Top

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Published in:

01-08-2017 | Preclinical study

The 21-gene recurrence score in special histologic subtypes of breast cancer with favorable prognosis

Authors: Gulisa Turashvili, Edi Brogi, Monica Morrow, Clifford Hudis, Maura Dickler, Larry Norton, Hannah Y. Wen

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 1/2017

Abstract

Background/purpose

The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay predicts the likelihood of distant recurrence and chemotherapy benefit in early-stage, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. Data on the RS of special histologic subtypes of invasive breast carcinoma with favorable prognosis are limited.

Methods

We reviewed our institutional database to identify patients with special histologic subtypes of breast cancer associated with favorable prognosis and available RS results. Our cohort consists of fifty-seven women: thirty-three patients with pure mucinous carcinoma (MC), ten with tubular carcinoma (TC), nine with encapsulated papillary carcinoma (EPC), and five with solid papillary carcinoma (SPC).

Results

Most (44/57, 77.2%) carcinomas had low RS (≤17), and none had high RS (≥31). All EPCs had low RS, but other subtypes had RS 18–30. Higher RS was associated with lower progesterone receptor (PR) expression by immunohistochemistry and lower PR mRNA scores (P ≤ 0.007). No morphologic feature (tumor grade, biopsy site changes, cellular stroma, inflammatory cells) was associated with RS ≥ 18. At a median follow-up of 40 months, the distant recurrence-free survival was 100%. One patient with SPC developed locoregional recurrence at 22 months.

Conclusions

As the largest series to date, our study raises the question of whether the RS assay is necessary for breast cancers with favorable histology. Reflex testing of node-negative, ER+/HER2− breast cancers may be deferred for these special histologic subtypes, emphasizing the need for multidisciplinary discussions between breast pathologists and other members of the breast cancer team.

Morrow M (2013) Personalizing extent of breast cancer surgery according to molecular subtypes. Breast 22(Suppl 2):S106–S109. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2013.07.020 CrossRefPubMed

Coates AS, Winer EP, Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Gnant M, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thurlimann B, Senn HJ, Panel M (2015) Tailoring therapies–improving the management of early breast cancer: St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2015. Ann Oncol 26(8):1533–1546. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdv221 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Julian TB, Venditti CA, Duggal S (2015) Landmark clinical trials influencing surgical management of non-invasive and invasive breast cancer. Breast J 21(1):60–66. doi:10.1111/tbj.12363 CrossRefPubMed

Guiu S, Wolfer A, Jacot W, Fumoleau P, Romieu G, Bonnetain F, Fiche M (2014) Invasive lobular breast cancer and its variants: how special are they for systemic therapy decisions? Crit Rev Oncol 92(3):235–257. doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2014.07.003 CrossRef

Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver MJ (eds) (2012) WHO Classification of Tumours of the Breast, vol 4. WHO Classification of Tumours, 4th edn. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon

Pestalozzi BC, Zahrieh D, Mallon E, Gusterson BA, Price KN, Gelber RD, Holmberg SB, Lindtner J, Snyder R, Thurlimann B, Murray E, Viale G, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Coates AS, Goldhirsch A, International Breast Cancer Study G (2008) Distinct clinical and prognostic features of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: combined results of 15 International Breast Cancer Study Group clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 26(18):3006–3014. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.14.9336 CrossRefPubMed

Nagao T, Kinoshita T, Hojo T, Tsuda H, Tamura K, Fujiwara Y (2012) The differences in the histological types of breast cancer and the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: the relationship between the outcome and the clinicopathological characteristics. Breast 21(3):289–295. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2011.12.011 CrossRefPubMed

Page DL (2003) Special types of invasive breast cancer, with clinical implications. Am J Surg Pathol 27(6):832–835CrossRefPubMed

Yerushalmi R, Hayes MM, Gelmon KA (2009) Breast carcinoma—rare types: review of the literature. Ann Oncol 20(11):1763–1770. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdp245 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Weigelt B, Geyer FC, Reis-Filho JS (2010) Histological types of breast cancer: how special are they? Mol Oncol 4(3):192–208. doi:10.1016/j.molonc.2010.04.004 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Rakha EA, Lee AH, Evans AJ, Menon S, Assad NY, Hodi Z, Macmillan D, Blamey RW, Ellis IO (2010) Tubular carcinoma of the breast: further evidence to support its excellent prognosis. J Clin Oncol 28(1):99–104. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.23.5051 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Rosen PP, Groshen S, Kinne DW, Norton L (1993) Factors influencing prognosis in node-negative breast carcinoma: analysis of 767 T1N0M0/T2N0M0 patients with long-term follow-up. J Clin Oncol 11(11):2090–2100CrossRefPubMed

13.

Colleoni M, Russo L, Dellapasqua S (2011) Adjuvant therapies for special types of breast cancer. Breast 20(Suppl 3):S153–S157. doi:10.1016/S0960-9776(11)70315-0 CrossRefPubMed

14.

Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, Kim C, Baker J, Cronin M, Baehner FL, Walker MG, Watson D, Park T, Hiller W, Fisher ER, Wickerham DL, Bryant J, Wolmark N (2004) A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 351(27):2817–2826. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa041588 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, Kim C, Baker J, Kim W, Cronin M, Baehner FL, Watson D, Bryant J, Costantino JP, Geyer CE Jr, Wickerham DL, Wolmark N (2006) Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24(23):3726–3734. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.04.7985 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Livingston RB, Yeh IT, Ravdin P, Bugarini R, Baehner FL, Davidson NE, Sledge GW, Winer EP, Hudis C, Ingle JN, Perez EA, Pritchard KI, Shepherd L, Gralow JR, Yoshizawa C, Allred DC, Osborne CK, Hayes DF, Breast Cancer Inter group of North A (2010) Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 11(1):55–65. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70314-6 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, Norton L, Ravdin P, Taube S, Somerfield MR, Hayes DF, Bast RC Jr, American Society of Clinical O (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25(33):5287–5312. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.14.2364 CrossRefPubMed

18.

Ramsey SD, Barlow WE, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Tunis S, Baker L, Crowley J, Deverka P, Veenstra D, Hortobagyi GN (2013) Integrating comparative effectiveness design elements and endpoints into a phase III, randomized clinical trial (SWOG S1007) evaluating oncotypeDX-guided management for women with breast cancer involving lymph nodes. Contempo Clin Trials 34(1):1–9. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2012.09.003 CrossRef

19.

Hassett MJ, Silver SM, Hughes ME, Blayney DW, Edge SB, Herman JG, Hudis CA, Marcom PK, Pettinga JE, Share D, Theriault R, Wong YN, Vandergrift JL, Niland JC, Weeks JC (2012) Adoption of gene expression profile testing and association with use of chemotherapy among women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 30(18):2218–2226. doi:10.1200/JCO.2011.38.5740 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Dinan MA, Mi X, Reed SD, Lyman GH, Curtis LH (2015) Association between use of the 21-gene recurrence score assay and receipt of chemotherapy among medicare beneficiaries with early-stage breast cancer, 2005–2009. JAMA Oncol 1(8):1098–1109. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2722 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, Pritchard KI, Albain KS, Hayes DF, Geyer CE Jr, Dees EC, Perez EA, Olson JA Jr, Zujewski J, Lively T, Badve SS, Saphner TJ, Wagner LI, Whelan TJ, Ellis MJ, Paik S, Wood WC, Ravdin P, Keane MM, Gomez Moreno HL, Reddy PS, Goggins TF, Mayer IA, Brufsky AM, Toppmeyer DL, Kaklamani VG, Atkins JN, Berenberg JL, Sledge GW (2015) Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1510764 PubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Lo SS, Mumby PB, Norton J, Rychlik K, Smerage J, Kash J, Chew HK, Gaynor ER, Hayes DF, Epstein A, Albain KS (2010) Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection. J Clin Oncol 28(10):1671–1676. doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.20.2119 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Ademuyiwa FO, Miller A, O’Connor T, Edge SB, Thorat MA, Sledge GW, Levine E, Badve S (2011) The effects of oncotype DX recurrence scores on chemotherapy utilization in a multi-institutional breast cancer cohort. Breast Cancer Res Treat 126(3):797–802. doi:10.1007/s10549-010-1329-6 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Geffen DB, Abu-Ghanem S, Sion-Vardy N, Braunstein R, Tokar M, Ariad S, Delgado B, Bayme M, Koretz M (2011) The impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on decision making about adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer in an oncology practice with a unified treatment policy. Ann Oncol 22(11):2381–2386. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdq769 CrossRefPubMed

25.

Partin JF, Mamounas EP (2011) Impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay compared with standard clinicopathologic guidelines in adjuvant therapy selection for node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 18(12):3399–3406. doi:10.1245/s10434-011-1698-z CrossRefPubMed

26.

Albanell J, Gonzalez A, Ruiz-Borrego M, Alba E, Garcia-Saenz JA, Corominas JM, Burgues O, Furio V, Rojo A, Palacios J, Bermejo B, Martinez-Garcia M, Limon ML, Munoz AS, Martin M, Tusquets I, Rojo F, Colomer R, Faull I, Lluch A (2012) Prospective transGEICAM study of the impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay and traditional clinicopathological factors on adjuvant clinical decision making in women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) node-negative breast cancer. Ann Oncol 23(3):625–631. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdr278 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Joh JE, Esposito NN, Kiluk JV, Laronga C, Lee MC, Loftus L, Soliman H, Boughey JC, Reynolds C, Lawton TJ, Acs PI, Gordan L, Acs G (2011) The effect of Oncotype DX recurrence score on treatment recommendations for patients with estrogen receptor-positive early stage breast cancer and correlation with estimation of recurrence risk by breast cancer specialists. Oncologist 16(11):1520–1526. doi:10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0045 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Eiermann W, Rezai M, Kummel S, Kuhn T, Warm M, Friedrichs K, Schneeweiss A, Markmann S, Eggemann H, Hilfrich J, Jackisch C, Witzel I, Eidtmann H, Bachinger A, Hell S, Blohmer J (2013) The 21-gene recurrence score assay impacts adjuvant therapy recommendations for ER-positive, node-negative and node-positive early breast cancer resulting in a risk-adapted change in chemotherapy use. Ann Oncol 24(3):618–624. doi:10.1093/annonc/mds512 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Carlson JJ, Roth JA (2013) The impact of the Oncotype Dx breast cancer assay in clinical practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 141(1):13–22. doi:10.1007/s10549-013-2666-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Levine MN, Julian JA, Bedard PL, Eisen A, Trudeau ME, Higgins B, Bordeleau L, Pritchard KI (2015) Prospective evaluation of the 21-gene recurrence score assay for breast cancer decision-making in Ontario. J Clin Oncol. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.62.8503

31.

Turner BM, Skinner KA, Tang P, Jackson MC, Soukiazian N, Shayne M, Huston A, Ling M, Hicks DG (2015) Use of modified Magee equations and histologic criteria to predict the Oncotype DX recurrence score. Mod Pathol 28(7):921–931. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2015.50 CrossRefPubMed

32.

Dialani V, Gaur S, Mehta TS, Venkataraman S, Fein-Zachary V, Phillips J, Brook A, Slanetz PJ (2016) Prediction of low versus high recurrence scores in estrogen receptor-positive, lymph node-negative invasive breast cancer on the basis of radiologic-pathologic features: comparison with Oncotype DX test recurrence scores. Radiology 280(2):370–378. doi:10.1148/radiol.2016151149 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Ingoldsby H, Webber M, Wall D, Scarrott C, Newell J, Callagy G (2013) Prediction of Oncotype DX and TAILORx risk categories using histopathological and immunohistochemical markers by classification and regression tree (CART) analysis. Breast 22(5):879–886. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2013.04.008 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Klein ME, Dabbs DJ, Shuai Y, Brufsky AM, Jankowitz R, Puhalla SL, Bhargava R (2013) Prediction of the Oncotype DX recurrence score: use of pathology-generated equations derived by linear regression analysis. Mod Pathol 26(5):658–664. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2013.36 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Parisi F, Gonzalez AM, Nadler Y, Camp RL, Rimm DL, Kluger HM, Kluger Y (2010) Benefits of biomarker selection and clinico-pathological covariate inclusion in breast cancer prognostic models. Breast Cancer Res 12(5):R66. doi:10.1186/bcr2633 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Flanagan MB, Dabbs DJ, Brufsky AM, Beriwal S, Bhargava R (2008) Histopathologic variables predict Oncotype DX recurrence score. Mod Pathol 21(10):1255–1261. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2008.54 CrossRefPubMed

37.

Auerbach J, Kim M, Fineberg S (2010) Can features evaluated in the routine pathologic assessment of lymph node-negative estrogen receptor-positive stage I or II invasive breast cancer be used to predict the Oncotype DX recurrence score? Arch Pathol Lab Med 134(11):1697–1701. doi:10.1043/2009-0439-OAR.1 PubMed

38.

Tsai ML, Lillemoe TJ, Finkelstein MJ, Money JE, Susnik B, Grimm E, Kang SH, Swenson KK (2016) Utility of Oncotype DX risk assessment in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. Clin Breast Cancer 16(1):45–50. doi:10.1016/j.clbc.2015.08.001 CrossRefPubMed

39.

Bomeisl PE, Thompson CL, Harris LN, Gilmore HL (2015) Comparison of Oncotype DX recurrence score by histologic types of breast carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 139(12):1546–1549. doi:10.5858/arpa.2014-0557-OA CrossRefPubMed

40.

Hanna MG, Bleiweiss IJ, Nayak A, Jaffer S (2017) Correlation of Oncotype DX recurrence score with histomorphology and immunohistochemistry in over 500 patients. Int J Breast Cancer 2017:1257078. doi:10.1155/2017/1257078 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Hudis CA (2015) Biology before anatomy in early breast cancer-precisely the point. N Engl J Med 373(21):2079–2080. doi:10.1056/NEJMe1512092 CrossRefPubMed

42.

Stemmer S, Steiner M, Rizel S, Ben-Baruch N, Soussan-Gutman L, Rosengarten O, Geffen D, Nisenbaum B, Ryvo L, Uziely B, Fried G, Svedman C, Rothney M, Klang S, Kaufman B, Isaacs K, Evron E, Zidan J, Shak S, Liebermann N (1963) First prospective outcome data in 930 patients with more than 5 year median follow up in whom treatment decisions in clinical practice have been made incorporating the 21-gene recurrence score. Eur J Cancer 51:S321. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(16)30911-X CrossRef

43.

Petkov VIMD, Howlader N, Gliner N, Howe W, Schussler N, Cronin K, Baehner FL, Cress R, Deapen D, Glaser SL, Hernandez BY, Lynch CF, Mueller L, Schwartz AG, Schwartz SM, Stroup A, Sweeney C, Tucker TC, Ward KC, Wiggins C, Wu X, Penberthy L, Shak S (2016) Breast-cancer-specific mortality in patients treated based on the 21-gene assay: a SEER population-based study. NPG Breast Cancer 2:16017CrossRef

44.

Sparano JA (2006) TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx). Clin Breast Cancer 7(4):347–350. doi:10.3816/CBC.2006.n.051 CrossRefPubMed

45.

Allison KH, Kandalaft PL, Sitlani CM, Dintzis SM, Gown AM (2012) Routine pathologic parameters can predict Oncotype DX recurrence scores in subsets of ER positive patients: who does not always need testing? Breast Cancer Res Treat 131(2):413–424. doi:10.1007/s10549-011-1416-3 CrossRefPubMed

46.

Weigelt B, Baehner FL, Reis-Filho JS (2010) The contribution of gene expression profiling to breast cancer classification, prognostication and prediction: a retrospective of the last decade. J Pathol 220(2):263–280. doi:10.1002/path.2648 PubMed

47.

Acs G, Esposito NN, Kiluk J, Loftus L, Laronga C (2012) A mitotically active, cellular tumor stroma and/or inflammatory cells associated with tumor cells may contribute to intermediate or high Oncotype DX recurrence scores in low-grade invasive breast carcinomas. Mod Pathol 25(4):556–566. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2011.194 CrossRefPubMed

48.

Weigelt B, Horlings HM, Kreike B, Hayes MM, Hauptmann M, Wessels LF, de Jong D, Van de Vijver MJ, Van’t Veer LJ, Peterse JL (2008) Refinement of breast cancer classification by molecular characterization of histological special types. J Pathol 216(2):141–150. doi:10.1002/path.2407 CrossRefPubMed

49.

Barbashina V, Corben AD, Akram M, Vallejo C, Tan LK (2013) Mucinous micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: an aggressive counterpart to conventional pure mucinous tumors. Hum Pathol 44(8):1577–1585. doi:10.1016/j.humpath.2013.01.003 CrossRefPubMed

50.

Lopez-Garcia MA, Geyer FC, Natrajan R, Kreike B, Mackay A, Grigoriadis A, Reis-Filho JS, Weigelt B (2010) Transcriptomic analysis of tubular carcinomas of the breast reveals similarities and differences with molecular subtype-matched ductal and lobular carcinomas. J Pathol 222(1):64–75. doi:10.1002/path.2743 PubMed

51.

Koerner F (2010) Papilloma and papillary carcinoma. Semin Diagn Pathol 27(1):13–30CrossRefPubMed

52.

Esposito NN, Dabbs DJ, Bhargava R (2009) Are encapsulated papillary carcinomas of the breast in situ or invasive? A basement membrane study of 27 cases. Am J Clin Pathol 131(2):228–242. doi:10.1309/AJCP8A2UVLCYGTPU CrossRefPubMed

53.

Rakha EA, Gandhi N, Climent F, van Deurzen CH, Haider SA, Dunk L, Lee AH, Macmillan D, Ellis IO (2011) Encapsulated papillary carcinoma of the breast: an invasive tumor with excellent prognosis. Am J Surg Pathol 35(8):1093–1103. doi:10.1097/PAS.0b013e31821b3f65 CrossRefPubMed

54.

Wynveen CA, Nehhozina T, Akram M, Hassan M, Norton L, Van Zee KJ, Brogi E (2011) Intracystic papillary carcinoma of the breast: an in situ or invasive tumor? Results of immunohistochemical analysis and clinical follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 35(1):1–14. doi:10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181fbe20a CrossRefPubMed

55.

Calderaro J, Espie M, Duclos J, Giachetti S, Wehrer D, Sandid W, Cahen-Doidy L, Albiter M, Janin A, de Roquancourt A (2009) Breast intracystic papillary carcinoma: an update. Breast J 15(6):639–644. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4741.2009.00823.x CrossRefPubMed

56.

Mulligan AM, O’Malley FP (2007) Metastatic potential of encapsulated (intracystic) papillary carcinoma of the breast: a report of 2 cases with axillary lymph node micrometastases. Int J Surg Pathol 15(2):143–147. doi:10.1177/1066896906299119 CrossRefPubMed

57.

Tan BY, Thike AA, Ellis IO, Tan PH (2016) Clinicopathologic characteristics of solid papillary carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol 40(10):1334–1342. doi:10.1097/PAS.0000000000000702 CrossRefPubMed

58.

Saremian J, Rosa M (2012) Solid papillary carcinoma of the breast: a pathologically and clinically distinct breast tumor. Arch Pathol Lab Med 136(10):1308–1311. doi:10.5858/arpa.2011-0227-RS CrossRefPubMed

59.

Rabban JT, Koerner FC, Lerwill MF (2006) Solid papillary ductal carcinoma in situ versus usual ductal hyperplasia in the breast: a potentially difficult distinction resolved by cytokeratin 5/6. Hum Pathol 37(7):787–793. doi:10.1016/j.humpath.2006.02.016 CrossRefPubMed

60.

Otsuki Y, Yamada M, Shimizu S, Suwa K, Yoshida M, Tanioka F, Ogawa H, Nasuno H, Serizawa A, Kobayashi H (2007) Solid-papillary carcinoma of the breast: clinicopathological study of 20 cases. Pathol Int 57(7):421–429. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1827.2007.02118.x CrossRefPubMed

61.

Nassar H, Qureshi H, Adsay NV, Visscher D (2006) Clinicopathologic analysis of solid papillary carcinoma of the breast and associated invasive carcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol 30(4):501–507CrossRefPubMed

Title: The 21-gene recurrence score in special histologic subtypes of breast cancer with favorable prognosis
Authors: Gulisa Turashvili
Edi Brogi
Monica Morrow
Clifford Hudis
Maura Dickler
Larry Norton
Hannah Y. Wen
Publication date: 01-08-2017
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4326-1

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background/purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Comparison of residual cancer burden, American Joint Committee on Cancer staging and pathologic complete response in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657)

Receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa B (RANK) expression in primary breast cancer correlates with recurrence-free survival and development of bone metastases in I-SPY1 (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657)

Combination breast cancer chemotherapy with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide damages bone and bone marrow in a female rat model

Sexual health needs and educational intervention preferences for women with cancer

The Canadian National Breast Screening Studies are compromised and their results are unreliable. They should not factor into decisions about breast cancer screening

Influence of clinical, societal, and treatment variables on racial differences in ER−/PR− breast cancer survival

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer