Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease that encompasses a wide range of clinical behaviors and histological and molecular variants. It is the most common type of cancer affecting women worldwide and is the second leading cause of cancer death.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search was performed to explore the advances in molecular medicine related to the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer.
Results
During the last few decades, advances in molecular medicine have changed the landscape of cancer treatment as new molecular tests complement and, in many instances, exceed traditional methods for determining patient prognosis and response to treatment options. Personalized medicine is becoming the standard of care around the world. Developments in molecular profiling, genomic analysis, and the discovery of targeted drug therapies have significantly improved patient survival rates and quality of life.
Conclusions
This review highlights what pathologists need to know about current molecular tests for classification and prognostic/predictive assessment of breast carcinoma as well as their role as part of the medical team.
GreenoughR.B.. Varying degrees of malignancy in cancer of the breast.J Cancer Res.1925; 9: 453–463.
3.
PateyD.H., ScarffR.W.. The position of histology in the prognosis carcinoma of the breast.Lancet.1928; 1: 801–804.
4.
HaagensenC.D.. The bases for the histologic grading of carcinoma of the breast.Am J Cancer.1933; 19: 285–327.
5.
BloomH.J., RichardsonW.W.. Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer; a study of 1409 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years.Br J Cancer.1957; 11(3): 359–377.
6.
RobbinsP., PinderS., de KlerkN.. Histological grading of breast carcinomas: a study of interobserver agreement.Hum Pathol.1995; 26(8): 873–879.
7.
RakhaE.A., El-SayedM.E., LeeA.H.. Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma.J Clin Oncol.2008; 26(19): 3153–3158.
8.
PereiraH., PinderS.E., SibberingD.M.. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. IV: Should you be a typer or a grader? A comparative study of two histological prognostic features in operable breast carcinoma.Histopathology.1995; 27(3): 219–226.
9.
SundquistM., ThorstensonS., BrudinL.; South East Swedish Breast Cancer Study Group. Applying the Nottingham Prognostic Index to a Swedish breast cancer population.Breast Cancer Res Treat.1999; 53(1): 1–8.
10.
ElstonC.W., EllisI.O.. Pathologic prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grades in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up.Histopathology.1991; 19(5): 403–410.
11.
SchwartzA.M., HensonD.E., ChenD.. Histologic grade remains a prognostic factor for breast cancer regardless of the number of positive lymph nodes and tumor size: a study of 161 708 cases of breast cancer from the SEER program.Arch Pathol Lab Med.2014; 138(8): 1048–1052.
12.
WeigeltB., Reis-FilhoJ.S.. Histological and molecular types of breast cancer: is there a unifying taxonomy?Nat Rev Clin Oncol.2009; 6(12): 718–730.
13.
DiazL.K., SneigeN.. Estrogen receptor analysis for breast cancer: current issues and keys to increasing testing accuracy.Adv Anat Pathol.2005; 12(1): 10–9.
14.
GownA.M.. Current issues in ER and HER2 testing by IHC in breast cancer.Mod Pathol.2008; 21(Suppl 2): S8–S15.
15.
SommerS., FuquaS.A.. Estrogen receptor and breast cancer.Semin Cancer Biol.2001; 11(5): 339–352.
16.
American Society of Clinical Oncology.Clinical practice guidelines for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal cancer. Adopted on May 17, 1996 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology.J Clin Oncol.1996; 14(10): 2843–2877.
17.
HammondM.E., HayesD.F., DowsettM.; American Society of Clinical Oncology; College of American Pathologists. Guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer (unabridged version).Arch Pathol Lab Med.2010; 134(7): e48–e72.
18.
RhodesA., JasaniB., BalatonA.J.. Frequency of oestrogen and progesterone receptor positivity by immunohistochemical analysis in 7016 breast carcinomas: correlation with patient age, assay sensitivity, threshold value, and mammographic screening.J Clin Pathol.2000; 53(9): 688–696.
19.
ChangM.C., MalowanyJ.I., MazurkiewiczJ.. ‘Genetic heterogeneity’ in HER2/neu testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization: a study of 2,522 cases.Mod Pathol.2012; 25(5): 683–688.
20.
SapinoA., GoiaM., RecuperoD.. Current challenges for HER2 testing in diagnostic pathology: state of the art and controversial issues.Front Oncol.2013; 3: 129.
21.
WolffA.C., HammondM.E., HicksD.G.; American Society of Clinical Oncology; College of American Pathologists. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: clinical practice guideline update.Arch Pathol Lab Med.2014; 138(2): 241–256.
22.
GeyerC.E., ForsterJ., LindquistD.. Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer [Erratum appears in N Engl J Med. 2007; 356(14): 1487].N Engl J Med.2006; 355(26): 2733–2743.
23.
BaselgaJ., CortésJ., KimS.B.; CLEOPATRA Study Group. Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer.N Engl J Med.2012; 366(2): 109–119.
24.
VermaS., MilesD., GianniL.; EMILIA Study Group. Trastuzumab emtansine for HER2- positive advanced breast cancer [Erratum appears in N Engl J Med. 2013; 368(25): 2442].N Engl J Med.2012; 367(19): 1783–1791.
LarsonJ.S., GoodmanL.J., TanY.. Analytical validation of a highly quantitative, sensitive, accurate, and reproducible assay (HERmark) for the measurement of HER2 total protein and HER2 homodimers in FFPE breast cancer tumor specimens.Patholog Res Int.2010; 2010: 814176.
27.
de AlavaE., OcañaA., AbadM.. Neuregulin expression modulates clinical response to trastuzumab in patients with metastatic breast cancer.J Clin Oncol.2007; 25(19): 2656–2663.
28.
PiccartM., LohrischC., Di LeoA.. The predictive value of HER2 in breast cancer.Oncology.2001; 61(Suppl 2): 73–82.
29.
WolffA.C., HammondM.E., SchwartzJ.N.; 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.2007; 131(1): 18–43.
30.
PaikS., BryantJ., Tan-ChiuE.. Real-world performance of HER2 testing–National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience.J Natl Cancer Inst.2002; 94(11) 852–854.
31.
VargaZ., TubbsR.R., WangZ.. Co-amplification of the HER2 gene and chromosome 17 centromere: a potential diagnostic pitfall in HER2 testing in breast cancer.Breast Cancer Res Treat.2012; 132(3): 925–935.
32.
VanceG.H., BarryT.S., BloomK.J.; College of American Pathologists. Genetic heterogeneity in HER2 testing in breast cancer: panel summary and guidelines.Arch Pathol Lab Med.2009; 133(4): 611–612.
33.
OhlschlegelC., ZahelK., KradolferD.. HER2 genetic heterogeneity in breast carcinoma.Clin Pathol.2011; 64(12): 1112–1116.
34.
PerezE.A., SumanV.J., DavidsonN.E.. HER2 testing by local, central, and reference laboratories in specimens from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 intergroup adjuvant trial.J Clin Oncol.2006; 24(19): 3032–3038.
35.
ReddyJ.C., ReimannJ.D., AndersonS.M.. Concordance between central and local laboratory HER2 testing from a community-based clinical study.Clin Breast Cancer.2006; 7(2): 153–157.
36.
LiptonA., AliS.. HER2 protein expression and homodimer levels predict response to trastuzumab in centrally tested FISH-positive metastatic breast cancer patients. Presented at: Proceedings of the 31st CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; San Antonio, Texas; 2008.
37.
BatesM., SperindeJ., KöstlerW.J., et al SperindeJ., AliS., LeitzelK.. Identification of a subpopulation of metastatic breast cancer patients with very high HER2 expression levels and possible resistance to trastuzumab.Ann Oncol.2011; 22(9): 2014–2020.
