Advertisement

Pathology Meets Biology: the New Era of Breast Cancer Staging

  • Agnieszka DombrowskaEmail author
Local-Regional Evaluation and Therapy (DM Euhus, Section Editor)
  • 10 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Local-Regional Evaluation and Therapy

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Breast cancer is now recognized to be a very heterogeneous disease. This complexity was recently reflected in the newest American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) breast cancer staging, implemented in 2018. Although it seems very daunting, the new staging is based on both the anatomical extent of the disease and the prognostic factors such as hormonal and HER2 status, grade of the tumor, and genomic assays providing information regarding risk of recurrence. The purpose of this review is to illustrate the reasoning for the change in previous, solely an anatomically based breast cancer staging system and to report the updates.

Recent Findings

The research showed that evaluation of breast cancer through immunohistochemistry and utility of genomic assays provides substantial prognostic information.

Summary

The combination of anatomic and prognostic factors has a tremendous impact on outcome predictive abilities of the staging system for each affected individual.

Keywords

Breast cancer staging Biomarkers Intrinsic subtypes Genomic assays Prognostic factors 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by the author.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    •• Hortobagyi G, et al. Breast AJCC cancer staging manual. In: American College of Surgeons (ACS) Chicago Illinois 2017. 8th ed. This is the breast chapter published by AJCC and addressing all the updates in the eighth edition of the breast cancer staging.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    • Giuliano A, et al. Breast cancer-major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. Ca Cancer J Clin. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21393. This is the editorial summary of the eighth edition AJCC breast cancer staging changes.
  3. 3.
    Polyak K. Heterogeneity in breast cancer. J Clin Invest. 2011;121:10–3788.  https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI60534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Parker JS, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(8):1160–7.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.1370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gautam M, et al. Histological, molecular and functional subtypes of breast cancers. Cancer Biol Ther. 2010;10:955–60.  https://doi.org/10.4161/cbt.10.10.13879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goldhirsch A, et al. Strategies for subtypes—dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol. 2011;22(8):1736–47.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdr304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hon JDC, et al. Breast cancer molecular subtypes: from TNBC to QNBC. American Journal of Cancer Research. 2016;6(9):1864–72.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Russnes H, et al. Breast cancer molecular stratification. From intrinsic subtypes to integrative clusters. Am J Pathol. 2017;187(10):2152–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpath.2017.04.022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dias K, Dvorkin-Gheva A, Hallett RM, Wu Y, Hassell J, Pond GR, et al. Claudin-low breast cancer; clinical & pathological characteristics. PLoS One. 2017;12:1.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168669.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Perou CM. Molecular stratification of triple-negative breast cancers. Oncologist. 2011;16:61–70.  https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2011-S1-61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lehmann B, et al. Identification of human triple-negative breast cancer subtypes and preclinical models for selection of targeted therapies. J Clin Invest. 2011;121(7):2750–67.  https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI45014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stemmer S, et al. Clinical outcomes in ER+ HER2 -node-positive breast cancer patients who were treated according to the recurrence score results: evidence from a large prospectively designed registry. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2017;3:32.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-017-0033-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Paik S, et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3726–34.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.04.7985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Morrow PK, Theriault R. Chapter 82. General NCCN guidelines. In: Kuerer HM, editor. Kuerer’s breast surgical oncology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2010.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cardoso F, et al. The MINDACT trial: the first prospective clinical validation of a genomic tool. Mol Oncol. 2010;1(3 (2007)):246–51.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molonc.2007.10.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Whitworth P, et al. Chemosensitivity and endocrine sensitivity in clinical luminal breast cancer patients in the prospective Neoadjuvant Breast Registry Symphony Trial (NBRST) predicted by molecular subtyping. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:669–75.  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5600-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cardoso F, et al. 70-gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(8):717–29.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1602253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Breast Surgery DepartmentJohns Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations