Dergiler / European Journal of Breast Health / 2018 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 4

The Impact of Subtype Distribution in Inflammatory Breast Cancer Outcome

Sayfa
211–217
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

TNBC had the worst outcome when compared to other breastcancer subtypes.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) has an unfavourable prognosis despite the advances made in the treatment of breast cancer.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Our studyaimed to define immunohistochemistry-based surrogate subtype distribution to determine whether the breast cancer subtype accompanied survivaloutcome differences in IBC.Materials and Methods: Medical records of female breast cancer patients with non-metastatic inflammatory breast cancer admitted to our clinicbetween March 2000 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:TNBC had the worst outcome when compared to other breastcancer subtypes.
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:2000 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Objective: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) has an unfavourable prognosis despite the advances made in the treatment of breast cancer. Our studyaimed to define immunohistochemistry-based surrogate subtype distribution to determine whether the breast cancer subtype accompanied survivaloutcome differences in IBC.Materials and Methods: Medical records of female breast cancer patients with non-metastatic inflammatory breast cancer admitted to our clinicbetween March 2000 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, clinical and pathological feature of the primarytumour, adjuvant treatment options and survival data were analysed. Intrinsic breast cancer subtypes were defined according to ER, PR, HER-2 andki-67 status.Results: We identified 129 non-metastatic inflammatory breast cancer patients. Median follow-up was 73 months. 10 (7.7%) were luminal A-like,67 (51.9%) were luminal B-like, 37 (28.6%) were HER-2 positive, and 15 (11.6%) were triple negative (TNBC) by immunohistochemistry. Therewere no statistically significant differences between subtypes in terms of histological type, grade, tumour size and lymph node status. Median diseasefree survival was 47 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 29.2-82.6) and median overall survival was 75 months (95% CI 64.7-90.8). Triplenegative breast cancer showed poorer outcome than other subgroups. Presence of TNBC disease was associated with poorer outcome compared toluminal A (HR: 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.92, p: 0.039), luminal B (HR: 0.34, 95% CI 0.15-0.74, p: 0.007) and HER-2 positive subgroups (HR: 0.40,95% CI 0.17-0.94, p:0.037). Luminal A patients had a trend to have a better overall survival which did not reach to a statistical significant difference.Conclusion: Our study put forth that IBC have a poor prognosis irrespective of breast cancer surrogate subtype distribution. Luminal A, the mostfrequent subtype of breast cancer was the least common in our IBC patient group. TNBC had the worst outcome when compared to other breastcancer subtypes.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ÇAKAR, B., KARABULUT, B., USLU, R., SÜRMELİ, Z., ÖNER, P. G., YELİM, E. S. (2022). The Impact of Subtype Distribution in Inflammatory Breast Cancer Outcome. European Journal of Breast Health, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 4, 211–217. https://ajindex.com/articles/510835

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (11)

  1. Hance KW, Anderson WF, Devesa SS, Young HA, Levine PH. Trends in inflammatory breast carcinoma incidence and survival: the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program at the National Cancer Institute. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005
  2. (PMID: 15998949) [CrossRef] Dawood S, Merajver SD, Viens P, Vermeulen PB, Swain SM, Buchholz TA, Dirix LY, Levine PH, Lucci A, Krishnamurthy S, Robertson FM, Woodward WA, Yang WT, Ueno NT, Cristofanilli M. International expert panel on inflammatory breast cancer: consensus statement for standardized diagnosis and treatment. Ann Oncol 2011
  3. (PMID: 20603440) [CrossRef] Jaiyesimi IA, Buzdar AU, Hortobagyi G. Inflammatory breast cancer: a review. J Clin Oncol 1992
  4. (PMID: 1588366) [CrossRef ] Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 1989
  5. (PMID: 2910416) [CrossRef] Pestalozzi BC, Zahrieh D, Mallon E, Gusterson BA, Price KN, Gelber RD, Holmberg SB, Lindtner J, Snyder R, Thürlimann B, Murray E, Viale G, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Coates AS, Goldhirsch A
  6. International Breast Cancer Study Group. Distinct clinical and prognostic features of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: combined results of 15 International Breast Cancer Study Group clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2008
  7. (PMID: 18458044) [CrossRef] Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Galea M, O'Rouke S, Blamey RW, Elston CW. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. III. Vascular invasion: relationship with recurrence and survival in a large study with longterm follow-up. Histopathology 1994
  8. (PMID: 8144141) [CrossRef ] Nguyen DM, Sam K, Tsimelzon A, Li X, Wong H, Mohsin S, Clark GM, Hilsenbeck SG, Elledge RM, Allred DC, O'Connell P, Chang JC. Molecular heterogeneity of inflammatory breast cancer: a hyperproliferative phenotype. Clin Cancer Res 2006
  9. (PMID: 16951220) [CrossRef] Paradiso A, Tommasi S, Brandi M, Marzullo F, Simone G, Lorusso V, Mangia A, De Lena M. Cell kinetics and hormonal receptor status in inflammatory breast carcinoma. Comparison with locally advanced disease. Cancer 1989
  10. (PMID: 2790702) [CrossRef] Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thürlimann B, Senn HJ
  11. Panel members. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013.