TY - JOUR
T1 - Conventional pathology versus gene signatures for assessing luminal A and B type breast cancers
T2 - Results of a prospective cohort study
AU - van Steenhoven, Julia E.C.
AU - Kuijer, Anne
AU - van Diest, Paul J.
AU - van Gorp, Joost M.
AU - Straver, Marieke
AU - Elias, Sjoerd G.
AU - Wesseling, Jelle
AU - Rutgers, Emiel J.Th.
AU - Timmer-Bonte, Johanna N.H.
AU - Nieboer, Peter
AU - Smilde, Tineke J.
AU - Imholz, Alex
AU - Blanken, Charlotte F.J.M.
AU - Siesling, Sabine
AU - van Dalen, Thijs
PY - 2018/5/1
Y1 - 2018/5/1
N2 - In this study, in estrogen receptor positive (ER+) early stage breast cancer patients who were considered candidates for 70-gene signature (70-GS, “MammaPrint”) use, we compared molecular subtyping (MS) based on the previously validated 80-gene signature (80-GS, “BluePrint”) versus surrogate pathological subtyping (PS). Between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2015, 595 clinical intermediate risk ER+ early stage breast cancer patients were enrolled. Hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 receptor status were determined by conventional pathology using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). Ki67 was assessed in a subset of patients. The overall concordance between PS and MS for luminal type cancers (A and B together) was 98%. The concordance between PS and MS for luminal A and luminal B type cancers based on the Bloom Richardson histological grade (BR) (n = 586) or Ki67 (n = 185) was low: 64% (Kappa 0.20 [95% CI 0.11–0.28]) and 65% (Kappa 0.22 [95% CI 0.062–0.37]), respectively. In this prospective study (NCT02209857) of a selection of ER+ and predominantly HER2− early-stage breast cancer patients, the additional ability of the 80-GS to distinguish between luminal, HER2-type and basal-like cancers was inherently very limited. The distinction of luminal-type tumors into A and B according to Ki67 status or BR grade versus the 70-GS revealed poor concordance.
AB - In this study, in estrogen receptor positive (ER+) early stage breast cancer patients who were considered candidates for 70-gene signature (70-GS, “MammaPrint”) use, we compared molecular subtyping (MS) based on the previously validated 80-gene signature (80-GS, “BluePrint”) versus surrogate pathological subtyping (PS). Between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2015, 595 clinical intermediate risk ER+ early stage breast cancer patients were enrolled. Hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 receptor status were determined by conventional pathology using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). Ki67 was assessed in a subset of patients. The overall concordance between PS and MS for luminal type cancers (A and B together) was 98%. The concordance between PS and MS for luminal A and luminal B type cancers based on the Bloom Richardson histological grade (BR) (n = 586) or Ki67 (n = 185) was low: 64% (Kappa 0.20 [95% CI 0.11–0.28]) and 65% (Kappa 0.22 [95% CI 0.062–0.37]), respectively. In this prospective study (NCT02209857) of a selection of ER+ and predominantly HER2− early-stage breast cancer patients, the additional ability of the 80-GS to distinguish between luminal, HER2-type and basal-like cancers was inherently very limited. The distinction of luminal-type tumors into A and B according to Ki67 status or BR grade versus the 70-GS revealed poor concordance.
KW - 70-gene signature
KW - 80-gene signature
KW - Breast cancer
KW - Ki67
KW - Local pathology
KW - Molecular subtyping
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047430367&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/genes9050261
DO - 10.3390/genes9050261
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85047430367
SN - 2073-4425
VL - 9
JO - Genes
JF - Genes
IS - 5
M1 - 261
ER -