Difference in Outcome between Luminal A, Luminal B in Early Stage Breast Cancer Retrospective Study
Dowidar, A., Abdeltwab, Z., Semary, S., Mohamed, S. (2024). Difference in Outcome between Luminal A, Luminal B in Early Stage Breast Cancer Retrospective Study. EKB Journal Management System, 5(2), 61-81. doi: 10.21608/ejmr.2023.174543.1293
Ahmed Mahrous Dowidar; Zeinab Gaber Abdeltwab; Samah Fathy Semary; Saeed Shaaban Mohamed. "Difference in Outcome between Luminal A, Luminal B in Early Stage Breast Cancer Retrospective Study". EKB Journal Management System, 5, 2, 2024, 61-81. doi: 10.21608/ejmr.2023.174543.1293
Dowidar, A., Abdeltwab, Z., Semary, S., Mohamed, S. (2024). 'Difference in Outcome between Luminal A, Luminal B in Early Stage Breast Cancer Retrospective Study', EKB Journal Management System, 5(2), pp. 61-81. doi: 10.21608/ejmr.2023.174543.1293
Dowidar, A., Abdeltwab, Z., Semary, S., Mohamed, S. Difference in Outcome between Luminal A, Luminal B in Early Stage Breast Cancer Retrospective Study. EKB Journal Management System, 2024; 5(2): 61-81. doi: 10.21608/ejmr.2023.174543.1293

Difference in Outcome between Luminal A, Luminal B in Early Stage Breast Cancer Retrospective Study

Egyptian Journal of Medical Research
Volume 5, Issue 2, April 2024, Page 61-81  XML PDF (473.11 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/ejmr.2023.174543.1293
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Ahmed Mahrous Dowidar; Zeinab Gaber Abdeltwab email ; Samah Fathy Semary; Saeed Shaaban Mohamed
Department of Clinical Oncology, Faculty of Medicine Beni-Suef University
Abstract
Background: Breast carcinoma is the most prevalent carcinoma in female worldwide, about  2.3 million new breast carcinoma cases and 685,000 breast carcinoma deaths worldwide in 2020. These tumors are heterogeneous in terms of histology (mainly ductal, lobular, mixed ductal and lobular, cribriform, mucinous, medullary, and tubular carcinomas), natural history, and response to treatment. Objective: To find retrospectively prognostic parameter difference between breast carcinoma subtypes Luminal A, Luminal B. and 5-year rates of (OS), (DFS) in female diagnosed with luminal early-stage breast carcinoma at clinical oncology department, faculty of Medicine, Beni-Suef University Hospital from Jan 2015 till December 2019.  Patients and Methods:  the current study is retrospective cross-sectional, conducted in Clinical Oncology Department in Beni-Suef University from Jan 2015 till Dec 2019. Results: There was significantly difference between luminal A, luminal B regarding age, as most patients more than 60 yrs old had luminal A breast cancer. There no significantly differences between luminal A, luminal B regarding DFS,OS but time of DFS, OS in luminal A was longer,as luminal A is the best prognosis of molecular subtypes. There was significantly differences between luminal A, luminal B regarding chemotherapy, which most of luminal A not received chemotherapy, because luminal A breast cancer less benefit of chemotherapy. There was significant association between T3 and younger age less than 40 years but from 40 to 60 and above 60 there was no significant association with T1, 2&3.There was a significant association between ages more than 60 years and lower Ki67.There was significant higher overall survival in patients without comorbitities than patients with DM or HTN or both. Conclusion: The current study, Luminal B almost depend on high ki67 which is not riable test, so no significantly difference between Luminal A, Luminal B regarding OS, DFS. But time of DFS, OS  is longer in Luminal A than Luminal B, this confirm Luminal A is the best prognosis of molecular subtypes of breast carcinoma.
Keywords
Axillary lymph node dissection; breast cancer; epidermal growth factor receptor
References

  1. Lei S, Zheng R, Zhang S, et al. Global patterns of breast cancer incidence and mortality: A population-based cancer registry data analysis from 2000 to 2020. Cancer Commun (Lond). 2021; 41(11):1183-1194.
  2. Colleoni M, Rotmensz N, Maisonneuve P, et al. Outcome of special types of luminal breast cancer. Annals of oncology. 2012; 23(6):1428-36.
  3. Fatma Khinaifis Al-thoubaity: Molecular classification of breast cancer: A retrospective cohort study, Annals of Medicine and Surgery, Volume 49, January 2020, Pages 44-48. ISSN 2049-0801.
  4. Hashmi AA, Aijaz S, Khan SM, Mahboob R, Irfan M, Zafar NI, et al., Prognostic parameters of luminal A and luminal B intrinsic breast cancer subtypes of Pakistani patients. World J Surg Oncol. 2018;16(1):1-6.
  5. Ignatiadis M, Singhal SK, Desmedt C, et al. Gene modules and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer subtypes: a pooled analysis. Journal of clinical oncology. 2012 Jun 1;30(16):1996-2004.
  6. Escala Cornejo RA, Munoz Garcia M, Olivares Hernandez A, et al. Identifying the best Ki67 cut-off for determining luminal breast cancer subtypes using immunohistochemical analysis and PAM50 genomic classification. In: Annals of Oncology 2020; 31, pp. S327-S327.
  7. Ozmen V, Çakar B, Gökmen E, et al. Cost effectiveness of Gene Expression Profiling in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer in a Middle-Income Country, Turkey: Results of a Prospective Multicenter Study. Eur J Breast Health. 2019; 15(3):183-190.
  8. Bhargava R, Striebel J, Beriwal S, Flickinger JC, Onisko A, Ahrendt G, Dabbs DJ. Prevalence, morphologic features and proliferation indices of breast carcinoma molecular classes using immunohistochemical surrogate markers. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2009;2(5):444
  9. Abdelkrim SB, Trabelsi A, Missaoui N, Beizig N, Bdioui A, Anjorin A, Jomaa W, Mokni M. Distribution of molecular breast cancer subtypes among Tunisian women and correlation with histopathological parameters: a study of 194 patients. Pathology-Research and Practice. 2010;206(11):772–5
  10. Shibuta K, Ueo H, Furusawa H, Komaki K, Rai Y, Sagara Y, Kamada Y, Tamaki N. The relevance of intrinsic subtype to clinicopathological features and prognosis in 4,266 Japanese women with breast cancer. Breast Cancer. 2011;18(4):292–8
  11. Zhu X, Ying J, Wang F, Wang J, Yang H. Estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status in invasive breast cancer: a 3,198 cases study at National Cancer Center, China. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;147(3):551–5.
  12. Cherbal F, Gaceb H, Mehemmai C, Saiah I, Bakour R, Rouis AO, Boualga K, Benbrahim W, Mahfouf H. Distribution of molecular breast cancer subtypes among Algerian women and correlation with clinical and tumor characteristics: a population-based study. Breast disease. 2015;35(2):95–102
  13. Caldarella A, Buzzoni C, Crocetti E, Bianchi S, Vezzosi V, Apicella P, Biancalani M, Giannini A, Urso C, Zolfanelli F, Paci E. Invasive breast cancer: a significant correlation between histological types and molecular subgroups. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2013;139(4):617–23
  14. Al Tamimi DM, Shawarby MA, Ahmed A, Hassan AK, AlOdaini AA. Protein expression profile and prevalence pattern of the molecular classes of breast cancer—a Saudi population based study. BMC Cancer. 2010;10(1):223
  15. Focke CM, Decker T, van Diest PJ. Reliability of the Ki67-Labelling Index in Core Needle Biopsies of Luminal Breast Cancers is Unaffected by Biopsy Volume. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017; 24(5):1251-1257.
  16. Boyaci C, Sun W, Robertson S, Acs B, Hartman J. Independent Clinical Validation of the Automated Ki67 Scoring Guideline from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group. Biomolecules. 2021; 11(11):1612.
  17. Pandit P, Patil R, Palwe V, Gandhe S, Patil R, Nagarkar R. Prevalence of Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer: A Single Institutional Experience of 2062 Patients. Eur J Breast Health. 2019; 16(1):39-43.
  18. Al-Taee ZA, Al-Janabi AA, AL-Mayali AM. Evaluation of Breast Cancer Molecular Profile in Old Age Patients in Comparison to Young Age Patients. Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology. 2020; 14(4):1686-92.
  19. Liu H, Lv L, Gao H, Cheng M. Pathologic Complete Response and Its Impact on Breast Cancer Recurrence and Patient’s Survival after Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine. 2021.
  20. Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thürlimann B, et al. Panel members. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(9): 2206–2223.
  21. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTG). Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 1998. 351:1451-67.
  22. Rocca A, Farolfi A, Maltoni R, Carretta E, Melegari E, Ferrario C, et al., Efficacy of endocrine therapy in relation to progesterone receptor and Ki67 expression in advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;152(1):57-65.
  23. Tsoutsou PG, Vozenin MC, Durham AD, Bourhis J. How could breast cancer molecular features contribute to locoregional treatment decision making? Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2017;110(1):43-8.
  24. Li Y and Ma L. Efficacy of chemotherapy for lymph node-positive luminal A subtype breast cancer patients: an updated meta-analysis. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2020; 18(1):1-11.
  25. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Thürlimann B, Senn HJ. 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;22:1736–47
 

  1. Newton EV, Kiluk JV, Shepard RC, et al. Adjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer, 18 Oct 2021.
  2. Harold J, Burstein,Daniel F Hayes, Sadhna R Vora. Up To Date April 15 2022
  3. Chumsri S, Li Z, Serie DJ, et al. Incidence of Late Relapses in Patients With Her2-Positive Breast Cancer Receiving Adjuvant Trastuzumab: Combined Analysis of NCCTG N9831 (Alliance) and NRG Oncology/NSABP B-31. J Clin Oncol 2019; 37:3425.
  4. Susan GK. Breast Cancer Foundation. Unique Issues for Young Women with Breast Cancer. (https://ww5. komen. org/ BreastCancer/ Young Women and Breast Cancer. html) Accessed 9/20/2019.
Statistics
Article View: 53
PDF Download: 28