ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Her-2/neu is one of the most important molecular markers of breast cancer. Overexpression of Her-2/neu as evaluated by immunohistochemistry is necessary in the management of breast cancers. This study was performed to determine the proportion of expression of the biomarker amongst breast cancer patients who presented in our 'one-stop breast cancer unit' using automated immunohistochemistry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Automated immunohistochemical analysis of 107 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients was done for expression of Her-2/neu, between 1st April, 2016 and 30th September, 2018. The data was analyzed using SPSS version 25 for windows and Microsoft excel, 2013. RESULTS: Her-2/neu was overexpressed in 30.1% patients, and it shows no correlation with age and histological grade of the disease. CONCLUSION: There is overexpression of Her-2/neu in our local setting, and this observation is very relevant to any therapeutic decisions and management of these patients.
Subject(s)
Black People , Breast Neoplasms/metabolism , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/metabolism , Receptor, ErbB-2/metabolism , Adult , Africa, Western , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Biopsy, Large-Core Needle , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms, Male/metabolism , Breast Neoplasms, Male/pathology , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/pathology , Female , Hospitals, University , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Nigeria , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: An important cornerstone in health care delivery is the field of surgical pathology and one of its major aims is to provide a complete, precise and comprehensive diagnosis within a short period of time. In achieving this, the clinician needs to properly fill a surgical pathology requisition form.METHOD: All the consecutive requisition forms from January 1, 2018 to April 30, 2018, totaling 1046 were evaluated for completeness of the information. The requesting clinicians were unaware and cytologic smears were excluded. Patient confidentiality was maintained as no names were recorded. All the Information on the forms was recorded as being present or absent. Analysis was done using the Statistical Package for Social Science version 20.RESULTS: Altogether 1046 forms were evaluated and (100%) of the sample population bore the surnames and first names. Ages were recorded in 93.7%. Similarly, 68.2% of the forms did not bear the hospital number. Clinical summary and date of request were absent in 42.9% and 35.4% of the forms respectively. Clinicians name/ signature and investigation required were absent in 25.1% and 21.1% of the forms respectively. Overall, 77.6% of information was provided while 22.4% not provided.CONCLUSION: The names were completely filled in all the requisition forms. Others were incompletely filled. These findings should be communicated to Clinicians and the recurring attitude of allowing House Officers to fill the requisition forms should be discouraged. Efforts should also be made to let Clinicians appreciate the importance of good clinical information since this determines to a large extent the output of laboratory results
