Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Differences in race, molecular and tumor characteristics among women diagnosed with invasive ductal and lobular breast carcinomas

  • Original paper
  • Published:
Cancer Causes & Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The dominant invasive breast cancer histologic subtype, ductal carcinoma, shows intrinsic subtype diversity. However, lobular breast cancers are predominantly Luminal A. Both histologic subtypes show distinct relationships with patient and tumor characteristics, but it is unclear if these associations remain after accounting for intrinsic subtype.

Methods

Generalized linear models were used to estimate relative frequency differences (RFDs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for the associations between age, race, tumor characteristics, immunohistochemistry (IHC) and RNA-based intrinsic subtype, TP53 status, and histologic subtype in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study (CBCS, n = 3,182) and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA, n = 808).

Results

Relative to ductal tumors, lobular tumors were significantly more likely to be Luminal A [CBCS RNA RFD: 44.9%, 95% CI (39.6, 50.1); TCGA: RFD: 50.5%, 95% CI (43.9, 57.1)], were less frequent among young (≤ 50 years) and black women, were larger in size, low grade, less frequently had TP53 pathway defects, and were diagnosed at later stages. These associations persisted among Luminal A tumors (n = 242).

Conclusions

While histology is strongly associated with molecular characteristics, histologic associations with age, race, size, grade, and stage persisted after restricting to Luminal A subtype. Histology may continue to be clinically relevant among Luminal A breast cancers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arps DP, Healy P, Zhao L et al (2013) Invasive ductal carcinoma with lobular features: a comparison study to invasive ductal and invasive lobular carcinomas of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 138:719–726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2493-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Makki J (2015) Diversity of breast carcinoma: histological subtypes and clinical relevance. Clin Med Insights Pathol 8:23–31. https://doi.org/10.4137/CPath.S31563.TYPE

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Rosen PP (2009) Rosen’s breast pathology, 3rd edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Phildelphia

    Google Scholar 

  4. Arpino G, Bardou VJ, Clark GM, Elledge RM (2004) Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res 6:R149–R156. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr767

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Cristofanilli M, Gonzalez-Angulo A, Sneige N et al (2005) Invasive lobular carcinoma classic type: response to primary chemotherapy and survival outcomes. J Clin Oncol 23:41–48. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.03.111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Li CI, Uribe DJ, Daling JR (2005) Clinical characteristics of different histologic types of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 93:1046–1052. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602787

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Li CI (2010) Risk of mortality by histologic type of breast cancer in the United States. Horm Cancer 1:156–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12672-010-0016-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pestalozzi BC, Zahrieh D, Mallon E et al (2008) Distinct clinical and prognostic features of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: combined results of 15 International Breast Cancer Study Group clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 26:3006–3014. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.14.9336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Phipps AI, Li CI, Kerlikowske K et al (2010) Risk factors for ductal, lobular, and mixed ductal-lobular breast cancer in a screening population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 19:1643–1654. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0188

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Rakha EA, Gill MS, El-Sayed ME et al (2009) The biological and clinical characteristics of breast carcinoma with mixed ductal and lobular morphology. Breast Cancer Res Treat 114:243–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-008-0007-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zengel B, Yararbas U, Duran A et al (2015) Comparison of the clinicopathological features of invasive ductal, invasive lobular, and mixed (invasive ductal + invasive lobular) carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer 22:374–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-013-0489-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Metzger Filho O, Giobbie-Hurder A, Mallon E et al (2015) Relative effectiveness of letrozole compared with tamoxifen for patients with lobular carcinoma in the BIG 1–98 Trial. J Clin Oncol 33:2772–2779. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.60.8133

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Badowska-Kozakiewicz AM, Patera J, Sobol M, Przybylski J (2015) The role of oestrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer—immunohistochemical evaluation of oestrogen and progesterone receptor expression in invasive breast cancer in women. Współczesna Onkol 3:220–225. https://doi.org/10.5114/wo.2015.51826

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Azim HA, Malek RA, Azim HA (2014) Pathological features and prognosis of lobular carcinoma in Egyptian breast cancer patients. Womens Health (Lond Engl) 10:511–518. https://doi.org/10.2217/whe.14.48

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Biglia N, Maggiorotto F, Liberale V et al (2013) Clinical-pathologic features, long term-outcome and surgical treatment in a large series of patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Eur J Surg Oncol 39:455–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2013.02.007

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Braunstein LZ, Brock JE, Chen Y-H et al (2015) Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy by subtype approximation and surgical margin. Breast Cancer Res Treat 149:555–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3273-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cha YJ, Jung WH, Cho NH, Koo JS (2015) Expression of sarcosine metabolism-related proteins in invasive lobular carcinoma: comparison to invasive ductal carcinoma. Yonsei Med J 56:598–607. https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2015.56.3.598

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Delpech Y, Coutant C, Hsu L et al (2013) Clinical benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy in oestrogen receptor-positive invasive ductal and lobular carcinomas. Br J Cancer 108:285–291. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2012.557

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. García-Fernández A, Lain JM, Chabrera C et al (2015) Comparative long-term study of a large series of patients with invasive ductal carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma. Loco-regional recurrence, metastasis, and survival. Breast J 21:533–537. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kwast ABG, Groothuis-Oudshoorn KCGM, Grandjean I et al (2012) Histological type is not an independent prognostic factor for the risk pattern of breast cancer recurrences. Breast Cancer Res Treat 135:271–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2160-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rakha E, El-Sayed ME, Menon S et al (2008) Histologic grading is an independent prognostic factor in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 111:121–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-007-9768-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jung S-Y, Jeong J, Shin S-H et al (2010) The invasive lobular carcinoma as a prototype luminal A breast cancer: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Cancer 10:664. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-10-664

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Bharat A, Gao F, Margenthaler JA (2009) Tumor characteristics and patient outcomes are similar between invasive lobular and mixed invasive ductal/lobular breast cancers but differ from pure invasive ductal breast cancers. Am J Surg 198:516–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.06.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Suryadevara A, Paruchuri LP, Banisaeed N et al (2010) The clinical behavior of mixed ductal/lobular carcinoma of the breast: a clinicopathologic analysis. World J Surg Oncol 8:51. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-8-51

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Conners AL, Jones KN, Hruska CB et al (2015) Direct-conversion molecular breast imaging of invasive breast cancer: imaging features, extent of invasive disease, and comparison between invasive ductal and lobular histology. Am J Roentgenol 205:W374–W381. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Tavassoli F, Schnitt SJ, Hoefler H et al (2003) Intraductal proliferative lesions. In: Tavassoli F, Devilee P (eds) World Health Organization classification of tumours. Pathology and genetics of tumours of the breast and female genital organs. IARC Press, Lyon, pp 63–74

    Google Scholar 

  27. Vlug E, Ercan C, van der Wall E et al (2014) Lobular breast cancer: pathology, biology, and options for clinical intervention. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz) 62:7–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00005-013-0251-0

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Weiss A, Chang DC (2016) A comparison of breast-specific gamma imaging of invasive lobular carcinomas and ductal carcinomas. JAMA Surg 150(8):815–816. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2015.0962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Langlands F, White J, Kearins O et al (2015) Contralateral breast cancer: incidence according to ductal or lobular phenotype of the primary. Clin Radiol 71:159–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2015.10.030

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kanumuri P, Hayse B, Killelea BK et al (2015) Characteristics of Multifocal and multicentric breast cancers. Ann Surg Oncol 22:2475–2482. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4430-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Arps DP, Jorns JM, Zhao L et al (2014) Re-excision rates of invasive ductal carcinoma with lobular features compared with invasive ductal carcinomas and invasive lobular carcinomas of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol 21:4152–4158. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3871-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Cao A-Y, Huang L, Wu J et al (2012) Tumor characteristics and the clinical outcome of invasive lobular carcinoma compared to infiltrating ductal carcinoma in a Chinese population. World J Surg Oncol 10:152. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-10-152

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Ciriello G, Gatza ML, Beck AH et al (2015) Comprehensive molecular portraits of invasive lobular breast cancer. Cell 163:506–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.09.033

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Newman B, Moorman PG, Millikan R et al (1995) The Carolina Breast Cancer Study: integrating population-based epidemiology and molecular biology. Breast Cancer Res Treat 35:51–60

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Moorman PG, Millikan RC, Newman B (2001) Oral contraceptives and breast cancer among African-American women and White women. J Natl Med Assoc 93:329–334

