Breast Cancers of Special Histologic Subtypes Are Biologically Diverse
- 345 Downloads
Cancers classified as “special histologic subtypes” are felt to have a good prognosis. We used the 21-gene Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® multigene assay to examine prognostic variation within special histologic subtypes. We also examined the Recurrence Score® (RS) distribution among the more common ductal (IDC) and lobular (ILC) cancers.
610,350 tumor specimens examined in the Genomic Health clinical laboratory from 2/2004 to 8/2017 were included. Specimen histology was classified centrally using a single H&E slide and World Health Organization criteria. RS distribution (low < 18, intermediate 18–30, and high ≥ 31) was compared among histologic subtypes.
Median patient age was 60 years (IQR 51–67); 80% were node negative. Most patients had low RS results (59.2%); only 9.5% had high results. The lowest mean RS was seen in the papillary subtype (11); the highest in the IDC group (18.4). Mean RS for all special subtypes was lower than that of IDC patients. When the high RS threshold was decreased from 31 to 25, as used in the TAILORx and RxPONDER trials, the number of high RS-result patients increased from 9.5% to 16.8%. Patients with ILC had a lower mean RS result than patients with IDC, 16.5 versus 18.4.
There is substantial diversity in predicted prognosis among patients with cancers classified as special histologic subtypes, with 12–25% having intermediate RS results and 0.5–9% having high RS results. Pending further definition of the role of chemotherapy for patients with intermediate RS results by TAILORx and RxPONDER, the RS result may help to inform systemic therapy decisions in these patients.
The preparation of this manuscript was funded in part by NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant No. P30 CA008748 to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and this study was presented in podium format at the 2018 Society of Surgical Oncology Annual Cancer Symposium, March 21–24, Chicago, IL. Monica Morrow is a consultant for Genomic Health.
- 8.Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Livingston RB, Yeh IT, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(1):55–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Ramsey SD, Barlow WE, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Tunis S, Baker L, Crowley J, et al. Integrating comparative effectiveness design elements and endpoints into a phase III, randomized clinical trial (SWOG S1007) evaluating oncotypeDX-guided management for women with breast cancer involving lymph nodes. Contemp Clin Trials. 2013;34(1):1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Harris LN, Ismaila N, McShane LM, Andre F, Collyar DE, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, et al. Use of Biomarkers to Guide Decisions on Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Women With Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(10):1134–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Kurian AW, Bondarenko I, Jagsi R, Friese CR, McLeod MC, Hawley ST, et al. Recent Trends in Chemotherapy Use and Oncologists’ Treatment Recommendations for Early-Stage Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017 (Epub ahead of print).Google Scholar
- 16.Jasem J, Amini A, Rabinovitch R, Borges VF, Elias A, Fisher CM, Kabos P. 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay As a Predictor of Adjuvant Chemotherapy Administration for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: An Analysis of Use, Therapeutic Implications, and Disparity Profile. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(17):1995–2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Hanna MG, Bleiweiss IJ, Nayak A, Jaffer S. Correlation of Oncotype DX Recurrence Score with Histomorphology and Immunohistochemistry in over 500 Patients. Int J Breast Cancer. 2017;2017(1257078).Google Scholar
- 22.Kelly CM, Krishnamurthy S, Bianchini G, Litton JK, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Hortobagyi GN, Pusztai L. Utility of oncotype DX risk estimates in clinically intermediate risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-normal, grade II, lymph node-negative breast cancers. Cancer. 2010;116(22):5161–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Lakhani SR. Lakhani, Sunil R., ed. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Breast. International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2012.Google Scholar
- 25.Badve SS, Baehner FL, Gray RP, Childs BH, Maddala T, Liu ML, et al. Estrogen- and progesterone-receptor status in ECOG 2197: comparison of immunohistochemistry by local and central laboratories and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction by central laboratory. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(15):2473–81. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2007.13.6424.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Pestalozzi BC, Zahrieh D, Mallon E, Gusterson BA, Price KN, Gelber RD, et al. 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. 2008;26(18):3006–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar