Search

Phosphohistone H3 assessed proliferation has strong prognostic value. Lymph vessel invasion by D2-40 is also prognostic, but D2-40+ myoepithelial expression in small ducts completely filled by solid-pattern ductal carcinoma in situ can mimic lymphovascular invasion. As myoepithelial cells are also p63 positive, we have investigated whether lymph vessel invasion identified by combined D2-40/p63 is stronger prognostically than by D2-40 alone, and whether it has independent prognostic value to phosphohistone H3. In 240 operable T1–2N0M0node negative invasive breast cancer patients <71 years, phosphohistone H3 was determined by quantitative immunohistochemistry and lymph vessel invasion by D2-40/p63 double immunostaining. Correlation analysis between the clinico-pathologic factors and lymph vessel invasion, and univariate and multivariate prognostic survival analysis were performed. With median 117 (range: 12–192) months follow-up, 36 patients (15%) developed and 28 (12%) died of distant metastases. Ten of the 61 patients (16%) with cancer cells surrounded by D2-40 were p63 positive and none of these ‘false lymph vessel invasion’ recurred. D2-40+/p63− lymph vessel invasion occurred in 51/239 (21%) cases and correlated with grade, mitotic activity index, phosphohistone H3, ER, cytokeratin14, and HER2. D2-40+/p63− lymph vessel invasion was strongly prognostic, but far more in women ≥55 than those <55 years (P<0.0001 and 0.04). With multivariate analysis, phosphohistone H3 proliferation was the strongest single prognosticator. Lymph vessel invasion had additional prognostic value to phosphohistone H3 only in women ≥55. This group of patients, without/with lymph vessel invasion, had 10-year survival rates of 83 and 50%, respectively (hazard ratio-lymph vessel invasion=3.0, P=0.04; hazard ratio-phosphohistone H3=6.9, P=0.002). Where age was <55 years, only phosphohistone H3 had independent prognostic value. Combinations of other features had no additional value. In conclusion, T1–2N0M0invasive breast cancer patients ≥55 years with phosphohistone H3≥13, D2-40+/p63− defined lymph vessel invasion identifies a subgroup with a high risk of distant metastases.

Phosphohistone H3 assessed proliferation has strong prognostic value. Lymph vessel invasion by D2-40 is also prognostic, but D2-40+ myoepithelial expression in small ducts completely filled by solid-pattern ductal carcinoma in situcan mimic lymphovascular invasion. As myoepithelial cells are also p63 positive, we have investigated whether lymph vessel invasion identified by combined D2-40/p63 is stronger prognostically than by D2-40 alone, and whether it has independent prognostic value to phosphohistone H3. In 240 operable T1–2N0M0node negative invasive breast cancer patients <71 years, phosphohistone H3 was determined by quantitative immunohistochemistry and lymph vessel invasion by D2-40/p63 double immunostaining. Correlation analysis between the clinico-pathologic factors and lymph vessel invasion, and univariate and multivariate prognostic survival analysis were performed. With median 117 (range: 12–192) months follow-up, 36 patients (15%) developed and 28 (12%) died of distant metastases. Ten of the 61 patients (16%) with cancer cells surrounded by D2-40 were p63 positive and none of these ‘false lymph vessel invasion’ recurred. D2-40+/p63− lymph vessel invasion occurred in 51/239 (21%) cases and correlated with grade, mitotic activity index, phosphohistone H3, ER, cytokeratin14, and HER2. D2-40+/p63− lymph vessel invasion was strongly prognostic, but far more in women ≥55 than those <55 years (P<0.0001 and 0.04). With multivariate analysis, phosphohistone H3 proliferation was the strongest single prognosticator. Lymph vessel invasion had additional prognostic value to phosphohistone H3 only in women ≥55. This group of patients, without/with lymph vessel invasion, had 10-year survival rates of 83 and 50%, respectively (hazard ratio-lymph vessel invasion=3.0, P=0.04; hazard ratio-phosphohistone H3=6.9, P=0.002). Where age was <55 years, only phosphohistone H3 had independent prognostic value. Combinations of other features had no additional value. In conclusion, T1–2N0M0invasive breast cancer patients ≥55 years with phosphohistone H3≥13, D2-40+/p63− defined lymph vessel invasion identifies a subgroup with a high risk of distant metastases.

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease. Different subgroups can be recognized on the basis of the steroid receptors, HER-2, cytokeratin expression and proliferation patterns. As a result of mRNA-profiling studies, five major groups can be recognized, of which the triple-negative and basal-like tumors have the worst prognosis. Many of these tumors have a high proliferation that has the strongest prognostic value in node negative breast cancer. In the current study we analyzed the microRNA pattern in 103 lymph node negative breast cancers and compared these profiles with different biological characteristics and clinicopathological features. Unsupervised hierarchical cluster analysis divides the patients into four main groups, of which the basal-like/triple-negative group is the most prominent (11% of all cases), the luminal A cancers containing the Her2 negative and estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor-positive tumors is the largest group (57%), and the group of luminal B (32%) is more heterogeneous and contains the Her2 positive/estrogen receptor-negative patients as well. The highest overall classification values by analysis of variance followed by cross validation (leave one sample out and reselect genes) were found for cytokeratin 5 and 6, triple-negative and estrogen receptor, with 97, 90 and 90% accuracy, respectively. MiR-106b gene is prominent in all of these signatures and correlates strongest with high proliferation. Other interesting observations are the presence of several microRNAs (miR532-5p, miR-500, miR362-5p, and miR502-3p) located at Xp11.23 in cancers with a triple-negative signature, and the upregulation of several miR-17 cluster members in estrogen receptor-negative tumors. The current study shows that estrogen receptor negativity and cytokeratin 5 and 6 expression are important, and specific biological processes in lymph node negative breast cancer, as microRNA signatures are strongest in these subgroups.

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease. Different subgroups can be recognized on the basis of the steroid receptors, HER-2, cytokeratin expression and proliferation patterns. As a result of mRNA-profiling studies, five major groups can be recognized, of which the triple-negative and basal-like tumors have the worst prognosis. Many of these tumors have a high proliferation that has the strongest prognostic value in node negative breast cancer. In the current study we analyzed the microRNA pattern in 103 lymph node negative breast cancers and compared these profiles with different biological characteristics and clinicopathological features. Unsupervised hierarchical cluster analysis divides the patients into four main groups, of which the basal-like/triple-negative group is the most prominent (11% of all cases), the luminal A cancers containing the Her2 negative and estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor-positive tumors is the largest group (57%), and the group of luminal B (32%) is more heterogeneous and contains the Her2 positive/estrogen receptor-negative patients as well. The highest overall classification values by analysis of variance followed by cross validation (leave one sample out and reselect genes) were found for cytokeratin 5 and 6, triple-negative and estrogen receptor, with 97, 90 and 90% accuracy, respectively. MiR-106bgene is prominent in all of these signatures and correlates strongest with high proliferation. Other interesting observations are the presence of several microRNAs (miR532-5p, miR-500, miR362-5p, and miR502-3p) located at Xp11.23 in cancers with a triple-negative signature, and the upregulation of several miR-17cluster members in estrogen receptor-negative tumors. The current study shows that estrogen receptor negativity and cytokeratin 5 and 6 expression are important, and specific biological processes in lymph node negative breast cancer, as microRNA signatures are strongest in these subgroups.

Background: The mitotic activity index (MAI) is a strong prognosticator in node-negative invasive breast cancer patients. Recently, a correlation between the MAI and specific chromosomal aberrations at chromosome 1p was described.Methods: Analysis of MAI, immunohistochemical staining patterns for proliferation-associated phosphohistone H3 (PPH3), phosphorylated ERK1/2, p21, cyclin E, Ki67 and cyclin D1 proteins; and prognosis in 158 adjuvant chemotherapy-treated T1-2N0M0 invasive breast cancer patients, analysis of LOH at 1p31 (including ARHI) using the dinucleotide repeats D1S207, D1S430 and D1S464 in 76 patients. Single and multivariate survival analysis was used to evaluate the importance of the various markers tested.Results: LOH at 1p31 did not correlate with MAI nor provide prognostic information. Phosphohistone H3 was the best prognosticator for patients in all age groups with 20 year distant metastasis free survival of distant metastases 93% vs. 72% respectively (p=0.004, HR=4.5). In multivariate analysis, phosphohistone H3<13 vs. ≥13 exceeded the prognostic value of the mitotic activity index.Conclusions: LOH at 1p31 is common in breast cancer, and correlates with loss of proliferation-associated proteins, but not with MAI, PPH3 or prognosis. PPH3 is the best prognosticator in this study group of adjuvant chemotherapy-treated lymph node-negative breast cancer patients.

The proliferation factor mitotic activity index is the strongest prognostic factor in early breast cancer, but it may lack reproducibility. We analyzed the prognostic value of phosphohistone H3, a marker of cells in late G2and M phase, measuring highly standardized immunohistochemical nuclear phosphohistone H3 expression by subjective counts and digital image analysis. Expression was compared with classical clinico-pathologic prognostic variables and the mitotic activity index in 119 node-negative invasive breast cancers in patients less than 55 years old treated with adjuvant systemic chemotherapy with long-term follow-up (median 168 months). Nineteen patients (16%) developed distant metastases and 16 (13%) died. Strong phosphohistone H3 expression occurred preferentially in the peripheral growing front; counts were highly reproducible between observers (R=0.92) and highly consistent with digital image analysis (R=0.96). Phosphohistone H3 correlated (P<0.05) with tumor diameter, estrogen receptor, carcinoma grade, and mitotic activity index. Phosphohistone H3 values were systematically (80%) higher than the mitotic activity index. Receiver-operating curve analysis objectively showed that phosphohistone H3 <13 (n=53; 45% of all cases) vs phosphohistone H3≥13 (n=66; 55% of all cases) was the strongest prognostic threshold, with 20-year recurrence-free survival of distant metastases of 96 and 58%, respectively (P=0.0002, HR=9.6). Mitotic activity index was the second strongest prognostic variable (P=0.003, HR=3.9). In multivariate analysis, phosphohistone H3 <13 vs≥13 exceeded the prognostic value of the mitotic activity index. None of the other classical prognostic factors examined offered prognostic value additional to phosphohistone H3. Phosphohistone H3 is by far the strongest prognostic variable in early invasive node-negative breast cancer patients less than 55 years old with long-term follow-up.Modern Pathology (2007) 20, 1307–1315; doi:10.1038/modpathol.3800972; published online 5 October 2007

The proliferation factor mitotic activity index is the strongest prognostic factor in early breast cancer, but it may lack reproducibility. We analyzed the prognostic value of phosphohistone H3, a marker of cells in late G2and M phase, measuring highly standardized immunohistochemical nuclear phosphohistone H3 expression by subjective counts and digital image analysis. Expression was compared with classical clinico-pathologic prognostic variables and the mitotic activity index in 119 node-negative invasive breast cancers in patients less than 55 years old treated with adjuvant systemic chemotherapy with long-term follow-up (median 168 months). Nineteen patients (16%) developed distant metastases and 16 (13%) died. Strong phosphohistone H3 expression occurred preferentially in the peripheral growing front; counts were highly reproducible between observers (R=0.92) and highly consistent with digital image analysis (R=0.96). Phosphohistone H3 correlated (P<0.05) with tumor diameter, estrogen receptor, carcinoma grade, and mitotic activity index. Phosphohistone H3 values were systematically (80%) higher than the mitotic activity index. Receiver-operating curve analysis objectively showed that phosphohistone H3 <13 (n=53; 45% of all cases) vsphosphohistone H3≥13 (n=66; 55% of all cases) was the strongest prognostic threshold, with 20-year recurrence-free survival of distant metastases of 96 and 58%, respectively (P=0.0002, HR=9.6). Mitotic activity index was the second strongest prognostic variable (P=0.003, HR=3.9). In multivariate analysis, phosphohistone H3 <13 vs≥13 exceeded the prognostic value of the mitotic activity index. None of the other classical prognostic factors examined offered prognostic value additional to phosphohistone H3. Phosphohistone H3 is by far the strongest prognostic variable in early invasive node-negative breast cancer patients less than 55 years old with long-term follow-up.

Background: The prognostic value of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway and PTEN in invasive breast cancer (IBC) is controversial. Cell proliferation, especially the Mitotic Activity Index (MAI), is strongly prognostic in lymph node-negative (LNneg) invasive breast cancer. However, its prognostic value has not been compared with the value of Akt and PTEN expression. Material and methods: Prognostic comparison of Her2Neu, p110alpha (PIK3CA), Akt, mTOR, PTEN, MAI and cell-cycle regulators in 125 LNneg patients aged <55 years with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF)-based adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. Results: Twenty-one (17%) patients developed distant metastases=DMs (median follow-up: 134 months). p110alpha correlated (p=0.01) with pAkt but only in PTEN-negatives; pAkt correlated (p=0.02) with mTOR. PTEN-negativity correlated with high MAI, high grade and ER-negativity (p=0.009). The MAI was the strongest prognosticator (Hazard Ratio=HR=2.9, p=0.01). Her2Neu/p110α/Akt/mTOR features have no additional prognostic value to the MAI. PTEN had additional value but only in MAI<3 (39/125=31%; 8% DMs). 19/39=49% of the MAI<3 patients have combined MAI<3 / PTEN+ with 0% DMs, contrasting 15% DMs in MAI<3 / PTEN− (p=0.03). Conclusions: In T1−3N0M0adjuvant CMF-treated breast cancer patients aged <55 years, MAI was the strongest survival predictor. The PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway and cell-cycle regulator characteristics had no additional prognostic value, but PTEN has. Patients with combined MAI<3 & PTEN-positivity had 100% survival. The small subgroup of MAI<3 patients that died were PTEN-negative.

Background: Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (ASCT) in lymph node-negative breast (LN−) cancers improves survival. The majority of (LN−) patients receive ASCT when the St. Gallen criteria or its modifications are used, as accurate identifiers which patients benefit from ASCT are lacking. This may imply over-treatment in many patients. Aim: To evaluate which patients or primary tumor factors predict ASCT success. Material and method: Retrospective analysis by single and multivariate survival analysis of clinical and tumor characteristics in (LN−) breast cancers <55 years, related to ASCT n=125 or-not n=516. Results: The two patient groups did not differ in age, tumor diameter, grade, type, number of mitoses and other factors. Fourteen-year survival for the ASCT and non-ASCT patients was 83% and 74% (Hazard Ratio = HR = 0.33; p<0.0001, 9% absolute = 12% relative difference). Subgroup analysis showed that the recurrence-free survival = RFS of ASCT treated vs. non-treated patients differed in patients with grade 1 cancers p=0.008, grade 2 cancers p=0.004, grades 3 p=0.02, tumors under and ≥2 cm (p=0.001 and 0.0002), oestrogen receptor-positive or -negative tumors (p=0.003,0.04), MAI < 10 and ≥10 (p=0.005,0.003) and fibrotic focus absent p=0.002. With multivariate analysis the most important predictor of ASCT effect was the MAI. In patients with slowly proliferating tumors (MAI <3) no advantage was found between patients treated-or-not with adjuvant chemotherapy (RFS = 92% and 91%, p=0.13, p=0.63 for overall survival), contrasting those with MAI ≥3 (p=0.0001; HR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.18–0.58). Conclusion: MAI is the strongest predictor of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy success. In patients with MAI < 3 (31% of all patients), ASCT does not improve survival.

Background: The mitotic activity index (MAI) is a strong prognosticator in node-negative invasive breast cancer patients. Recently, a correlation between the MAI and specific chromosomal aberrations at chromosome 1p was described.Methods: Analysis of MAI, immunohistochemical staining patterns for proliferation-associated phosphohistone H3 (PPH3), phosphorylated ERK1/2, p21, cyclin E, Ki67 and cyclin D1 proteins; and prognosis in 158 adjuvant chemotherapy-treated T1-2N0M0 invasive breast cancer patients, analysis of LOH at 1p31 (including ARHI) using the dinucleotide repeats D1S207, D1S430 and D1S464 in 76 patients. Single and multivariate survival analysis was used to evaluate the importance of the various markers tested.Results: LOH at 1p31 did not correlate with MAI nor provide prognostic information. Phosphohistone H3 was the best prognosticator for patients in all age groups with 20 year distant metastasis free survival of distant metastases 93% vs. 72% respectively (p = 0.004, HR = 4.5). In multivariate analysis, phosphohistone H3 < 13 vs. ≥13 exceeded the prognostic value of the mitotic activity index.Conclusions: LOH at 1p31 is common in breast cancer, and correlates with loss of proliferation-associated proteins, but not with MAI, PPH3 or prognosis. PPH3 is the best prognosticator in this study group of adjuvant chemotherapy-treated lymph node-negative breast cancer patients.

Background: The prognostic value of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway and PTEN in invasive breast cancer (IBC) is controversial. Cell proliferation, especially the Mitotic Activity Index (MAI), is strongly prognostic in lymph node-negative (LNneg) invasive breast cancer. However, its prognostic value has not been compared with the value of Akt and PTEN expression. Material and Methods: Prognostic comparison of Her2Neu, p110alpha (PIK3CA), Akt, mTOR, PTEN, MAI and cell-cycle regulators in 125 LNneg patients aged <55 years with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF)-based adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. Results: Twenty-one (17%) patients developed distant metastases = DMs (median follow-up: 134 months). p110alpha correlated (p = 0.01) with pAkt but only in PTEN-negatives; pAkt correlated (p = 0.02) with mTOR. PTEN-negativity correlated with high MAI, high grade and ER-negativity (p = 0.009). The MAI was the strongest prognosticator (Hazard Ratio = HR = 2.9, p = 0.01). Her2Neu/p110α/Akt/mTOR features have no additional prognostic value to the MAI. PTEN had additional value but only in MAI < 3 (39/125 = 31%; 8% DMs). 19/39 = 49% of the MAI < 3 patients have combined MAI < 3 / PTEN+ with 0% DMs, contrasting 15% DMs in MAI < 3 / PTEN− (p = 0.03). Conclusions: In T1−3N0M0 adjuvant CMF-treated breast cancer patients aged <55 years, MAI was the strongest survival predictor. The PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway and cell-cycle regulator characteristics had no additional prognostic value, but PTEN has. Patients with combined MAI < 3 & PTEN-positivity had 100% survival. The small subgroup of MAI < 3 patients that died were PTEN-negative.

Apolipoprotein D (ApoD) is a small glycoprotein of 24 kD, and a member of the lipocalin family. ApoD exerts several intracellular mechanistic roles, especially ligand binding. Some putative ligands are arachidonic acid, progesterone, and tamoxifen. It probably has a binding/reservoir function of these ligands in the cytoplasm. Furthermore, ApoD has features compatible with endosomal trafficking, proteolytic activity and interactions in cellular signal pathways. ApoD inhibits translocation of phosphorylated MAPK into the nucleus. Moreover, ApoD is associated with reduced proliferative activity of cancer cells, and is abundantly raised in senescent cells. In breast cancer, ApoD expression is associated with favourable histology and clinical stage, whereas in adjacent tumour stroma ApoD expression is a marker of adverse prognosis. Oestrogen receptor expression in breast cancer is inversely related to ApoD expression. Therefore, a combined oestrogen receptor positivity/ApoD positivity, could reflect a non-functional oestrogen receptor pathway, and this subset of breast cancer patients does not react to adjuvant tamoxifen treatment. The triangular relationship between oestrogen receptor, tamoxifen and ApoD should be further explored.

Background: Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (ASCT) in lymph node-negative breast (LN−) cancers improves survival. The majority of (LN−) patients receive ASCT when the St. Gallen criteria or its modifications are used, as accurate identifiers which patients benefit from ASCT are lacking. This may imply over-treatment in many patients. Aim: To evaluate which patients or primary tumor factors predict ASCT success. Material and method: Retrospective analysis by single and multivariate survival analysis of clinical and tumor characteristics in (LN−) breast cancers <55 years, related to ASCT (n = 125) or-not (n = 516). Results: The two patient groups did not differ in age, tumor diameter, grade, type, number of mitoses and other factors. Fourteen-year survival for the ASCT and non-ASCT patients was 83% and 74% (Hazard Ratio = HR = 0.33; p < 0.0001, 9% absolute = 12% relative difference). Subgroup analysis showed that the recurrence-free survival = RFS of ASCT treated vs. non-treated patients differed in patients with grade 1 cancers (p = 0.008), grade 2 cancers (p = 0.004), grades 3 (p = 0.02), tumors under and ≧2 cm (p = 0.001 and 0.0002), oestrogen receptor-positive or -negative tumors (p = 0.003, 0.04), MAI < 10 and ≧10 (p = 0.005, 0.003) and fibrotic focus absent (p = 0.002). With multivariate analysis the most important predictor of ASCT effect was the MAI. In patients with slowly proliferating tumors (MAI < 3) no advantage was found between patients treated-or-not with adjuvant chemotherapy (RFS = 92% and 91%, p = 0.13, p = 0.63 for overall survival), contrasting those with MAI ≧ 3 (p = 0.0001; HR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.18–0.58). Conclusion: MAI is the strongest predictor of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy success. In patients with MAI < 3 (31% of all patients), ASCT does not improve survival.