Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mieux faire que les facteurs histopronostiques classiques TN et grade histopronostique : biochimie et immunohistochimie?

Can we improve the classical histopathological tools (TN and grade) using biochemistry and immunohistochemistry?

  • Conference paper
Cancer du sein : surdiagnostic, surtraitement

  • 233 Accesses

Résumé

La prise en charge des cancers du sein, repose toujours en 2011 en France sur, d’une part, les paramètres classiques : taille tumorale, envahissement ganglionnaire, grade histopronostique modifié par Elston Ellis, envahissement lymphatique et, d’autre part, les paramètres « biologiques » que sont les statuts des récepteurs hormonaux et de HER2.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Références

  1. Penault-Llorca F, Arnould L (2010) Adjuvant breast cancer: which clinical and pathological characteristics in 2007? Bull Cancer 97: 1421–1426

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Sørlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R et al. (2001) Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 10869–10874

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nielsen TO, Hsu FD, Jensen K et al. (2004) Immunohistochemical and clinical characterization of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 10: 5367–5374

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ross JS (2009) Multigene classifiers, prognostic factors, and predictors of breast cancer clinical outcome. Adv Anat Pathol 16: 204–215

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lamy PJ, Romieu G, Jacot W (2010) UPA/PAI-1: a tool for breast cancer treatment individualization. Biology, clinical implications and quantification assays. Bull Cancer 97: 341–348

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Carlson RW, Allred DC, Anderson BO et al.; NCCN Breast Cancer Clinical Practice Guidelines Panel (2009) Breast cancer. Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 7: 122–192

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Thürlimann B, Senn HJ; Panel members (2011) 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. Ann Oncol 2011 22: 1736–1747

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Recommandations pour la pratique clinique de Saint-Paul-de-Vence (2011) Cancers du sein. Oncologie (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dowsett M, Salter J, Zabaglo L et al. (2011) Predictive algorithms for adjuvant therapy: TransATAC. Steroids 76: 777–780

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Dowsett M, O Nielsen T, A’Hern R et al. (2011) Ki-67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki-67 in Breast Cancer Working Group JNCI

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre Jean Perrin, 58, rue Montalembert, BP 392, 63011, Clermont-Ferrand Cedex

    F. Penault-Llorca

Authors
  1. F. Penault-Llorca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag France, Paris

About this paper

Cite this paper

Penault-Llorca, F. (2012). Mieux faire que les facteurs histopronostiques classiques TN et grade histopronostique : biochimie et immunohistochimie?. In: Cancer du sein : surdiagnostic, surtraitement. Springer, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0249-7_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0249-7_18

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Paris

  • Print ISBN: 978-2-8178-0248-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-2-8178-0249-7

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation