Cargando…

Estrogen receptor status has no prognostic relevance in metaplastic breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) is a rare histologic variant of breast cancer characterized by the presence of glandular and non-glandular components. The prognostic significance of estrogen receptor (ER) status has been scarcely studied in these tumors. We therefore investigated the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abada, Evi, Kim, Seongho, Dozier, Keion, Fehmi, Omar, Jang, Hyejeong, Fehmi, Ziad, Bandyopadhyay, Sudeshna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9742347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36058202
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctarc.2022.100630
_version_ 1784848495626158080
author Abada, Evi
Kim, Seongho
Dozier, Keion
Fehmi, Omar
Jang, Hyejeong
Fehmi, Ziad
Bandyopadhyay, Sudeshna
author_facet Abada, Evi
Kim, Seongho
Dozier, Keion
Fehmi, Omar
Jang, Hyejeong
Fehmi, Ziad
Bandyopadhyay, Sudeshna
author_sort Abada, Evi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) is a rare histologic variant of breast cancer characterized by the presence of glandular and non-glandular components. The prognostic significance of estrogen receptor (ER) status has been scarcely studied in these tumors. We therefore investigated the prognostic relevance of ER status in MBC within our patient population. DESIGN: We reviewed MBC cases (n = 125) between January 2000 and September 2019. Histologic slides were reviewed for variables including tumor morphology and hormonal status. Additional clinical information was obtained from the electronic medical records. RESULTS: Of the 125 patients, 15 (12%) had ER positive tumors and 110 (88%) had ER negative tumors. Eleven (73%) ER positive tumors had ER positivity > 10% and 4 (27%) had ER positivity ≤ 10%. ER positive tumors had a smaller median tumor size of 2.5 cm, compared with ER negative tumors with median tumor size 3.05 cm, however this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.82). There were no statistical differences between ER positive and ER negative tumors in terms of histologic grade (P = 0.34), histologic subtype (P = 0.65), clinical stage (P>0.99) or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression (P = 0.29). There was also no difference in overall survival (OS) between ER positive and ER negative metaplastic breast cancers (HR = 0.35, 95% CI, 0.003–2.67, P = 0.39). CONCLUSION: Our experience suggests that ER positivity has no prognostic relevance in MBC. Regardless of ER expression status, there were no statistically significant differences in overall survival between ER positive and ER negative MBC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9742347
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97423472022-12-12 Estrogen receptor status has no prognostic relevance in metaplastic breast carcinoma Abada, Evi Kim, Seongho Dozier, Keion Fehmi, Omar Jang, Hyejeong Fehmi, Ziad Bandyopadhyay, Sudeshna Cancer Treat Res Commun Article BACKGROUND: Metaplastic breast carcinoma (MBC) is a rare histologic variant of breast cancer characterized by the presence of glandular and non-glandular components. The prognostic significance of estrogen receptor (ER) status has been scarcely studied in these tumors. We therefore investigated the prognostic relevance of ER status in MBC within our patient population. DESIGN: We reviewed MBC cases (n = 125) between January 2000 and September 2019. Histologic slides were reviewed for variables including tumor morphology and hormonal status. Additional clinical information was obtained from the electronic medical records. RESULTS: Of the 125 patients, 15 (12%) had ER positive tumors and 110 (88%) had ER negative tumors. Eleven (73%) ER positive tumors had ER positivity > 10% and 4 (27%) had ER positivity ≤ 10%. ER positive tumors had a smaller median tumor size of 2.5 cm, compared with ER negative tumors with median tumor size 3.05 cm, however this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.82). There were no statistical differences between ER positive and ER negative tumors in terms of histologic grade (P = 0.34), histologic subtype (P = 0.65), clinical stage (P>0.99) or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression (P = 0.29). There was also no difference in overall survival (OS) between ER positive and ER negative metaplastic breast cancers (HR = 0.35, 95% CI, 0.003–2.67, P = 0.39). CONCLUSION: Our experience suggests that ER positivity has no prognostic relevance in MBC. Regardless of ER expression status, there were no statistically significant differences in overall survival between ER positive and ER negative MBC. 2022 2022-08-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9742347/ /pubmed/36058202 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctarc.2022.100630 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ).
spellingShingle Article
Abada, Evi
Kim, Seongho
Dozier, Keion
Fehmi, Omar
Jang, Hyejeong
Fehmi, Ziad
Bandyopadhyay, Sudeshna
Estrogen receptor status has no prognostic relevance in metaplastic breast carcinoma
title Estrogen receptor status has no prognostic relevance in metaplastic breast carcinoma
title_full Estrogen receptor status has no prognostic relevance in metaplastic breast carcinoma
title_fullStr Estrogen receptor status has no prognostic relevance in metaplastic breast carcinoma
title_full_unstemmed Estrogen receptor status has no prognostic relevance in metaplastic breast carcinoma
title_short Estrogen receptor status has no prognostic relevance in metaplastic breast carcinoma
title_sort estrogen receptor status has no prognostic relevance in metaplastic breast carcinoma
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9742347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36058202
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctarc.2022.100630
work_keys_str_mv AT abadaevi estrogenreceptorstatushasnoprognosticrelevanceinmetaplasticbreastcarcinoma
AT kimseongho estrogenreceptorstatushasnoprognosticrelevanceinmetaplasticbreastcarcinoma
AT dozierkeion estrogenreceptorstatushasnoprognosticrelevanceinmetaplasticbreastcarcinoma
AT fehmiomar estrogenreceptorstatushasnoprognosticrelevanceinmetaplasticbreastcarcinoma
AT janghyejeong estrogenreceptorstatushasnoprognosticrelevanceinmetaplasticbreastcarcinoma
AT fehmiziad estrogenreceptorstatushasnoprognosticrelevanceinmetaplasticbreastcarcinoma
AT bandyopadhyaysudeshna estrogenreceptorstatushasnoprognosticrelevanceinmetaplasticbreastcarcinoma