Article

Tumour markers in breast carcinoma correlate with grade rather than with invasiveness.

Department of Surgery, University Hospital Uppsala, S-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden.
British Journal of Cancer (Impact Factor: 5.08). 10/2001; 85(6):869-74. DOI: 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1995
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Ductal breast carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is regarded as a precursor to invasive breast cancer. The progression from in situ to invasive cancer is however little understood. We compared some tumour markers in invasive and in situ breast carcinomas trying to find steps in this progression. We designed a semi-experimental setting and compared histopathological grading and tumour marker expression in pure DCIS (n = 194), small invasive lesions (n = 127) and lesions with both an invasive and in situ component (n = 305). Grading was done according to the Elston-Ellis and EORTC classification systems, respectively. Immunohistochemical staining was conducted for p53, c-erbB-2, Ki-67, ER, PR, bcl-2 and angiogenesis. All markers correlated with grade rather than with invasiveness. No marker was clearly associated with the progression from in situ to invasiveness. The expression of tumour markers was almost identical in the 2 components of mixed lesions. DCIS as a group showed a more 'malignant picture' than invasive cancer according to the markers, probably, due to a higher proportion of poorly differentiated lesions. The step between in situ and invasive cancer seems to occur independently of tumour grade. The results suggest that well-differentiated DCIS progress to well-differentiated invasive cancer and poorly differentiated DCIS progress to poorly differentiated invasive cancer.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
113 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Different molecular subtypes of breast cancer have been identified based on gene expression profiling. Treatment suggestions based on an approximation of these subtypes by immunohistochemical criteria have been published by the St Gallen international expert consensus panel. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) can be classified into the same molecular subtypes. Our aim was to study the relation between these newly defined subtypes and prognosis in DCIS.Methods and material: TMA including 458 women from a population-based cohort with DCIS diagnosed 1986--2004 was used. Stainings for ER, PR, HER2 and Ki67 were used to classify the surrogate molecular subtypes according to the St Gallen criteria from 2011. The associations with prognosis were examined using Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazards regression models. Surrogate molecular subtyping could be done in 381 cases. Mean follow up was 164 months. Of the classified DCIS 186 were Luminal A (48.8 %), 33 Luminal B/HER2- (8.7 %), 74 Luminal B/HER2+ (17.4 %), 61 HER2+/ER- (16.0 %) and 27 Triple Negative (7.1 %). One hundred and two women had a local recurrence of which 58 were invasive. Twenty-two women had generalised disease, 8 without a prior local recurrence. We could not find a prognostic significance of the molecular subtypes other than a higher risk of developing breast cancer after more than 10 years of follow-up among women with a Triple Negative DCIS (OR 3.2; 95 % CI 1.1-9.8). The results from this large population-based cohort, with long-term follow up failed to demonstrate a prognostic value for the surrogate molecular subtyping of DCIS using the St Gallen criteria up to ten years after diagnosis. More than ten years after diagnosis Triple Negative DCIS had an elevated risk of recurrence.
    BMC Cancer 10/2013; 13(1):512. · 3.33 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Corresponding to the increased use of mammography, the incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has risen dramatically in the past 30 years. Despite its growing incidence, the treatment of DCIS remains highly variable and controversial. Although DCIS itself does not metastasize and is never lethal, it may be a precursor of invasive breast cancer and is a marker of increased breast cancer risk. Confusing a precursor lesion with cancer, many clinicians apply an invasive breast cancer treatment paradigm to DCIS patients, offering adjuvant radiation therapy and tamoxifen after diagnosis. In this commentary, we outline the issues associated with DCIS management-is DCIS a cancer, a precursor of cancer, or a marker of invasive carcinoma risk? Specifically, we argue that consideration be given to removing the term "carcinoma" from DCIS, using cancer "occurrence" to mean the diagnosis of invasive cancer after DCIS instead of "recurrence," and make the argument that a prophylactic paradigm of treatment after excision may be more appropriate.
    CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment 09/2013; · 14.07 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The spread of mammographic screening programs around the world, including in developing countries, has substantially contributed to the diagnosis of small non-palpable lesions, which has increased the detection rate of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). DCIS is heterogeneous in several ways, such as its clinical presentation, morphology and genomic profile. Excellent outcomes have been reported; however, many questions remain unanswered. For example, which patients groups are over-treated and could instead benefit from minimal intervention and which patient groups require a more traditional multidisciplinary approach. The development of a comprehensive integrated analysis that includes the radiological, morphological and genetic aspects of DCIS is necessary to answer these questions. This review focuses on discussing the significant findings about the morphological and molecular features of DCIS and its progression that have helped to uncover the biological and genetic heterogeneity of this disease. The knowledge gained in recent years might allow the development of tailored clinical management for women with DCIS in the future.
    Bioscience Reports 11/2013; · 1.88 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
1 Download
Available from