Abstract Background Early invasive breast cancer (EIBC) is an heterogeneous disease. Immunohistochemical (IHC) markers can be used to classify tumors in different biological subtypes with different clinical behavior. Purpose: The aim of our study was to evaluate survival outcomes for patients (pts) with different subtypes of EIBC as classified using four ICH markers (ER, PR, HER2 and Ki67). Methods: We evaluated data from 3403 consecutive cases of EIBC treated from 1995 to 2008 and classified as: luminal A (positive ER and PR, negative HER2 and Ki67< 14%), luminal B (positive ER and/or PR, negative HER2 and Ki67>14%), luminal C (positive ER and/or PR, positive HER2, any Ki67), HER2+ (negative ER and PR, positive HER2, any ki67), triple negative (negative ER and PR, negative HER2, any ki67). Log-rank test and Kaplan-Meyer estimator were performed to evaluate the impact of ICH subtypes on overall survival (OS), Event Free Survival (EFS) and their correlation with other known prognostic factors such as N, G, Size, Age. Results: We identified 917 luminal A (26.9%), 1731 luminal B (50.9%), 279 (8.2%) luminal C, 183 HER2 + (5.4%) and 293 triple negative (8.6%). Median age was 61 years. Luminal A was more frequently (p<0.001) associated with older age, smaller size, negative axilla involvement, low grading. Observed events (relapses, contralateral and second tumors) were: 54 in luminal A (6%), 215 in luminal B (16%), 40 in luminal C (14%), 42 in HER2+ (23%) and 59 in triple negative (20%). Disease free interval (DFI) was shorter in luminal C, HER2 and TN (median DFI: 30, 26 and 19 months) than in Luminal A and B (median DFI: 51 and 41 month). Luminal A and B presented more bony and less visceral recurrences than luminal C, HER2 and triple negative tumors. At median follow up of 51 months EFS was 94.1% in luminal A, 87.5% in luminal B, 85.5% in luminal C, 76.8% in HER2+ and 79.7% in triple negative. Corresponding OS was 95.3% in luminal A, 89% in luminal B, 89.2% in luminal C, 80.9% in HER2+, 81.9% in triple negative. Different subtypes EFS according to nodal status, grading, tumor size and age, was reported in table 1. Considering only Luminal subtypes, Luminal B and C were significantly associated with poor EFS vs Luminal A EIBCs in both N0 (p=0.046) and N+ pts (p<0.001), in T1 (p=0.013) and T2 (p=0.03) pts, in pts older than 40 years (p=0.002). Conclusions: Luminal A showed better prognosis in term of EFS and OS than other subtypes regardless other prognostic factors as clinical features (age) and tumor extent (T and N). Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-14-23.
Read full abstract