38.
BartonS., ZabagloL., A'HernR.. Assessment of the contribution of the IHC4+C score to decision making in clinical practice in early breast cancer.Br J Cancer.2012; 106(11): 1760–1765.
39.
OlivottoI.A., BajdikC.D., RavdinP.M.. Population-based validation of the prognostic model ADJUVANT! for early breast cancer.J Clin Oncol.2005; 23(12): 2716–2725.
40.
Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group.Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials.Lancet.1998; 352(9132): 930–942.
41.
Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group.Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials.Lancet.1998; 351(9114): 1451–1467.
42.
Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG).Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials.Lancet.2005; 365(9472): 1687–1717.
43.
RavdinP.M., SiminoffL.A., DavisG.J.. Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer.J Clin Oncol.2001; 19(4): 980–991.
44.
DowsettM., CuzickJ., WaleC.. Prediction of risk of distant recurrence using the 21-gene recurrence score in node-negative and node-positive postmenopausal patients with breast cancer treated with anastrozole or tamoxifen: a TransATAC study.J Clin Oncol.2010; 28(11): 1829–1834.
45.
DowsettM., AllredC., KnoxJ.. Relationship between quantitative estrogen and progesterone receptor expression and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) status with recurrence in the arimidex, tamoxifen, alone or in combination trial.J Clin Oncol.2008; 26(7): 1059–1065.
46.
CuzickJ., DowsettM., PinedaS.. Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the Genomic Health recurrence score in early breast cancer.J Clin Oncol.2011; 29(32): 4273–4278.
PerouC.M., SørlieT., EisenM.B.. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours.Nature.2000; 406(6797): 747–752.
49.
SørlieT., PerouC.M., TibshiraniR.. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.2001; 98(19): 10869–10874.
50.
WuY., SahinA.. Molecular classification and testing of breast carcinoma. In: HodaS., BrogiE., KoernerF.. ed. Rosen's Breast Pathology.4th ed.Philadelphia: LWW;2014: 1337–1342.
51.
BastienR.R., Rodríguez-Lescureá, EbbertM.T.. PAM50 breast cancer subtyping by RT-qPCR and concordance with standard clinical molecular markers.BMC Med Genomics.2012; 5: 44.
52.
SinnP., AulmannS., WirtzR.. Multigene assays for classification, prognosis, and prediction in breast cancer: a critical review on the background and clinical utility.Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd.2013; 73(9): 932–940.
53.
SotiriouC., WirapatiP., LoiS.. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis.J Natl Cancer Inst.2006; 98(4): 262–272.
54.
NielsenT.O., ParkerJ.S., LeungS.. A comparison of PAM50 intrinsic subtyping with immunohistochemistry and clinical prognostic factors in tamoxifen-treated estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.Clin Cancer Res.2010; 16(21): 5222–5232.
55.
KittanehM., MonteroA.J., GlückS.. Molecular profiling for breast cancer: a comprehensive review.Biomark Cancer.2013; 5: 61–70.
56.
RingB.Z., SeitzR.S., BeckR.. Novel prognostic immunohistochemical biomarker panel for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.J Clin Oncol.2006; 24(19): 3039–3047.
57.
RossD.T., KimC.Y., TangG.. Chemosensitivity and stratification by a five monoclonal antibody immunohistochemistry test in the NSABP B14 and B20 trials.Clin Cancer Res.2008; 14(20): 6602–6609.
58.
RossJ.S., HatzisC., SymmansW.F.. Commercialized multigene predictors of clinical outcome for breast cancer [Erratum appears in Oncologist. 2008; 13(8)].Oncologist.2008; 13(5): 477–493.
59.
BartlettJ.M., ThomasJ., RossD.T.. Mammostrat as a tool to stratify breast cancer patients at risk of recurrence during endocrine therapy.Breast Cancer Res.2010; 12(4): R47.
60.
