METHODS: We conducted a cross sectional study using 100 samples of archived formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissue blocks of invasive ductal carcinoma and stained them with immunohistochemistry for PITX2, ER, PR and HER2. All HER2 with scoring of 2+ were confirmed with chromogenic in-situ hybridization (CISH).
RESULTS: PITX2 protein was expressed in 53% of invasive ductal carcinoma and lack of PITX2 expression in 47%. Univariate analysis revealed a significant association between PITX2 expression with PR (p=0.001), ER (p=0.006), gland formation (p=0.044) and marginal association with molecular subtypes of breast carcinoma (p=0.051). Combined ER and PR expression with PITX2 was also significantly associated (p=0.003) especially in double positive cases. Multivariate analysis showed the most significant association between PITX2 and PR (RR 4.105, 95% CI 1.765-9.547, p=0.001).
CONCLUSION: PITX2 is another potential prognostic marker in breast carcinoma adding significant information to established prognostic factors of ER and PR. The expression of PITX2 together with PR may carry a very good prognosis.
METHODS: Clinicopathological data were retrieved from the archived formal pathology reports for surgical specimens diagnosed as invasive ductal carcinoma, NOS. Microvessels were immunohistochemically stained with anti-CD34 antibody and quantified as microvessel density.
RESULTS: At least 50% of 94 cases of invasive breast ductal carcinoma in the study were advanced stage. The majority had poor prognosis factors such as tumor size larger than 50mm (48.9%), positive lymph node metastasis (60.6%), and tumor grade III (52.1%). Higher percentages of estrogen and progesterone receptor negative cases were recorded (46.8% and 46.8% respectively). Her-2 overexpression cases and triple negative breast cancers constituted 24.5% and 22.3% respectively. Significantly higher microvessel density was observed in the younger patient age group (p=0.012). There were no significant associations between microvessel density and other clinicopathological factors (p>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Majority of the breast cancer patients of this institution had advanced stage disease with poorer prognostic factors as compared to other local and western studies. Breast cancer in younger patients might be more proangiogenic.
Methods: 80 patients with invasive breast cancer receiving BCS after neoadjuvant chemotherapy were included in this non-randomized case-control study. 40 patients with specimen radiography performed in a standard approach (control group) were compared to 40 patients with use of a radiopaque tissue transfer system (study group).
Results: 19/80 (23.75%) patients required re-excision because of involved margins; among those, 14/40 (35%) were in the control group and 5/40 (12.5%) in the study group. The association between the use of the radiopaque tissue transfer system and the lower re-excision rate was statistically significant (p = 0.023).
Conclusion: Our analysis provides a rationale for the routine use of a radiopaque tissue transfer system for specimen radiography in BCS after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer in order to reduce re-excision rates.
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer (BC) from 2005 to 2013 at our tertiary institution were included and divided according to race and subtypes. Demographic and clinical information of non-metastatic TNBC patients were analyzed. Log-rank test, univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to find associated risk factors related with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).
RESULTS: Among 1227 BC patients, 129 (10.5%) had TNBC. TNBC patients had the worst OS (P: 0.0005) and DFS (P: 0.0016) among the subtypes. However, variations in race did not have any difference in OS or DFS among TNBC patients. Axillary lymph node involvement, invasive lobular histology, larger tumor size, and the presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were factors associated with both poor DFS and OS among TNBC patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Racial variation did not have any impact on the prognosis of the TNBC.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the expression of DDR1 and DVL1 and their association with histological type, grading and hormonal status of IDC and ILC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross sectional study was conducted on IDC and ILC breast tumours. Tumours were immunohistochemically stained for (DDR1) and (DVL1) as well as estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and C-erbB2 receptor. Demographic data including age and ethnicity were obtained from patient records.
RESULTS: A total of 51 cases (30 IDCs and 21 ILCs) were assessed. DDR1 and DVL1 expression was not significantly associated with histological type (p=0.57 and p=0.66 respectively). There was no association between DDR1 and DVL1 expression and tumour grade (p=0.32 and p=1.00 respectively), ER (p=0.62 and 0.50 respectively), PR (p=0.38 and p=0.63 respectively) and C-erbB2 expression (p=0.19 and p=0.33 respectively) in IDC. There was no association between DDR1 and DVL1 expression and tumour grade (p=0.52 and p=0.33 respectively), ER (p=0.06 and p=0.76 respectively), PR (p=0.61 and p=0.43 respectively) and C-erbB2 expression (p=0.58 and p=0.76 respectively) in ILC.
CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that DDR1 and DVL1 are present in both IDC and ILC regardless of the tumour differentiation. More studies are needed to assess the potential of these two proteins in distinguishing IDC from ILC in breast tumours.