Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Identification of prognostic different subgroups in triple negative breast cancer by Her2-neu protein expression

  • Gynecologic Oncology
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Many patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) have a poor outcome, but not all of them. This study has the aim to analyse the prognostic impact of tumour size, nodal status, grading, Her2-neu (human epithelial growth factor receptor 2) score and Ki-67 index. The main goal of this analysis is to find out if there are any differences in survival between patients with TNBC and a Her2-neu score 0 versus 1+2.

Experimental design

Retrospectively, we studied a cohort of 121 patients with TNBC, diagnosed at the Saarland University Medical Center between December 2004 and June 2013. We compared the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in those women on the basis of the different Her2-neu scores (0 versus 1 or 2 with negative FISH).

Results

One hundred and twenty one patients were included in this study. 58.68 % of them had a T2–4 tumour. 39.67 % were nodal positive and 67.77 % had high-grade tumours. The Her2-neu score was determined in 119 patients. 54.62 % of them had a score 0. In the 103 patients with a Ki-67 determination, the mean index was 44.5 %.

We found that tumour size, nodal status and Her2-neu score are important prognostic factors. Patients with a Her2-neu score 0 had a significantly poorer outcome regarding DFS and OS. In contrast, the expression level of Ki-67 and the grading do not seem to have any prognostic value in TNBC.

Conclusion

Besides tumour stage, grading and nodal status, the Her2-neu score 0 is able to function as a prognostic factor in patients with TNBC.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bauer KR, Brown M, Cress RD, Parise CA, Caggiano V (2007) Descriptive analysis of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, and HER2-negative invasive breast cancer, the so-called triple-negative phenotype: a population-based study from the California cancer Registry. Cancer 109(9):1721–1728

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L, Gatti L, Moore DT, Collichio F et al (2007) The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res 13(8):2329–2334

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Haffty BG, Yang Q, Reiss M, Kearney T, Higgins SA, Weidhaas J et al (2006) Locoregional relapse and distant metastasis in conservatively managed triple negative early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24(36):5652–5657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. D’Ippolito E, Iorio MV (2013) MicroRNAs and triple negative breast cancer. Int J Mol Sci 14(11):22202–22220

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, Dressler LG, Cowan D, Conway K et al (2006) Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA 295(21):2492–2502

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dent R, Trudeau M, Pritchard KI, Hanna WM, Kahn HK, Sawka CA et al (2007) Triple-negative breast cancer: clinical features and patterns of recurrence. Clin Cancer Res 13(15 Pt 1):4429–4434

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Liedtke C, Mazouni C, Hess KR, Andre F, Tordai A, Mejia JA et al (2008) Response to neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26(8):1275–1281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rakha EA, El Sayed ME, Green AR, Lee AH, Robertson JF, Ellis IO (2007) Prognostic markers in triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer 109(1):25–32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lin C, Chien SY, Kuo SJ, Chen LS, Chen ST, Lai HW et al (2012) A 10-year follow-up of triple-negative breast cancer patients in Taiwan. Jpn J Clin Oncol 42(3):161–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lara-Medina F, Perez-Sanchez V, Saavedra-Perez D, Blake-Cerda M, Arce C, Motola-Kuba D et al (2011) Triple-negative breast cancer in Hispanic patients: high prevalence, poor prognosis, and association with menopausal status, body mass index, and parity. Cancer 117(16):3658–3669

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hudis CA, Gianni L (2011) Triple-negative breast cancer: an unmet medical need. Oncologist 16(Suppl 1):1–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jang G, Lee SS, Ahn JH, Jung KH, Lee H, Gong G et al (2011) Clinical features and course of brain metastases in triple-negative breast cancer: comparison with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive and other type at single institution in Korea. Breast Cancer Res Treat 128(1):171–177

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Foulkes WD, Smith IE, Reis-Filho JS (2010) Triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 363(20):1938–1948

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Heitz F, Harter P, Lueck HJ, Fissler-Eckhoff A, Lorenz-Salehi F, Scheil-Bertram S et al (2009) Triple-negative and HER2-overexpressing breast cancers exhibit an elevated risk and an earlier occurrence of cerebral metastases. Eur J Cancer 45(16):2792–2798

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Strehl JD, Wachter DL, Fasching PA, Beckmann MW, Hartmann A (2011) Invasive breast cancer: recognition of molecular subtypes. Breast Care (Basel) 6(4):258–264

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lehmann BD, Bauer JA, Chen X, Sanders ME, Chakravarthy AB, Shyr Y et al (2011) Identification of human triple-negative breast cancer subtypes and preclinical models for selection of targeted therapies. J Clin Invest 121(7):2750–2767

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rody A, Karn T, Liedtke C, Pusztai L, Ruckhaeberle E, Hanker L et al (2011) A clinically relevant gene signature in triple negative and basal-like breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 13(5):R97

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Olayioye MA, Neve RM, Lane HA, Hynes NE (2000) The ErbB signaling network: receptor heterodimerization in development and cancer. EMBO J 19(13):3159–3167

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rakha E, Reis-Filho JS (2009) Basal-like breast carcinoma: from expression profiling to routine practice. Arch Pathol Lab Med 133(6):860–868

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Anders C, Carey LA (2008) Understanding and treating triple-negative breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park) 22(11):1233–1239

    Google Scholar 

  21. Peng Y (2012) Potential prognostic tumor biomarkers in triple-negative breast carcinoma. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao 44(5):666–672

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rhee J, Han SW, Oh DY, Kim JH, Im SA, Han W et al (2008) The clinicopathologic characteristics and prognostic significance of triple-negativity in node-negative breast cancer. BMC Cancer 8:307

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Keam B, Im SA, Kim HJ, Oh DY, Kim JH, Lee SH et al (2007) Prognostic impact of clinicopathologic parameters in stage II/III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant docetaxel and doxorubicin chemotherapy: paradoxical features of the triple negative breast cancer. BMC Cancer 7:203

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Scholzen T, Gerdes J (2000) The Ki-67 protein: from the known and the unknown. J Cell Physiol 182(3):311–322

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Brown DC, Gatter KC (2002) Ki67 protein: the immaculate deception? Histopathology 40(1):2–11

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gerdes J, Schwab U, Lemke H, Stein H (1983) Production of a mouse monoclonal antibody reactive with a human nuclear antigen associated with cell proliferation. Int J Cancer 31(1):13–20

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wirapati P, Sotiriou C, Kunkel S, Farmer P, Pradervand S, Haibe-Kains B et al (2008) Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures. Breast Cancer Res 10(4):R65

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Schmidt M, Fasching PA, Beckmann MW, Kölbl H (2012) Biomarkers in breast cancer—an update. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 72(9):819–832

  29. Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thurlimann B et al (2013) 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 24(9):2206–2223

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Brown RW, Allred CD, Clark GM, Osborne CK, Hilsenbeck SG (1996) Prognostic value of Ki-67 compared to S-phase fraction in axillary node-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2(3):585–592

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jung SY, Han W, Lee JW, Ko E, Kim E, Yu JH et al (2009) Ki-67 expression gives additional prognostic information on St. Gallen 2007 and Adjuvant! Online risk categories in early breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 16(5):1112–1121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Weikel W, Brumm C, Wilkens C, Beck T, Knapstein PG (1995) Growth fractions (Ki-67) in primary breast cancers, with particular reference to node-negative tumors. Cancer Detect Prev 19(5):446–450

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Weikel W, Beck T, Mitze M, Knapstein PG (1991) Immunohistochemical evaluation of growth fractions in human breast cancers using monoclonal antibody Ki-67. Breast Cancer Res Treat 18(3):149–154

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Jones RL, Salter J, A’Hern R, Nerurkar A, Parton M, Reis-Filho JS et al (2010) Relationship between oestrogen receptor status and proliferation in predicting response and long-term outcome to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 119(2):315–323

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Petit T, Wilt M, Velten M, Millon R, Rodier JF, Borel C et al (2004) Comparative value of tumour grade, hormonal receptors, Ki-67, HER-2 and topoisomerase II alpha status as predictive markers in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer 40(2):205–211

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pohl G, Rudas M, Taucher S, Stranzl T, Steger GG, Jakesz R et al (2003) Expression of cell cycle regulatory proteins in breast carcinomas before and after preoperative chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 78(1):97–103

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ et al (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 131(1):18–43

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, Gao D, Leung S, Snider J et al (2009) Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 101(10):736–750

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Blows FM, Driver KE, Schmidt MK, Broeks A, van Leeuwen FE, Wesseling J et al (2010) Subtyping of breast cancer by immunohistochemistry to investigate a relationship between subtype and short and long term survival: a collaborative analysis of data for 10,159 cases from 12 studies. PLoS Med 7(5):e1000279

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Konigsberg R, Pfeiler G, Klement T, Hammerschmid N, Brunner A, Zeillinger R et al (2012) Tumor characteristics and recurrence patterns in triple negative breast cancer: a comparison between younger (<65) and elderly (>/=65) patients. Eur J Cancer 48(16):2962–2968

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hamm C, El Masri M, Poliquin G, Poliquin V, Mathews J, Kanjeekal S et al (2011) A single-centre chart review exploring the adjusted association between breast cancer phenotype and prognosis. Curr Oncol 18(4):191–196

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Pogoda K, Niwinska A, Murawska M, Pienkowski T (2013) Analysis of pattern, time and risk factors influencing recurrence in triple-negative breast cancer patients. Med Oncol 30(1):388

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kaplan HG, Malmgren JA, Atwood M (2009) T1N0 triple negative breast cancer: risk of recurrence and adjuvant chemotherapy. Breast J 15(5):454–460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Amar S, McCullough AE, Tan W, Geiger XJ, Boughey JC, McNeil RB et al (2010) Prognosis and outcome of small (<=1 cm), node-negative breast cancer on the basis of hormonal and HER-2 status. Oncologist 15(10):1043–1049

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Lee JA, Kim KI, Bae JW, Jung YH, An H, Lee ES (2010) Triple negative breast cancer in Korea-distinct biology with different impact of prognostic factors on survival. Breast Cancer Res Treat 123(1):177–187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bulut N, Aksoy S, Dizdar O, Dede DS, Arslan C, Dogan E et al (2011) Demographic and clinico-pathological characteristics in patients with triple-negative and non-triple-negative breast cancer. Med Oncol 28(Suppl 1):S75–S79

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Hernandez-Aya LF, Chavez-Macgregor M, Lei X, Meric-Bernstam F, Buchholz TA, Hsu L et al (2011) Nodal status and clinical outcomes in a large cohort of patients with triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 29(19):2628–2634

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Arriagada R, Le MG, Dunant A, Tubiana M, Contesso G (2006) Twenty-five years of follow-up in patients with operable breast carcinoma: correlation between clinicopathologic factors and the risk of death in each 5-year period. Cancer 106(4):743–750

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Dalton LW, Pinder SE, Elston CE, Ellis IO, Page DL, Dupont WD et al (2000) Histologic grading of breast cancer: linkage of patient outcome with level of pathologist agreement. Mod Pathol 13(7):730–735

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Bahreini F, Soltanian AR, Mehdipour P (2014) A meta-analysis on concordance between immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to detect HER2 gene overexpression in breast cancer. Breast Cancer. doi:10.1007/s12282-014-0528-0

  51. Sauter G, Lee J, Bartlett JM, Slamon DJ, Press MF (2009) Guidelines for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing: biologic and methodologic considerations. J Clin Oncol 27(8):1323–1333

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Lipton A, Kostler WJ, Leitzel K, Ali SM, Sperinde J, Weidler J et al (2010) Quantitative HER2 protein levels predict outcome in fluorescence in situ hybridization-positive patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with trastuzumab. Cancer 116(22):5168–5178

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Luoh SW, Ramsey B, Hanlon NA, Troxell M, Hu Z, Chin K et al (2013) HER-2 gene amplification in human breast cancer without concurrent HER-2 over-expression. Springerplus 2:386

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Aleskandarany MA, Green AR, Benhasouna AA, Barros FF, Neal K, Reis-Filho JS et al (2012) Prognostic value of proliferation assay in the luminal, HER2-positive, and triple-negative biologic classes of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 14(1):R3

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Munzone E, Botteri E, Sciandivasci A, Curigliano G, Nole F, Mastropasqua M et al (2012) Prognostic value of Ki-67 labeling index in patients with node-negative, triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 134(1):277–282

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Polley MY, Leung SC, McShane LM, Gao D, Hugh JC, Mastropasqua MG et al (2013) An international ki67 reproducibility study. J Natl Cancer Inst 105(24):1897–1906

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Colozza M, Sidoni A, Piccart-Gebhart M (2010) Value of Ki67 in breast cancer: the debate is still open. Lancet Oncol 11(5):414–415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Homburg University Medical Centre, University of Homburg, 66421, Homburg, Germany

    Gilda Schmidt, Gabriele Meyberg-Solomayer, Christoph Gerlinger, Ingolf Juhasz-Böss, Daniel Herr & Erich-Franz Solomayer

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Kiel University Medical Centre, Kiel, Germany

    Achim Rody & Cornelia Liedtke

Authors
  1. Gilda Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gabriele Meyberg-Solomayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christoph Gerlinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ingolf Juhasz-Böss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daniel Herr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Achim Rody
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Cornelia Liedtke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Erich-Franz Solomayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gilda Schmidt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schmidt, G., Meyberg-Solomayer, G., Gerlinger, C. et al. Identification of prognostic different subgroups in triple negative breast cancer by Her2-neu protein expression. Arch Gynecol Obstet 290, 1221–1229 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3331-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3331-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation