Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Pathology Report

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Breast Cancer

Abstract

An accurate pathological assessment of core biopsies or resection specimens provides important information on the major features of breast cancer, such as tumor type, size, biological characteristics, lymph node status, stage, and extent of residual disease in case of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and is crucial for ensuring an appropriate patient management. In the era of molecular medicine and tailored therapies, the pathologic assessment of primary tumor still represents an essential guide for oncologists and surgeons to inform the choice of the best treatment options available for individual patients. Therefore, the management of patients with breast cancer detected through imaging or symptomatic presentation depends heavily on the quality of the pathology service.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN et al (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:118–145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Wolff AC et al (2010) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 6:195–197

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Bossuyt V, Provenzano E, Symmans WF et al (2015) Recommendations for standardized pathological characterization of residual disease for neoadjuvant clinical trials of breast cancer by the BIG-NABCG collaboration. Ann Oncol 26(7):1280–1291

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Provenzano E, Bossuyt V, Viale G et al (2015) Standardization of pathologic evaluation and reporting of postneoadjuvant specimens in clinical trials of breast cancer: recommendations from an international working group. Mod Pathol 28(9):1185–1201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lakhani S, Ellis I, Schnitt S et al (2012) WHO classification of tumours of the breast, 4. Aufl edn. IARC Press, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  6. Colleoni M, Rotmensz N, Maisonneuve P et al (2012) Outcome of special types of breast cancer. Ann Oncol 23(6):1428–1436

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Arpino G, Clark GM, Mohsin S et al (2000) Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: molecular markers, treatment, and clinical outcome. Cancer 94:2119–2127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Leibl S, Gogg-Kammerer M, Sommersacher A et al (2005) Metaplastic breast carcinomas: are they of myoepithelial differentiation? Immunohistochemical profile of the sarcomatoid subtype using novel myoepithelial markers. Am J Surg Pathol 29:347–353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Viale G, Rotmensz MP et al (2009) Lack of prognostic significance of “classic” lobular breast carcinoma: a matched, single institution series. Breast Cancer Res Treat 117:211–214

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC et al (2010) AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ellis IO, Carder P, Hales S et al (2016) Pathology reporting of breast disease in surgical excision specimens incorporating the dataset for histological reporting of breast cancer. Published by The Royal College of Pathologists, 73

    Google Scholar 

  13. Henson DE, Ries L, Freedman LS et al (1991) Relationship among outcome, stage of disease, and histologic grade for 22,616 cases of breast cancer. The basis of a prognostic index. Cancer 68:2142–2149

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Page DL, Ellis IO, Elston CW (1995) Histologic grading of breast cancer let’s do it. Am J Clin Pathol 103:123–124

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Lee AH et al (2008) Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 26:3153–3158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Patey DH, Scarff RW (1928) The position of histology in the prognosis of carcinoma of the breast. Lancet 1:801–804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bloom HJ, Richardson WW (1957) Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer. Br J Cancer 11:359–377

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Elston CW, Ellis IO (1991) Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 19(5):403–401

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dunne B, Going JJ (2001) Scoring nuclear pleomorphism in breast cancer. Histopathology 39:259–265

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Verhoeven D, Bourgeois N, Derde MP et al (1990) Comparison of cell growth in different parts of breast cancers. Histopathology 17:505–509

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Connor AJM, Pinder SE, Elston CW et al (1997) Intratumoural heterogeneity of proliferation in invasive breast carcinoma evaluated with MIB1 antibody. Breast 6:171–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Harris GC, Denley HE, Pinder SE, Lee AH, Ellis IO, Elston CW et al (2003) Correlation of histologic prognostic factors in core biopsies and therapeutic excisions of invasive breast carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 27:11–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. O’Shea AM, Rakha EA, Hodi Z et al (2011) Histological grade of invasive carcinoma of the breast assessed on needle core biopsy—modifications to mitotic count assessment to improve agreement with surgical specimens. Histopathology 59:543–548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Galea M et al (1994) Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. III. Vascular invasion: relationship with recurrence and survival in a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 24:41–47

