ABSTRACT
The presence or absence of estrogen and progesterone steroid hormone receptor expression (ER, PR) is an essential feature of invasive breast cancer and determines prognosis and endocrine treatment decisions. Among the four ER/PR receptor phenotypes, the ER-/PR+ is infrequent, and its clinical relevance has been controversially discussed. Thus, we investigated its clinical significance and gene expression pattern in large datasets. In a retrospective clinical study of 15,747 breast cancer patients, we determined the ER/PR subtype survival probabilities using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. From The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) breast cancer dataset, PAM50 expression signature and pathway analyses were performed to test for distinct molecular features. In our cohort, the ER-/PR+ phenotype has been observed at a frequency of 4.1 % and was associated with an improved 10-year survival for stage I cancers compared to the ER+/PR+ reference subtype (median; 95 % CI 88.1 %; 83-93 vs. 84.3 %; 82-86 %, P = 0.024) as was confirmed by multivariate analysis over the entire follow-up (HR 0.59, 95 % CI 0.38-0.92, P = 0.021). This association lacked significance when including all stages. ER-/PR+ patients treated with antihormonal agents (34.5 %) had shorter survival compared to their non-treated counterparts (Log-rank P = 0.0001). PAM50 signatures suggest a distinct configuration for the ER-/PR+ phenotype. This specific phenotype has been further separated by a set of 59 uniquely expressed genes. Our study supports the notion of the existence of an ER-/PR+ phenotype with clinical and molecular features distinct from the large group of ER+/PR+ patients.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Gene Expression Profiling , Phenotype , Receptors, Estrogen/genetics , Receptors, Progesterone/genetics , Transcriptome , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Biomarkers, Tumor , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Neoplasm Metastasis , Neoplasm Staging , Patient Outcome Assessment , Prognosis , Survival Analysis , Young AdultABSTRACT
Patient prognosis in lung cancer largely depends on early diagnosis. The exhaled breath of patients may represent the ideal specimen for future lung cancer screening. However, the clinical applicability of current diagnostic sensor technologies based on signal pattern analysis remains incalculable due to their inability to identify a clear target. To test the robustness of the presence of a so far unknown volatile organic compound in the breath of patients with lung cancer, sniffer dogs were applied. Exhalation samples of 220 volunteers (healthy individuals, confirmed lung cancer or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)) were presented to sniffer dogs following a rigid scientific protocol. Patient history, drug administration and clinicopathological data were analysed to identify potential bias or confounders. Lung cancer was identified with an overall sensitivity of 71% and a specificity of 93%. Lung cancer detection was independent from COPD and the presence of tobacco smoke and food odours. Logistic regression identified two drugs as potential confounders. It must be assumed that a robust and specific volatile organic compound (or pattern) is present in the breath of patients with lung cancer. Additional research efforts are required to overcome the current technical limitations of electronic sensor technologies to engineer a clinically applicable screening tool.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Odorants , Small Cell Lung Carcinoma/diagnosis , Adenocarcinoma of Lung , Adult , Aged , Animals , Breath Tests/methods , Dogs , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Food , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Sensitivity and Specificity , Tobacco Smoke PollutionABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Treatment decisions in breast cancer depend on TNM classification and the assessment of additional variables with have an impact on survival. We examined whether histological subtyping breast cancer as either ductal or lobular is related to disease outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined a large data base of 14198 breast cancer patients. RESULTS: Histological sub-classification of invasive breast cancer as either ductal or lobular is not correlated with disease outcome. However, the data further showed that invasive lobular carcinomas have a higher probability of being oestrogen receptor (ER)- and progesterone receptor (PR)-positive and a lower probability of being c-erbB2-positive. They also showed a higher average age at the time of diagnosis in comparison with invasive ductal carcinoma. Local recurrence rates were lower in invasive lobular carcinoma in comparison with invasive ductal carcinoma (3.5% vs. 6.2%; p = 0.031). The multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that ER, PR, nodal status, grade and tumour size predicted disease outcome with statistical significance, while the histological subtype (invasive ductal or lobular) was not a significant predictor of disease outcome. CONCLUSION: Histological sub-classification of invasive breast cancer as either ductal or lobular is not correlated with disease outcome. On the other hand our data gives some indication that lobular and ductal breast cancer appear to be different biological entities.
