Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis
Precise prognosis is crucial for selection of adjuvant therapy in breast cancer. Molecular subtyping is increasingly used to complement immunohistochemical and pathological classification and to predict recurrence. This study compares both outcomes in a clinical setting. Molecular subtyping (MammaPr...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-08-01
|
| Series: | Cancers |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/14/17/4197 |
| _version_ | 1797496106547937280 |
|---|---|
| author | José A. López-Ruiz Jon A. Mieza Ignacio Zabalza María d. M. Vivanco |
| author_facet | José A. López-Ruiz Jon A. Mieza Ignacio Zabalza María d. M. Vivanco |
| author_sort | José A. López-Ruiz |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Precise prognosis is crucial for selection of adjuvant therapy in breast cancer. Molecular subtyping is increasingly used to complement immunohistochemical and pathological classification and to predict recurrence. This study compares both outcomes in a clinical setting. Molecular subtyping (MammaPrint<sup>®</sup>, TargetPrint<sup>®</sup>, and BluePrint<sup>®</sup>) and pathological classification data were compared in a cohort of 143 breast cancer patients. High risk clinical factors were defined by a value of the proliferation factor Ki67 equal or higher than 14% and/or high histological grade. The results from molecular classification were considered as reference. Core needle biopsies were found to be comparable to surgery samples for molecular classification. Discrepancies were found between molecular and pathological subtyping of the samples, including misclassification of HER2-positive tumors and the identification of a significant percentage of genomic high risk T1N0 tumors. In addition, 20% of clinical low-risk tumors showed genomic high risk, while clinical high-risk samples included 42% of cases with genomic low risk. According to pathological subtyping, a considerable number of breast cancer patients would not receive the appropriate systemic therapy. Our findings support the need to determine the molecular subtype of invasive breast tumors to improve breast cancer management. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T01:58:56Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7f12281599a0493ca6cad1dbd9af606d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2072-6694 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T01:58:56Z |
| publishDate | 2022-08-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Cancers |
| spelling | doaj.art-7f12281599a0493ca6cad1dbd9af606d2023-11-23T12:51:28ZengMDPI AGCancers2072-66942022-08-011417419710.3390/cancers14174197Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer PrognosisJosé A. López-Ruiz0Jon A. Mieza1Ignacio Zabalza2María d. M. Vivanco3Breast Imaging, PRETEIMAGEN Radiological Group, Manuel Allende 13, 48010 Bilbao, SpainDepartment of Oncological Gynecology, Cruces University Hospital, 48903 Barakaldo, SpainPathology Department, Galdakao University Hospital, 48960 Galdakao, SpainCancer Heterogeneity Lab, CIC bioGUNE, Basque Research and Technology Alliance, BRTA, Technological Park of Bizkaia, 48160 Derio, SpainPrecise prognosis is crucial for selection of adjuvant therapy in breast cancer. Molecular subtyping is increasingly used to complement immunohistochemical and pathological classification and to predict recurrence. This study compares both outcomes in a clinical setting. Molecular subtyping (MammaPrint<sup>®</sup>, TargetPrint<sup>®</sup>, and BluePrint<sup>®</sup>) and pathological classification data were compared in a cohort of 143 breast cancer patients. High risk clinical factors were defined by a value of the proliferation factor Ki67 equal or higher than 14% and/or high histological grade. The results from molecular classification were considered as reference. Core needle biopsies were found to be comparable to surgery samples for molecular classification. Discrepancies were found between molecular and pathological subtyping of the samples, including misclassification of HER2-positive tumors and the identification of a significant percentage of genomic high risk T1N0 tumors. In addition, 20% of clinical low-risk tumors showed genomic high risk, while clinical high-risk samples included 42% of cases with genomic low risk. According to pathological subtyping, a considerable number of breast cancer patients would not receive the appropriate systemic therapy. Our findings support the need to determine the molecular subtype of invasive breast tumors to improve breast cancer management.https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/14/17/4197breast cancerIHCTNprognosisSymphonyMammaPrint |
| spellingShingle | José A. López-Ruiz Jon A. Mieza Ignacio Zabalza María d. M. Vivanco Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis Cancers breast cancer IHC TN prognosis Symphony MammaPrint |
| title | Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis |
| title_full | Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis |
| title_short | Comparison of Genomic Profiling Data with Clinical Parameters: Implications for Breast Cancer Prognosis |
| title_sort | comparison of genomic profiling data with clinical parameters implications for breast cancer prognosis |
| topic | breast cancer IHC TN prognosis Symphony MammaPrint |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/14/17/4197 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT josealopezruiz comparisonofgenomicprofilingdatawithclinicalparametersimplicationsforbreastcancerprognosis AT jonamieza comparisonofgenomicprofilingdatawithclinicalparametersimplicationsforbreastcancerprognosis AT ignaciozabalza comparisonofgenomicprofilingdatawithclinicalparametersimplicationsforbreastcancerprognosis AT mariadmvivanco comparisonofgenomicprofilingdatawithclinicalparametersimplicationsforbreastcancerprognosis |