Cargando…
Is oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive (ER−/PR+) a real pathological entity?
BACKGROUND: The existence of oestrogen receptor-negative (ER−)/progesterone receptor-positive (PR+) breast cancer continues to be an area of controversy amongst oncologists and pathologists. METHODS: To re-evaluate breast cancers originally classified as ER−/PR+ via Oncotype DX® assay and compare mo...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cancer Intelligence
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8426004/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34567263 http://dx.doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2021.1278 |
_version_ | 1783749955160113152 |
---|---|
author | Onitilo, Adedayo A Engel, Jessica Joseph, Adedayo O Li, Ya-Huei |
author_facet | Onitilo, Adedayo A Engel, Jessica Joseph, Adedayo O Li, Ya-Huei |
author_sort | Onitilo, Adedayo A |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The existence of oestrogen receptor-negative (ER−)/progesterone receptor-positive (PR+) breast cancer continues to be an area of controversy amongst oncologists and pathologists. METHODS: To re-evaluate breast cancers originally classified as ER−/PR+ via Oncotype DX® assay and compare molecular phenotype with Recurrence Score® (RS) result, clinicopathologic features and clinical outcomes were retrospectively obtained from electronic health records between January 1998 and June 2005. Archived formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumour specimens were tested for the expression of ER, PR and human-epidermal-growth-factor-2. The number of positive ER−/PR+ samples confirmed by transcriptional analysis was the primary outcome of interest with event-free and overall survival as secondary outcomes. Biopsies from 26 patients underwent Oncotype DX testing and analysis. RESULTS: Approximately 60% were middle-aged (40–50 years old) women, and 84.6% had invasive ductal carcinoma. Based on the Oncotype DX assay, approximately 65% (N = 17) had ER+/PR+ status; 23% (N = 6) had ER−/PR− status; and 12% had a single hormone positive receptor (1 ER–/PR+, 2 ER+/PR–) status. Almost one-quarter of patients were stratified into the low-RS (<18) or intermediate-RS (18–30) results, and half of the patients had a high-RS (>30) result. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest the ER−/PR+ subtype is not a reproducible entity and emphasises the value of retesting this subtype via molecular methods for appropriate treatment selection and patient outcomes. Multigene assay analysis may serve as a second-line or confirming tool for clinical determination of ER/PR phenotype in breast cancer patients for targeted therapies. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8426004 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Cancer Intelligence |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84260042021-09-24 Is oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive (ER−/PR+) a real pathological entity? Onitilo, Adedayo A Engel, Jessica Joseph, Adedayo O Li, Ya-Huei Ecancermedicalscience Research BACKGROUND: The existence of oestrogen receptor-negative (ER−)/progesterone receptor-positive (PR+) breast cancer continues to be an area of controversy amongst oncologists and pathologists. METHODS: To re-evaluate breast cancers originally classified as ER−/PR+ via Oncotype DX® assay and compare molecular phenotype with Recurrence Score® (RS) result, clinicopathologic features and clinical outcomes were retrospectively obtained from electronic health records between January 1998 and June 2005. Archived formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumour specimens were tested for the expression of ER, PR and human-epidermal-growth-factor-2. The number of positive ER−/PR+ samples confirmed by transcriptional analysis was the primary outcome of interest with event-free and overall survival as secondary outcomes. Biopsies from 26 patients underwent Oncotype DX testing and analysis. RESULTS: Approximately 60% were middle-aged (40–50 years old) women, and 84.6% had invasive ductal carcinoma. Based on the Oncotype DX assay, approximately 65% (N = 17) had ER+/PR+ status; 23% (N = 6) had ER−/PR− status; and 12% had a single hormone positive receptor (1 ER–/PR+, 2 ER+/PR–) status. Almost one-quarter of patients were stratified into the low-RS (<18) or intermediate-RS (18–30) results, and half of the patients had a high-RS (>30) result. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest the ER−/PR+ subtype is not a reproducible entity and emphasises the value of retesting this subtype via molecular methods for appropriate treatment selection and patient outcomes. Multigene assay analysis may serve as a second-line or confirming tool for clinical determination of ER/PR phenotype in breast cancer patients for targeted therapies. Cancer Intelligence 2021-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8426004/ /pubmed/34567263 http://dx.doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2021.1278 Text en © the authors; licensee ecancermedicalscience. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Onitilo, Adedayo A Engel, Jessica Joseph, Adedayo O Li, Ya-Huei Is oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive (ER−/PR+) a real pathological entity? |
title | Is oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive (ER−/PR+) a real pathological entity? |
title_full | Is oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive (ER−/PR+) a real pathological entity? |
title_fullStr | Is oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive (ER−/PR+) a real pathological entity? |
title_full_unstemmed | Is oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive (ER−/PR+) a real pathological entity? |
title_short | Is oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive (ER−/PR+) a real pathological entity? |
title_sort | is oestrogen receptor-negative/progesterone receptor-positive (er−/pr+) a real pathological entity? |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8426004/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34567263 http://dx.doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2021.1278 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT onitiloadedayoa isoestrogenreceptornegativeprogesteronereceptorpositiveerprarealpathologicalentity AT engeljessica isoestrogenreceptornegativeprogesteronereceptorpositiveerprarealpathologicalentity AT josephadedayoo isoestrogenreceptornegativeprogesteronereceptorpositiveerprarealpathologicalentity AT liyahuei isoestrogenreceptornegativeprogesteronereceptorpositiveerprarealpathologicalentity |