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. The Cancer Genome Atlas Network (2012) Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumors. Nature 490:61–70. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11412.Comprehensive

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA et al (2006) Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA 295:2492–2502. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.21.2492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. O’Brien KM, Cole SR, Tse C-K et al (2010) Intrinsic breast tumor subtypes, race, and long-term survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. Clin Cancer Res 16:6100–6110. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1533

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Allott EH, Cohen SM, Geradts J et al (2016) Performance of three-biomarker immunohistochemistry for intrinsic breast cancer subtyping in the AMBER consortium. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 25:470–478. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0874

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MCU et al (2009) Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol 27:1160–1167. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.1370

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Troester MA, Herschkowitz JI, Oh DS et al (2006) Gene expression patterns associated with p53 status in breast cancer. BMC Cancer 6:276. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-6-276

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Williams LA, Butler EN, Sun X et al (2018) TP53 protein levels, RNA-based pathway assessment, and race among invasive breast cancer cases. NPJ Breast Cancer June 25:4:13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-018-0067-5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Taylor NJ, Nikolaishvili-Feinberg N, Midkiff BR et al (2015) Rational manual and automated scoring thresholds for the immunohistochemical detection of TP53 missense mutations in human breast carcinomas. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 24:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  44. Spiegelman D, Hertzmark E (2005) Easy SAS calculations for risk or prevalence ratios and differences. Am J Epidemiol 162:199–200. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwi188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Furberg H, Millikan R, Dressler L et al (2001) Tumor characteristics in African American and white women. Breast Cancer Res Treat 68(1):33–43

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Iorfida M, Maiorano E, Orvieto E et al (2012) Invasive lobular breast cancer: subtypes and outcome. Breast Cancer Res Treat 133:713–723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2002-z

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Caldarella A, Buzzoni C, Crocetti E et al (2013) Invasive breast cancer: a significant correlation between histological types and molecular subgroups. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 139:617–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-012-1365-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Lim ST, Yu JH, Park HK et al (2014) A comparison of the clinical outcomes of patients with invasive lobular carcinoma and invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast according to molecular subtype in a Korean population. World J Surg Oncol 12:56. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-12-56

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Engstrøm MJ, Opdahl S, Vatten LJ et al (2015) Invasive lobular breast cancer: the prognostic impact of histopathological grade, E-cadherin and molecular subtypes. Histopathology 66:409–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.12572

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Lips EH, Mukhtar R, Yau C et al (2012) Lobular histology and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 136:35–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2233-z

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Sisti JS, Collins LC, Beck AH et al (2016) Reproductive risk factors in relation to molecular subtypes of breast cancer: results from the nurses’ health studies. Int J Cancer 138:2346–2356. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.29968

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Cha YJ, Kim YH, Cho NH, Koo JS (2014) Expression of autophagy related proteins in invasive lobular carcinoma: comparison to invasive ductal carcinoma. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 7:3389–3398

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank that participants who generously participated in these studies. This work was supported by the Komen Graduate Training and Disparities Research Training Grant (LAW); Komen Career Catalyst Grant (CCR16376756) (KAH); National Institutes of Health: P50 CA058223 and U01 CA179715 (AFO and MAT); R01 HG009125, P01 CA142538, and P30 ES010126 (MIL), and U54 CA156733 (MAT), R01 CA19575401 (CMP).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 135 Dauer Dr, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA

    Lindsay A. Williams, Hazel B. Nichols, Andrew F. Olshan & Melissa A. Troester

  2. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA

    Katherine A. Hoadley & Melissa A. Troester

  3. Department of Population Sciences, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA

    Joseph Geradts

  4. Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA

    Charles M. Perou & Michael I. Love

  5. Department of Biostatistics, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA

    Michael I. Love

  6. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA

    Melissa A. Troester

Authors
  1. Lindsay A. Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katherine A. Hoadley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hazel B. Nichols
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joseph Geradts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Charles M. Perou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Michael I. Love
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Andrew F. Olshan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Melissa A. Troester
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melissa A. Troester.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 265 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Williams, L.A., Hoadley, K.A., Nichols, H.B. et al. Differences in race, molecular and tumor characteristics among women diagnosed with invasive ductal and lobular breast carcinomas. Cancer Causes Control 30, 31–39 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-018-1121-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-018-1121-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation