4.5 Article

ER, HER2, and TOP2A expression in primary tumor, synchronous axillary nodes, and asynchronous metastases in breast cancer

期刊

BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT
卷 132, 期 2, 页码 511-521

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-011-1610-3

关键词

ER; HER2; TOP2A; Breast cancer; Primary tumor; Synchronous axillary nodes; Metastases

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

At recurrence of breast cancer, the therapeutic target is the metastases. However, it is current practice to base the choice of systemic treatment on the biomarker profile of the primary tumor. In the present study, confirmatory biopsies were obtained from suspected metastatic lesions and compared with the primary tumors with respect to ER, HER2, and TOP2A. In the prospective tissue-collection study, 81 patients had biopsy from a suspected relapse. Additional archived paired material was included, leaving a total of 119 patients with paired primary tumor, synchronous axillary nodes (available in 52 patients) and asyncronous metastases available for analysis. ER, HER2, and TOP2A expression of primary tumors, axillary nodes and metastases were re-analysed and determined centrally by immunohistochemistry, chromogenic in situ hybridization, and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Of the 81 patients with a biopsy from a suspected relapse, 65 (80%) were diagnosed with recurrent breast carcinoma, 3 (4%) were diagnosed with other malignancies, 6 (7%) had benign conditions, and in 7 (9%) patients the biopsy was non-representative. Discordance in ER, HER2, and TOP2A (aberration vs. normal) status between primary tumor and corresponding asynchronous metastasis was 12% (14/118), 9% (10/114), and 23% (17/75), respectively. There were no significant associations with biomarker discordance and prior adjuvant therapy, or location of biopsy. Expression of ER, HER2, and TOP2A displayed discordance with a sufficient frequency to emphasize the role of confirmatory biopsies from metastatic lesions in future management of recurrent breast cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据