Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Demographic and clinico-pathological characteristics in patients with triple-negative and non-triple-negative breast cancer

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Medical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We investigate retrospectively the demographic and clinico-pathological characteristics of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) compared to those with non-TNBC. Patients with breast cancer diagnosed from 1981 to 2008 in our clinic were retrospectively analyzed. Patient demographics including survival data and tumor characteristics were obtained from charts. A total of 795 patients were assessed in the study, including 140 patients (17.6%) with TNBC and 655 patients (82.4%) with non-TNBC. Patients with non-TNBC were further classified into 3 groups according to hormone receptor (HR) and HER-2 status. Median age was 49 (range 38–60 years) and similar between patients with TNBC and non-TNBC. Patients with TNBC had an increased likelihood of a higher histological grade III compared with HR(+) HER-2(−) subgroup (P > 0.001) and lower stage compared with HR(+)/HER2(+) and HR(−)/HER2(+) subgroups (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively). In patients with TNBC, the disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 66% at 5 years. In subgroup analysis of non-TNBCs, 5-year-DFS rates of the patients in HR(+)/HER2(−), HR(+)/HER2(+) and HR(−)/HER2(+) subgroups were 59, 66, and 57%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the TNBC and non-TNBC subgroups (P = 0.238). In multivariate analysis, nodal involvement (RR = 2.8, 95% CI: 0.99–8.3, P = 0.052) and the presence of lymphovascular invasion (RR = 3.2, 95% CI: 1.1–9.2, P = 0.029) were significantly associated with increased recurrence risk in patients with TNBC. Although there are differences in patient and tumor features, patients with TNBC had similar clinical course with those with non-TNBC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Reis-Filho JS, Tutt AN. Triple negative tumours: a critical review. Histopathology. 2008;52:108–18.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Arslan C, Dizdar O, Altundag K. Pharmacotherapy of triple-negative breast cancer. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2009;10:2081–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Irvin WJ Jr, Carey LA. What is triple-negative breast cancer? Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:2799–805.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, et al. Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina breast cancer study. Jama. 2006;295:2492–502.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Stockmans G, Deraedt K, Wildiers H, Moerman P, Paridaens R. Triple-negative breast cancer. Curr Opin Oncol. 2008;20:614–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tischkowitz M, Brunet JS, Begin LR, et al. Use of immunohistochemical markers can refine prognosis in triple negative breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 2007;7:134.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dent R, Hanna WM, Trudeau M, et al. Pattern of metastatic spread in triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;115:423–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dent R, Trudeau M, Pritchard KI, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer: clinical features and patterns of recurrence. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:4429–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kassam F, Enright K, Dent R, et al. Survival outcomes for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: implications for clinical practice and trial design. Clin Breast Cancer. 2009;9:29–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yang XR, Sherman ME, Rimm DL, et al. Differences in risk factors for breast cancer molecular subtypes in a population-based study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:439–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Livasy CA, Karaca G, Nanda R, et al. Phenotypic evaluation of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2006;19:264–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Van Calster B, Vanden Bempt I, Drijkoningen M, et al. Axillary lymph node status of operable breast cancers by combined steroid receptor and HER-2 status: triple positive tumours are more likely lymph node positive. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;113:181–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yin WJ, Lu JS, Di GH, et al. Clinicopathological features of the triple-negative tumors in Chinese breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;115:325–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Burnell MJ, O’Connor EM, Chapman JW, et al. Triple-negative receptor status and prognosis in the NCIC CTG MA.21 adjuvant breast cancer trial. (abstract 550)mn. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26.

  15. Rodriguez-Pinilla SM, Sarrio D, Honrado E, et al. Prognostic significance of basal-like phenotype and fascin expression in node-negative invasive breast carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:1533–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lin C, Chien SY, Chen LS, et al. Triple negative breast carcinoma is a prognostic factor in Taiwanese women. BMC Cancer. 2009;9:192.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kadri Altundag.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bulut, N., Aksoy, S., Dizdar, O. et al. Demographic and clinico-pathological characteristics in patients with triple-negative and non-triple-negative breast cancer. Med Oncol 28 (Suppl 1), 75–79 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-010-9715-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-010-9715-9

Keywords

Navigation