Diverse histomorphology of HER2-positive breast carcinomas based on differential ER expression.
Adult
Aged
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ analysis
Breast Neoplasms
/ classification
Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast
/ classification
Female
Humans
Lymphocytes, Tumor-Infiltrating
/ pathology
Middle Aged
Receptor, ErbB-2
/ biosynthesis
Receptors, Estrogen
/ biosynthesis
Receptors, Progesterone
/ biosynthesis
Retrospective Studies
HER2-positive breast carcinoma
central scar
comedo necrosis
oestrogen receptor
tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes
Journal
Histopathology
ISSN: 1365-2559
Titre abrégé: Histopathology
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7704136
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2020
Mar 2020
Historique:
received:
29
03
2019
accepted:
22
09
2019
pubmed:
26
9
2019
medline:
2
12
2020
entrez:
26
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
HER2-positive (HER2+) breast carcinoma (BC) cases are often treated similarly; however, they can be classified as either luminal B (LH) or non-luminal type (NLH) BC, which have different prognoses. In this study, we investigated the clinicohistomorphological features of each HER2+ BC subgroup. We classified 166 patients with HER2+ invasive BC into LH (n = 110, 66.3%) and NLH groups (n = 56, 33.7%). We further subclassified LH into patients with carcinomas expressing high levels of hormone receptors [LH-high; Allred score, oestrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PgR) 4-8, n = 89, 53.6%] or low levels (LH-low; Allred score, ER and/or PgR 2 or 3, n = 21, 12.7%) for clinicohistomorphological characterisation. Morphological review showed that NLH included a percentage of patients with comedo necrosis, while LH patients had significantly more central scarring. In terms of immune responsiveness, NLH showed significantly higher rates of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and healing. The LH-high and NLH groups showed distinct characteristics (by both models, P < 0.05) and the LH-low group appeared to demonstrate intermediate characteristics according to multinomial analyses using covariates reflecting tumour morphology and immune response outcomes. These results support the classification of HER2+ BC into two major subgroups, LH-high and NLH, based on tumour morphology and immune response; LH-high proliferates via scirrhous and/or spiculated growth with a central scar, while the primary proliferation pattern of NLH is based on in-situ carcinomas containing comedo necrosis with noticeable TILs and healing.
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Receptors, Estrogen
0
Receptors, Progesterone
0
ERBB2 protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
Receptor, ErbB-2
EC 2.7.10.1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
560-571Subventions
Organisme : JSPS KAKENHI
ID : JP17K08707
Informations de copyright
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000; 406; 747-752.
Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 2001; 98; 10869-10874.
Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS et al. 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 2011. Ann. Oncol. 2011; 22; 1736-1747.
Coates AS, Winer EP, Goldhirsch A et al. Tailoring therapies improving the management of early breast cancer: St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2015. Ann. Oncol. 2015; 26; 1533-1546.
Weigelt B, Geyer FC, Reis-Filho JS. Histological types of breast cancer: how special are they? Mol. Oncol. 2010; 4; 192-208.
Caldarella A, Buzzoni C, Crocetti E et al. Invasive breast cancer: a significant correlation between histological types and molecular subgroups. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2013; 139; 617-623.
Tamaki K, Ishida T, Miyashita M et al. Correlation between mammographic findings and corresponding histopathology: potential predictors for biological characteristics of breast diseases. Cancer Sci. 2011; 102; 2179-2185.
Tamaki K, Ishida T, Miyashita M et al. Multidetector row helical computed tomography for invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: correlation between radiological findings and the corresponding biological characteristics of patients. Cancer Sci. 2012; 103; 67-72.
Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 2003; 100; 8418-8423.
Dawood S, Broglio K, Buzdar AU et al. Prognosis of women with metastatic breast cancer by HER2 status and trastuzumab treatment: an institutional-based review. J. Clin. Oncol. 2010; 28; 92-98.
Hoff ER, Tubbs RR, Myles JL et al. HER2/neu amplification in breast cancer: stratification by tumor type and grade. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 2002; 117; 916-921.
van de Vijver MJ, Peterse JL, Mooi WJ et al. Neu-protein overexpression in breast cancer. Association with comedo-type ductal carcinoma in situ and limited prognostic value in stage II breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1988; 319; 1239-1245.
Bhargava R, Beriwal S, Striebel JM et al. Breast cancer molecular class ERBB2: preponderance of tumors with apocrine differentiation and expression of basal phenotype markers CK5, CK5/6, and EGFR. Appl. Immunohistochem. Mol. Morphol. 2010; 18; 113-118.
Morita M, Yamaguchi R, Tanaka M et al. Two progressive pathways of microinvasive carcinoma: low-grade luminal pathway and high-grade HER2 pathway based on high tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes. J. Clin. Pathol. 2016; 69; 890-898.
Morita M, Yamaguchi R, Tanaka M et al. CD8(+) tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes contribute to spontaneous ‘healing’ in HER2-positive ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer Med. 2016; 5; 1607-1618.
Tabár L, Tot T, Dean PB. Breast cancer: the art and science of early detection with mammography: perception, interpretation, histopathologic correlation. Stuttgart/New York: Thieme, 2005; viii; 476 pp.
Tabar L, Chen HH, Yen MF et al. Mammographic tumor features can predict long-term outcomes reliably in women with 1-14-mm invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 101; 1745-1759.
Llombart-Cussac A, Cortes J, Pare L et al. HER2-enriched subtype as a predictor of pathological complete response following trastuzumab and lapatinib without chemotherapy in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (PAMELA): an open-label, single-group, multicentre, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017; 18; 545-554.
Ellis MJ, Coop A, Singh B et al. Letrozole is more effective neoadjuvant endocrine therapy than tamoxifen for ErbB-1- and/or ErbB-2-positive, estrogen receptor-positive primary breast cancer: evidence from a Phase III randomized trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 2001; 19; 3808-3816.
Lee HJ, Park IA, Park SY et al. Two histopathologically different diseases: Hormone receptor-positive and hormone receptor-negative tumors in HER2-positive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2014; 145; 615-623.
Allred DC, Harvey JM, Berardo M et al. Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis. Mod. Pathol. 1998; 11; 155-168.
Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J. Clin. Oncol. 2013; 31; 3997-4013.
Elston CW, Ellis IO. 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 1991; 19; 403-410.
Silverstein MJ, Poller DN, Waisman JR et al. Prognostic classification of breast ductal carcinoma-in-situ. Lancet 1995; 345; 1154-1157.
Salgado R, Denkert C, Demaria S et al. The evaluation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in breast cancer: recommendations by an International TILs Working Group 2014. Ann. Oncol. 2015; 26; 259-271.
Muir R, Aitkenhead AC. The healing of intra-duct carcinoma of the mamma. J. Pathol. Bacteriol. 1934; 38; 117-127.
Horii R, Akiyama F, Kasumi F et al. Spontaneous ‘healing’ of breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2005; 12; 140-144.
Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver MJ eds. WHO classification of tumours of the breast. 4th ed. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2012.
Tsunoda-Shimizu H, Hayashi N, Hamaoka T et al. Determining the morphological features of breast cancer and predicting the effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy via diagnostic breast imaging. Breast Cancer 2008; 15; 133-140.
Zhang H, Singer B. Recursive partitioning in the health sciences. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1999.
Harrison BT, Hwang ES, Partridge AH, Thompson AM, Schnitt SJ. Variability in diagnostic threshold for comedo necrosis among breast pathologists: implications for patient eligibility for active surveillance trials of ductal carcinoma in situ. Mod. Pathol. 2019; 32; 1257-1262.
Tan PH, Ho JT, Ng EH et al. Pathologic-radiologic correlations in screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: findings of the Singapore breast screening project. Int. J. Cancer 2000; 90; 231-236.
D'Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB et al. ACR BI-RADS® atlas, breast imaging reporting and data system. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2013.
Palka I, Ormandi K, Gaal S, Boda K, Kahan Z. Casting-type calcifications on the mammogram suggest a higher probability of early relapse and death among high-risk breast cancer patients. Acta Oncol. 2007; 46; 1178-1183.
Mujtaba SS, Ni YB, Tsang JY et al. Fibrotic focus in breast carcinomas: relationship with prognostic parameters and biomarkers. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2013; 20; 2842-2849.
Mittendorf EA, Chavez-MacGregor M. All HER2-positive tumors are not created equal. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2017; 24; 3471-3474.