Radiation Oncology Journal

The Korean Society for Radiation Oncology (대한방사선종양학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Treatment outcome in patients with triple negative early stage breast cancers compared with other molecular subtypes

  • Kim, Ja Young (Department of Radiation Oncology, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University) ;
  • Chang, Sei-Kyung (Department of Radiation Oncology, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University) ;
  • Park, Heily (Department of Radiation Oncology, Presbyterian Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Bo-Mi (Department of Radiation Oncology, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University) ;
  • Shin, Hyun Soo (Department of Radiation Oncology, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University)
  • Received : 2012.07.03
  • Accepted : 2012.09.14
  • Published : 2012.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: To determine whether triple negative (TN) early stage breast cancers have poorer survival rates compared with other molecular types. Materials and Methods: Between August 2000 and July 2006, patients diagnosed with stage I, II early stage breast cancers, in whom all three markers (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor [HER]-2) were available and treated with modified radical mastectomy or breast conserving surgery followed by radiotherapy, were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Of 446 patients, 94 (21.1%) were classified as TN, 57 (12.8%) as HER-2 type, and 295 (66.1%) as luminal. TN was more frequently associated with young patients younger than 35 years old (p = 0.002), higher histologic grade (p < 0.0001), and nuclear (p < 0.0001). The median follow-up period was 78 months (range, 4 to 130 months). There were 9 local relapses (2.0%), 15 nodal (3.4%), 40 distant metastases (9.0%), and 33 deaths (7.4%) for all patients. The rates of 5-year OS, DFS, LFS, and DMFS for all patients were 95.5%, 89.9%, 95.4%, and 91.7%, respectively. There were no significant differences in OS, DFS, LFS, and DMFS between triple negative and other subtypes (p > 0.05). Conclusion: We found that patients with TN early stage breast cancers had no difference in survival rates compared with other molecular subtypes. Prospective study in homogeneous treatment group will need for a prognosis of TN early stage breast cancer.

Keywords

References

  1. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000;406:747-52. https://doi.org/10.1038/35021093
  2. Weigelt B, Mackay A, A'hern R, et al. Breast cancer molecular profiling with single sample predictors: a retrospective analysis. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:339-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70008-5
  3. Foulkes WD, Smith IE, Reis-Filho JS. Triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2010;363:1938-48. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1001389
  4. Kreike B, van Kouwenhove M, Horlings H, et al. Gene expression profiling and histopathological characterization of triple-negative/basal-like breast carcinomas. Breast Cancer Res 2007;9:R65. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr1771
  5. Nguyen PL, Taghian AG, Katz MS, et al. Breast cancer subtype approximated by estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER-2 is associated with local and distant recurrence after breast-conserving therapy. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2373-8. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.14.4287
  6. Noh JM, Choi DH, Huh SJ, et al. Patterns of recurrence after breast-conserving treatment for early stage breast cancer by molecular subtype. J Breast Cancer 2011;14:46-51. https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2011.14.1.46
  7. Yagata H, Kajiura Y, Yamauchi H. Current strategy for triplenegative breast cancer: appropriate combination of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. Breast Cancer 2011;18:165-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-011-0254-9
  8. Dent R, Trudeau M, Pritchard KI, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer: clinical features and patterns of recurrence. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13:4429-34. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-3045
  9. Dent R, Hanna WM, Trudeau M, Rawlinson E, Sun P, Narod SA. Time to disease recurrence in basal-type breast cancers: effects of tumor size and lymph node status. Cancer 2009;115:4917-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24573
  10. Voduc KD, Cheang MC, Tyldesley S, Gelmon K, Nielsen TO, Kennecke H. Breast cancer subtypes and the risk of local and regional relapse. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1684-91. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.24.9284
  11. Haffty BG, Yang Q, Reiss M, et al. Locoregional relapse and distant metastasis in conservatively managed triple negative early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:5652-7. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.06.5664
  12. Solin LJ, Hwang WT, Vapiwala N. Outcome after breast conservation treatment with radiation for women with triplenegative early-stage invasive breast carcinoma. Clin Breast Cancer 2009;9:96-100. https://doi.org/10.3816/CBC.2009.n.018
  13. Collins LC, Botero ML, Schnitt SJ. Bimodal frequency distribution of estrogen receptor immunohistochemical staining results in breast cancer: an analysis of 825 cases. Am J Clin Pathol 2005;123:16-20. https://doi.org/10.1309/HCF035N9WK40ETJ0
  14. Park YH, Lee SJ, Cho EY, et al. Clinical relevance of TNM staging system according to breast cancer subtypes. Ann Oncol 2011;22:1554-60. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq617
  15. Freedman GM, Anderson PR, Li T, Nicolaou N. Locoregional recurrence of triple-negative breast cancer after breastconserving surgery and radiation. Cancer 2009;115:946-51. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24094
  16. Brenton JD, Carey LA, Ahmed AA, Caldas C. Molecular classification and molecular forecasting of breast cancer: ready for clinical application? J Clin Oncol 2005;23:7350-60. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.03.3845
  17. Kim EK, Noh WC, Han W, Noh DY. Prognostic signifi cance of young age (<35 years) by subtype based on ER, PR, and HER2 status in breast cancer: a nationwide registry-based study. World J Surg 2011;35:1244-53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1071-1

Cited by

  1. No association between triple-negative breast cancer and prognosis of patients receiving breast-conserving treatment vol.14, pp.6, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2017.7251