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee AH, Pinder SE, Macmillan RD et al (2006) Prognostic value of lymphovascular invasion in women with lymph node negative invasive breast carcinoma. Eur J Cancer 42:357–362

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mohammed RA, Ellis IO, Lee AH, Martin SG (2009) Vascular invasion in breast cancer; an overview of recent prognostic developments and molecular pathophysiological mechanisms. Histopathology 55:1–9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Braun M, Flucke U, Debald M et al (2008) Detection of lymphovascular invasion in early breast cancer by D2-40 (podoplanin): a clinically useful predictor for axillary lymph node metastases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 112:503–511

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J et al (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1233–1241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Arriagada R, Lê MG, Rochard F, Contesso G (1996) Conservative treatment versus mastectomy in early breast cancer: patterns of failure with 15 years of follow-up data. Institut Gustave-Roussy breast cancer group. J Clin Oncol 14:1558–1564

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Blichert-Toft M, Rose C, Andersen JA et al (1992) Danish randomized trial comparing breast conservation therapy with mastectomy: six years of life-table analysis. Danish breast cancer cooperative group. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 11:19–25

    Google Scholar 

  31. Poggi MM, Danforth DN, Sciuto LC et al (2003) Eighteen-year results in the treatment of early breast carcinoma with mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy: the National Cancer Institute Randomized trial. Cancer 98:697–702

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Van Dongen JA, Voogd AC, Fentiman IS et al (2000) Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10801 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:1143–1150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L et al (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1227–1232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Halyard MY, Wasif N, Harris EE et al (2012) ACR appropriateness criteria local-regional recurrence (LR) and salvage surgery: breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 35:178–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Park CC, Mitsumori M, Nixon A et al (2000) Outcome at 8 years after breast conserving surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer: influence of margin status and systemic therapy on local recurrence. J Clin Oncol 18:1668–1675

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Leong C, Boyages J, Jayasinghe UW et al (2004) Effect of margins on ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after breast conservation therapy for lymph node negative breast carcinoma. Cancer 100:1823–1832

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Dooley WC, Parker J (2005) Understanding the mechanisms creating false positive lumpectomy margins. Am J Surg 190:606–608

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Esbona K, Li Z, Wilke LG (2012) Intraoperative imprint cytology and frozen section pathology for margin assessment in breast conservation surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol 19:3236–3245

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Osborn JB, Keeney GL, Jakub JW et al (2011) Cost-effectiveness analysis of routine frozen-section analysis of breast margins compared with reoperation for positive margins. Ann Surg Oncol 18:3204–3209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. De Mascarel I, MacGrogan G, Debled M et al (2008) Distinction between isolated tumor cells and micrometastases in breast cancer: is it reliable and useful? Cancer 112:1672–1678

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Cserni G, Bianchi S, Vezzosi V et al (2008) Variations in sentinel node isolated tumour cells/micrometastasis and non-sentinel node involvement rates according to different interpretations of the TNM definitions. Eur J Cancer 44:2185–2191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Galimberti V et al (1997) Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph-nodes. Lancet 349(9069):1864–1867

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Viale G, Bosari S, Mazzarol G et al (1999) Intraoperative examination of axillary lymph nodes in breast carcinoma patients. Cancer 85(11):2433–2438

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Turner RR, Olilla DW, Krasne DL, Giuliano AE (1997) Histopathologic validation of sentinel lymph node hypothesis for breast carcinoma. Ann Surg 226(3):271–276

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Taniyama K, Motoshita J, Sakane J et al (2006) Combination analysis of a whole lymph node by one-step nucleic acid amplification and histology for intraoperative detection of micrometastasis. Pathobiology 73(4):183–191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Tsujimoto M, Nakabayashi K, Yoshidome K et al (2007) One-step nucleic acid amplification for intraoperative detection of lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res 13(16):4807–4816

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Tamaki Y, Akiyama F, Iwase T et al (2009) Molecular detection of lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients: results of a multicenter trial using the one-step nucleic acid amplification assay. Clin Cancer Res 15(8):2879–2884

