Back to Search
Start Over
Lymph node status as a guide to selection of available prognostic markers in breast cancer: the clinical practice of the future?
- Source :
-
Diagnostic pathology [Diagn Pathol] 2006 Nov 08; Vol. 1, pp. 41. Date of Electronic Publication: 2006 Nov 08. - Publication Year :
- 2006
-
Abstract
- Prognosticators evaluating survival in breast cancer vary in significance in respect to lymph node status. Studies have shown e.g. that HER2/neu immunohistochemistry or HER2/neu gene amplification analysis do perform well as prognosticators in lymph node positive (LN +) patients but are less valuable in lymph node negative (LN -) patients. We collected data from different studies and tried to evaluate the relative significance of different prognosticators in LN+/LN- patient groups. In LN+ patients HER2/neu and E-cadherin immunohistochemistry were the statistically most significant prognosticators followed by proliferation associated features (mitotic counts by SMI (standardised mitotic index) or MAI (mitotic activity index), or S-phase fraction). Bcl-2 immunohistochemistry was also significant but p53 and cystatin A had no significance as prognosticators. In LN- patients proliferation associated prognosticators (SMI, MAI, Ki-67 index, PCNA immunohistochemistry, S-phase fraction) are especially valuable and also Cathepsin D, cystatin A, and p53 are significant, but HER2/neu or bcl-2, or E-cadherin less significant or without significance. We find that in studies evaluating single prognosticators one should distinguish between prognosticators suitable for LN+ and LN- patients. This will allow the choice of best prognosticators in evaluating the prospects of the patient. The distinction between LN+ and LN- patients in this respect may also be of special value in therapeutic decisions.
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1746-1596
- Volume :
- 1
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Diagnostic pathology
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 17092354
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1596-1-41