LN- patients proliferation associated prognosticators (SMI, MAI, Ki-67 index, PCNA immunohistochemistry, S-phase fraction) are especially valuable and also Cathepsin D, cystatin A, and p53 are significant, but HER2/neu or bcl-2, or E-cadherin less significant or without significance. We find that in studies evaluating single prognosticators one should distinguish between prognosticators suitable for LN+ and LN- patients. This will allow the choice of best prognosticators in evaluating the prospects of the patient. The distinction between LN+ and LN- patients in this respect may also be of special value in therapeutic decisions. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-1654187 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2006 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-16541872006-11-21 Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future? Elzagheid, A Kuopio, T Pyrhönen, S Collan, Y Diagn Pathol Review Prognosticators evaluating survival in breast cancer vary in significance in respect to lymph node status. Studies have shown e.g. that HER2/neu immunohistochemistry or HER2/neu gene amplification analysis do perform well as prognosticators in lymph node positive (LN +) patients but are less valuable in lymph node negative (LN -) patients. We collected data from different studies and tried to evaluate the relative significance of different prognosticators in LN+/LN- patient groups. In LN+ patients HER2/neu and E-cadherin immunohistochemistry were the statistically most significant prognosticators followed by proliferation associated features (mitotic counts by SMI (standardised mitotic index) or MAI (mitotic activity index), or S-phase fraction). Bcl-2 immunohistochemistry was also significant but p53 and cystatin A had no significance as prognosticators. In LN- patients proliferation associated prognosticators (SMI, MAI, Ki-67 index, PCNA immunohistochemistry, S-phase fraction) are especially valuable and also Cathepsin D, cystatin A, and p53 are significant, but HER2/neu or bcl-2, or E-cadherin less significant or without significance. We find that in studies evaluating single prognosticators one should distinguish between prognosticators suitable for LN+ and LN- patients. This will allow the choice of best prognosticators in evaluating the prospects of the patient. The distinction between LN+ and LN- patients in this respect may also be of special value in therapeutic decisions. BioMed Central 2006-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC1654187/ /pubmed/17092354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1746-1596-1-41 Text en Copyright © 2006 Elzagheid et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Elzagheid, A Kuopio, T Pyrhönen, S Collan, Y Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future? |
title | Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future? |
title_full | Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future? |
title_fullStr | Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future? |
title_full_unstemmed | Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future? |
title_short | Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future? |
title_sort | lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future? |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1654187/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17092354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1746-1596-1-41 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT elzagheida lymphnodestatusasaguidetoselectionofavailableprognosticmarkersinbreastcancertheclinicalpracticeofthefuture AT kuopiot lymphnodestatusasaguidetoselectionofavailableprognosticmarkersinbreastcancertheclinicalpracticeofthefuture AT pyrhonens lymphnodestatusasaguidetoselectionofavailableprognosticmarkersinbreastcancertheclinicalpracticeofthefuture AT collany lymphnodestatusasaguidetoselectionofavailableprognosticmarkersinbreastcancertheclinicalpracticeofthefuture |