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Hansen NM, Grube B, Ye X et al (2009) Impact of micrometastasis in the sentinel node of patients with invasive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 27(28):4679–4684

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV et al (2011) Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 305:569–575

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Giuliano AE, McCall L, Beitsch P et al (2010) Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: the American College of Surgeons oncology group Z0011 randomized trial. Ann Surg 252:426–432

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Giuliano AE, Ballman K, McCall L et al (2016) Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: long-term follow-up from the american college of surgeons oncology group (alliance) ACOSOG Z0011 randomized trial. Ann Surg 264(3):413–420

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Coates AS, Winer EP, Goldhirsch A et al (2015) Tailoring therapies-improving the management of early breast cancer: St. Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. Ann Oncol 26:1533–1546

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Rakha EA, Reis-Filho JS, Ellis IO (2010) Combinatorial biomarker expression in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 120(2):293–308

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB et al (2000) Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406(6797):747–752

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Anderson WF, Chatterjee N, Ershler WB, Brawley OW (2002) Estrogen receptor breast cancer phenotypes in the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Breast Cancer Res Treat 76:27–36

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Dunnwald LK, Rossing MA, Li CI (2007) Hormone receptor status, tumor characteristics, and prognosis: a prospective cohort of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res 9:R6

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Putti TC, El-Rehim DMA, Rakha EA et al (2005) Estrogen receptor-negative breast carcinomas: a review of morphology and immunophenotypical analysis. Mod Pathol 18:26–35

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Group EBCTC (2005) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 365:1687–1717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Badve S, Nakshatri H (2009) Oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer: towards bridging histopathological and molecular classifications. J Clin Pathol 62:6–12

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Oh DS, Troester MA, Usary J et al (2006) Estrogen-regulated genes predict survival in hormone receptor-positive breast cancers. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 24:1656–1664

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Group EBCTC (1998) Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 351:1451–1467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Goldhirsch A, Ingle JN, Gelber RD et al (2009) Thresholds for therapies: highlights of the St. Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. Ann Oncol 20:1319–1329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M et al (2010) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 28:2784–2789

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Kohler BA, Sherman RL, Howlader N et al (2015) Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2011, featuring incidence of breast cancer subtypes by race/ethnicity, poverty, and state. J Natl Cancer Inst 30:107

    Google Scholar 

  65. Bose R, Kavuri SM, Searleman AC et al (2013) Activating HER2 mutations in HER2 gene amplification negative breast cancer. Cancer Discov 3(2):224–237

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Greulich H, Kaplan B, Mertins P et al (2012) Functional analysis of receptor tyrosine kinase mutations in lung cancer identifies oncogenic extracellular domain mutations of ERBB2. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109(36):14476–14481

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Wagle N, Lin NU, Richardson AL et al (2014) Whole exome sequencing of HER2+ metastatic breast cancer from patients with or without prior trastuzumab: a correlative analysis of TBCRC003. Presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium

    Google Scholar 

  68. Ross JS, Slodkowska EA, Symmans WF et al (2009) The HER-2 receptor and breast cancer: ten years of targeted anti-HER-2 therapy and personalized medicine. Oncologist 14:320–368

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Moasser MM, Krop IE (2015) The evolving landscape of HER2 targeting in breast cancer. JAMA Onocol 1(8):1154–1161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Salmon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S et al (2001) Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med 344(11):783–792

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B et al (2005) Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 353:1659–1672

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart MJ et al (2013) 2 years versus 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (HERA): an open-label, randomized controlled trial. Lancet 382:1021–1028

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Perez EA, Romond EH, Suman VJ et al (2011) Four-year follow-up of trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: joint analysis of data from NCCTG N9831 and NSABP B-31. J Clin Oncol 29:3366–3373

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Perez EA, Romond EH, Suman VJ et al (2014) Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemo-therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: planned joint analysis of overall survival from NSABP B-31 and NCCTG N9831. J Clin Oncol 32:3744–3752

