Cargando…

Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer

INTRODUCTION: At least four major categories of invasive breast cancer that are associated with different clinical outcomes have been identified by gene expression profiling: luminal A, luminal B, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and basal-like. However, the prevalence of these phenot...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tamimi, Rulla M, Baer, Heather J, Marotti, Jonathan, Galan, Mark, Galaburda, Laurie, Fu, Yineng, Deitz, Anne C, Connolly, James L, Schnitt, Stuart J, Colditz, Graham A, Collins, Laura C
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2575540/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18681955
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/bcr2128
_version_ 1782160325813993472
author Tamimi, Rulla M
Baer, Heather J
Marotti, Jonathan
Galan, Mark
Galaburda, Laurie
Fu, Yineng
Deitz, Anne C
Connolly, James L
Schnitt, Stuart J
Colditz, Graham A
Collins, Laura C
author_facet Tamimi, Rulla M
Baer, Heather J
Marotti, Jonathan
Galan, Mark
Galaburda, Laurie
Fu, Yineng
Deitz, Anne C
Connolly, James L
Schnitt, Stuart J
Colditz, Graham A
Collins, Laura C
author_sort Tamimi, Rulla M
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: At least four major categories of invasive breast cancer that are associated with different clinical outcomes have been identified by gene expression profiling: luminal A, luminal B, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and basal-like. However, the prevalence of these phenotypes among cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has not been previously evaluated in detail. The purpose of this study was to compare the prevalence of these distinct molecular subtypes among cases of DCIS and invasive breast cancer. METHODS: We constructed tissue microarrays (TMAs) from breast cancers that developed in 2897 women enrolled in the Nurses' Health Study (1976 to 1996). TMA slides were immunostained for oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), HER2, cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Using these immunostain results, cases were grouped into molecularly defined subtypes. RESULTS: The prevalence of the distinct molecular phenotypes differed significantly between DCIS (n = 272) and invasive breast cancers (n = 2249). The luminal A phenotype was significantly more frequent among invasive cancers (73.4%) than among DCIS lesions (62.5%) (p = 0.0002). In contrast, luminal B and HER2 molecular phenotypes were both more frequent among DCIS (13.2% and 13.6%, respectively) as compared with invasive tumours (5.2% and 5.7%, respectively) (p < 0.0001). The basal-like phenotype was more frequent among the invasive cancers (10.9%) than DCIS (7.7%), although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.15). High-grade DCIS and invasive tumours were more likely to be HER2 type and basal-like than low- or intermediate-grade lesions. Among invasive tumours, basal-like and HER2 type tumours were more likely to be more than 2 cm in size, high-grade and have nodal involvement compared with luminal A tumours. CONCLUSION: The major molecular phenotypes previously identified among invasive breast cancers were also identified among cases of DCIS. However, the prevalence of the luminal A, luminal B and HER2 phenotypes differed significantly between DCIS and invasive breast cancers.
format Text
id pubmed-2575540
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-25755402008-10-30 Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer Tamimi, Rulla M Baer, Heather J Marotti, Jonathan Galan, Mark Galaburda, Laurie Fu, Yineng Deitz, Anne C Connolly, James L Schnitt, Stuart J Colditz, Graham A Collins, Laura C Breast Cancer Res Research Article INTRODUCTION: At least four major categories of invasive breast cancer that are associated with different clinical outcomes have been identified by gene expression profiling: luminal A, luminal B, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and basal-like. However, the prevalence of these phenotypes among cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has not been previously evaluated in detail. The purpose of this study was to compare the prevalence of these distinct molecular subtypes among cases of DCIS and invasive breast cancer. METHODS: We constructed tissue microarrays (TMAs) from breast cancers that developed in 2897 women enrolled in the Nurses' Health Study (1976 to 1996). TMA slides were immunostained for oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), HER2, cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Using these immunostain results, cases were grouped into molecularly defined subtypes. RESULTS: The prevalence of the distinct molecular phenotypes differed significantly between DCIS (n = 272) and invasive breast cancers (n = 2249). The luminal A phenotype was significantly more frequent among invasive cancers (73.4%) than among DCIS lesions (62.5%) (p = 0.0002). In contrast, luminal B and HER2 molecular phenotypes were both more frequent among DCIS (13.2% and 13.6%, respectively) as compared with invasive tumours (5.2% and 5.7%, respectively) (p < 0.0001). The basal-like phenotype was more frequent among the invasive cancers (10.9%) than DCIS (7.7%), although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.15). High-grade DCIS and invasive tumours were more likely to be HER2 type and basal-like than low- or intermediate-grade lesions. Among invasive tumours, basal-like and HER2 type tumours were more likely to be more than 2 cm in size, high-grade and have nodal involvement compared with luminal A tumours. CONCLUSION: The major molecular phenotypes previously identified among invasive breast cancers were also identified among cases of DCIS. However, the prevalence of the luminal A, luminal B and HER2 phenotypes differed significantly between DCIS and invasive breast cancers. BioMed Central 2008 2008-08-05 /pmc/articles/PMC2575540/ /pubmed/18681955 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/bcr2128 Text en Copyright © 2008 Tamimi 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 Research Article
Tamimi, Rulla M
Baer, Heather J
Marotti, Jonathan
Galan, Mark
Galaburda, Laurie
Fu, Yineng
Deitz, Anne C
Connolly, James L
Schnitt, Stuart J
Colditz, Graham A
Collins, Laura C
Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer
title Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer
title_full Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer
title_fullStr Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer
title_short Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer
title_sort comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2575540/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18681955
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/bcr2128
work_keys_str_mv AT tamimirullam comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT baerheatherj comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT marottijonathan comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT galanmark comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT galaburdalaurie comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT fuyineng comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT deitzannec comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT connollyjamesl comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT schnittstuartj comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT colditzgrahama comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer
AT collinslaurac comparisonofmolecularphenotypesofductalcarcinomainsituandinvasivebreastcancer