HarrisL., FritscheH., MennelR.; American Society of Clinical Oncology. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer.J Clin Oncol.2007; 25(33): 5287–312.
61.
SparanoJ.A.. TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx).Clin Breast Cancer.2006; 7(4): 347–350.
62.
PaikS., TangG., ShakS.. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.J Clin Oncol.2006; 24(23): 3726–3734.
63.
AlbainK.S., BarlowW.E., ShakS.; Breast Caner Intergroup of North America. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal, node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial.Lancet Oncol.2010; 11(1): 55–65.
64.
MarchionniL., WilsonR.F., MarinopoulosS.S.. Impact of Gene Expression Profiling Tests on Breast Cancer Outcomes.Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality;2008.
ParkM.M., EbelJ.J., ZhaoW.. ER and PR immunohistochemistry and HER2 FISH versus oncotype DX: implications for breast cancer treatment.Breast J.2014; 20(1): 37–45.
67.
AcsG., EspositoN.N., KilukJ.. 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.2012; 25(4): 556–566.
68.
RossJ.S.. Multigene predictors in early-stage breast cancer: moving in or moving out? [Erratum appears in Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2008; 8(5): 669].Expert Rev Mol Diagn.2008; 8(2): 129–135.
69.
SolinL.J., GrayR., BaehnerF.L.. A multigene expression assay to predict local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.J Natl Cancer Inst.2013; 105(10): 701–710.
LagiosM.D., SilversteinM.J.. Risk of recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ by oncotype Dx technology: some concerns.Cancer.2014; 120(7): 1085.
72.
ParkerJ.S., MullinsM., CheangM.C.. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes.J Clin Oncol.2009; 27(8): 1160–1167.
73.
NielsenT., WalldenB., SchaperC.. Analytical validation of the PAM50-based Prosigna Breast Cancer Prognostic Gene Signature Assay and nCounter Analysis System using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded breast tumor specimens.BMC Cancer.2014; 14: 177.
74.
ChiaS.K., BramwellV.H., TuD.. A 50-gene intrinsic subtype classifier for prognosis and prediction of benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen.Clin Cancer Res.2012; 18(16): 4465–4472.
75.
Cancer Genome Atlas Network.Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours.Nature.2012; 490(7418): 61–70.
76.
MookS., SchmidtM.K., WeigeltB.. The 70-gene prognosis signature predicts early metastasis in breast cancer patients between 55 and 70 years of age.Ann Oncol.2010; 21(4): 717–722.
77.
SlodkowskaE.A., RossJ.S.. MammaPrint 70-gene signature: another milestone in personalized medical care for breast cancer patients.Expert Rev Mol Diagn.2009; 9(5): 417–422.
78.
MittempergherL., de RondeJ.J., NieuwlandM.. Gene expression profiles from formalin fixed paraffin embedded breast cancer tissue are largely comparable to fresh frozen matched tissue.PLoS One.2011; 6(2): e17163.
79.
SadiA.M., WangD.Y., YoungsonB.J.. Clinical relevance of DNA microarray analyses using archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded breast cancer specimens.BMC Cancer.2011; 11: 253: 1-13.
80.
FedorowiczG., GuerreroS., WuT.D.. Microarray analysis of RNA extracted from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded and matched fresh-frozen ovarian adenocarcinomas.BMC Med Genomics.2009; 2: 23.
DryS., GrodyW.W., PapagniP.. Stuck between a scalpel and a rock, or molecular pathology and legal-ethical issues in use of tissues for clinical care and research: what must a pathologist know?Am J Clin Pathol.2012; 137(3): 346–355.
86.
GrodyW.W., RichardsC.S.. New quality assurance standards for rare disease testing.Genet Med.2008; 10(5): 320–324.
87.
AllisonK.H.. Molecular pathology of breast cancer: what a pathologist needs to know.Am J Clin Pathol.2012; 138(6): 770–780.