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Guarneri V, Frassoldati A, Bottini A et al (2012) Preoperative chemotherapy plus trastuzumab, lapatinib, or both in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer: results of the randomized phase II CHER-LOB study. J Clin Oncol 30(16):1989–1995

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Baselga J, Cortes J, Kim SB et al (2012) Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med 366(2):109–119

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Swain SM, Baselga J, Kim SB et al (2015) Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med 372(8):724–734

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Baselga J, Bradbury I, Eidtmann H et al (2012) Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet 379:633–640

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Gianni L, Bienkowski T, Im YH et al (2012) Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a randomised multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 13(1):25–32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. IBCSG Trial 39–11/BIG 4–11 (APHINITY)

    Google Scholar 

  81. Press MF, Sauter G, Bernstein L et al (2005) Diagnostic evaluation of HER-2 as a molecular target: an assessment of accuracy and reproducibility of laboratory testing in large, prospective, randomized clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 11(18):6598–6607

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Perez EA, Suman VJ, Davidson NE et al (2006) HER2 testing by local, central, and reference laboratories in specimens from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 intergroup adjuvant trial. J Clin Oncol 24(19):3032–3038

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Viale G, Slaets L, Bogaerts J et al (2014) High concordance of protein (by IHC), gene (by FISH; HER2 only), and microarray readout (by TargetPrint) of ER, PgR, and HER2: results from the EORTC 10041/BIG 03-04 MINDACT trial. Ann Oncol 25:816–823

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Thor AD, Liu S, Moore DH, Edgerton SM (1999) Comparison of mitotic index, in vitro bromodeoxyuridine labeling, and MIB-1 assays to quantitate proliferation in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 17:470–477

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. De Azambuja E, Cardoso F, de Castro G et al (2007) Ki-67 as prognostic marker in early breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published studies involving 12 155 patients. Br J Cancer 96:1504–1513

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Jonat W, Arnold N (2011) Is the Ki-67 labelling index ready for clinical use? Ann Oncol 22:500–502

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R et al (2001) Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98(19):10869–10874

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC et al (2009) Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol 27(8):1160–1167

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Prat A, Pineda E, Adamo B et al (2015) Clinical implications of the intrinsic molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Breast Suppl 2:S26–S35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ et al (2002) Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 415(6871):530–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Wittner BS, Sgroi DC, Ryan PD et al (2008) Analysis of the MammaPrint breast cancer assay in a predominantly postmenopausal cohort. Clin Cancer Res 14(10):2988–2993

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G et al (2004) A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 351(27):2817–2826

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A’Hern R et al (2011) Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:1656–1664

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Cheang MCU, Chia SK, Voduc D, Gao D, Leung S, Snider J et al (2009) Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with Luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 101:736–750

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  95. Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thürlimann B et al (2013) Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. Ann Oncol 24:2206–2223

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Prat A, Cheang MC, Martín M, Parker JS, Carrasco E, Caballero R et al (2013) Prognostic significance of progesterone receptor e positive tumor cells within immunohistochemically defined Luminal A breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 31:203–209

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Maisonneuve P, Disalvatore D, Rotmensz N, Curigliano G, Colleoni M, Dellapasqua S et al (2014) Proposed new clinicopathological surrogate definitions of Luminal A and Luminal B (HER2-negative) intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. Breast Cancer Res 16:R65

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy

    Andrea Vingiani & Giuseppe Viale

  2. University of Milan, School of Medicine, Milan, Italy

    Giuseppe Viale

Authors
  1. Andrea Vingiani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giuseppe Viale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giuseppe Viale .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. European Institutee of Oncology, Milan, Italy

    Umberto Veronesi

  2. European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy

    Aron Goldhirsch

  3. European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy

    Paolo Veronesi

  4. San Raffaele University and Research Hospital, Milano, Italy

    Oreste Davide Gentilini

  5. European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy

    Maria Cristina Leonardi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Vingiani, A., Viale, G. (2017). The Pathology Report. In: Veronesi, U., Goldhirsch, A., Veronesi, P., Gentilini, O., Leonardi, M. (eds) Breast Cancer. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48848-6_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48848-6_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48846-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48848-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation