Search

The biological behavior and prognosis of breast cancer is often unpredictable with a number of factors contributing to the outcome. Nottingham's Prognostic Factor (NPI) takes into account the tumor size, nodal status, and histological grade of tumor. The receptor status considers the hormone receptor and HER2 status. The aim of the study was to correlate the NPI score with the receptor status expression in Indian women with breast cancer. A total of 78 breast cancer patients who underwent upfront modified radical mastectomy were recruited. NPI score and receptor status assessment was done at histopathological examination of the specimen. Hormone receptor negative breast cancer tended to have a higher NPI score compared to hormone receptor positive patients. However, this difference did not achieve statistical significance. NPI score parameters except for the histological grade are a reflection of the duration or time span of the tumor. On the contrary, the receptor status is indicative of the tumor biology and not of its time duration. A scoring system which incorporates the three parameters of the NPI as well as the receptor status would be the best prognostic index as well as predictive regarding the choice of adjuvant therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evaluation of expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2/neu) receptor was carried out on 80 breast cancer patients before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). No differences in expression were noted in 89% with reference to ER, 95% with reference to PR, and 91% with reference to HER2/neu status. A change in receptor status from positive to negative was noted in 12% for ER, 5% for PR, and 21% for HER2/neu after NAC. A negative to positive shift was noted in 11% for ER, 4% for PR, and 4% for HER2/neu after NAC. The possible reasons ascribed for change in receptor status after NAC are as follows: (1) Selection of chemoresistant clones with different receptor expression after NAC. (2) Tumor heterogeneity with variable receptor expression in different areas. (3) Ovarian suppression during NAC leading to alteration in receptor expression. (4) Technical considerations such as staining techniques and intra-observer and inter-observer differences in IHC slide interpretation before and after NAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]