Dataset Information

In modern times, how important are breast cancer stage, grade and receptor subtype for survival: a population-based cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In breast cancer, immunohistochemistry (IHC) subtypes, together with grade and stage, are well-known independent predictors of breast cancer death. Given the immense changes in breast cancer treatment and survival over time, we used recent population-based data to test the combined influence of IHC subtypes, grade and stage on breast cancer death.

Methods

We identified 24,137 women with invasive breast cancer aged 20 to 74 between 2005 and 2015 in the database of the Cancer Registry of Norway. Kaplan-Meier curves, mortality rates and adjusted hazard ratios for breast cancer death were estimated by IHC subtypes, grade, tumour size and nodal status during 13?years of follow-up.

Results

Within all IHC subtypes, grade, tumour size and nodal status were independent predictors of breast cancer death. When combining all prognostic factors, the risk of death was 20- to 40-fold higher in the worst groups compared to the group with the smallest size, low grade and ER+PR+HER2- status. Among node-negative ER+HER2- tumours, larger size conferred a significantly increased breast cancer mortality. ER+PR-HER2- tumours of high grade and advanced stage showed particularly high breast cancer mortality similar to TNBC. When examining early versus late mortality, grade, size and nodal status explained most of the late (>?5?years) mortality among ER+ subtypes.

Conclusions

There is a wide range of risks of dying from breast cancer, also across small breast tumours of low/intermediate grade, and among node-negative tumours. Thus, even with modern breast cancer treatment, stage, grade and molecular subtype (reflected by IHC subtypes) matter for prognosis.

SUBMITTER: Johansson ALV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7852363 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

In modern times, how important are breast cancer stage, grade and receptor subtype for survival: a population-based cohort study.

Johansson Anna L V ALV Trewin Cassia B CB Fredriksson Irma I Reinertsen Kristin V KV Russnes Hege H Ursin Giske G

Breast cancer research : BCR 20210201 1

<h4>Background</h4>In breast cancer, immunohistochemistry (IHC) subtypes, together with grade and stage, are well-known independent predictors of breast cancer death. Given the immense changes in breast cancer treatment and survival over time, we used recent population-based data to test the combined influence of IHC subtypes, grade and stage on breast cancer death.<h4>Methods</h4>We identified 24,137 women with invasive breast cancer aged 20 to 74 between 2005 and 2015 in the database of the Ca ...[more]

PMID: 33526044

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the influence of stage at breast cancer diagnosis, tumour biology, and treatment on survival in contemporary times of better (neo-)adjuvant systemic therapy.DesignProspective nationwide population based study.SettingNationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry.ParticipantsFemale patients with primary breast cancer diagnosed between 1999 and 2012 (n=173,797), subdivided into two time cohorts on the basis of breast cancer diagnosis: 1999-2005 (n=80,228) and 2006-12 (n=93,569).Main outcome measuresRelative survival was compared between the two cohorts. Influence of traditional prognostic factors on overall mortality was analysed with Cox regression for each cohort separately.ResultsCompared with 1999-2005, patients from 2006-12 had smaller (≤ T1 65% (n=60,570) v 60% (n=48,031); P<0.001), more often lymph node negative (N0 68% (n=63,544) v 65% (n=52,238); P<0.001) tumours, but they received more chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, and targeted therapy (neo-adjuvant/adjuvant systemic therapy 60% (n=56,402) v 53% (n=42,185); P<0.001). Median follow-up was 9.8 years for 1999-2005 and 3.9 years for 2006-12. The relative five year survival rate in 2006-12 was 96%, improved in all tumour and nodal stages compared with 1999-2005, and 100% in tumours ≤ 1 cm. In multivariable analyses adjusted for age and tumour type, overall mortality was decreased by surgery (especially breast conserving), radiotherapy, and systemic therapies. Mortality increased with progressing tumour size in both cohorts (2006-12 T1c v T1a: hazard ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval 1.33 to 1.78), but without a significant difference in invasive breast cancers until 1 cm (2006-12 T1b v T1a: hazard ratio 1.04, 0.88 to 1.22), and independently with progressing number of positive lymph nodes (2006-12 N1 v N0: 1.25, 1.17 to 1.32).ConclusionsTumour stage at diagnosis of breast cancer still influences overall survival significantly in the current era of effective systemic therapy. Diagnosis of breast cancer at an early tumour stage remains vital.

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the role of local therapy in elderly patients with stage IV breast cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of local therapy including surgery and radiotherapy in this kind of population by using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.MethodsEligible patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were selected from the SEER database. Baseline characteristics, way of local therapy and survival information were collected for survival and analysis of prognostic factors. Cause-specific survival (CSS) curves were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier (KM) method and compared by the log-rank test. Cox regression and multivariate competing risk analyses were used to analyze prognosis factors.ResultsA total of 1,900 patients were enrolled with the median age of 71 (range, 65 to 95) years. The 5-year CSS of patients with surgery was significantly better than that of those who did not (36.5% vs. 22.4%, P<0.001). Moreover, surgery was an independent protective factor for CSS in both multivariate Cox regression analysis [hazard ratio (HR), 0.588; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.485-0.643; P<0.001] and multivariate competing risk analysis [subdistribution HR (SHR), 0.620; 95% CI, 0.535-0.718; P<0.001]. Stratified analysis showed that most subgroup patients could benefit from surgery. The 5-year CSS of patients with radiotherapy was comparable to those without radiotherapy (28.9% vs. 26.5%, P=0.060), and radiotherapy was not an independent prognostic factor for CSS (SHR, 1.005; 95% CI, 0.846-1.202; P=0.954). However, subgroup analysis found that patients with moderate grade in histopathology, luminal A, or triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtype could benefit from radiotherapy (all P<0.05).ConclusionsElderly patients with stage IV breast cancer can benefit from surgical treatment. This study helps to select the appropriate group for local surgery or radiotherapy according to the personal situation of the elderly to obtain the maximum benefit.

Project description:BackgroundThe relation between breast cancer molecular subtype and survival has been studied in several jurisdictions, but limited information is available for Ontario. The aim of this study was to determine breast cancer survival by molecular subtype and to assess the effect on survival of selected demographic and tumour-based characteristics.MethodsWe extracted 29 833 breast cancer cases (in 26 538 girls and women aged ≥ 15 yr) diagnosed between 2010 and 2012 from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Cancers were categorized into 4 molecular subtypes: 1) luminal A (estrogen-receptor-positive and/or progesterone-receptor-positive [ER+ and/or PR+] and negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2-]), 2) luminal B (ER+ and/or PR+/HER2+), 3) HER2-enriched (ER- and PR-/HER2+) and 4) triple-negative (ER- and PR-/HER2-). We estimated associations with predictor variables (age, stage at diagnosis, histologic type, comorbidity and place of residence [urban or rural]) using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. Likelihood ratio testing was used to evaluate differences in risk of death.ResultsLuminal A was the most commonly diagnosed subtype (59.0%) and had the greatest survival, whereas triple-negative had the poorest survival. For all subtypes, a dose-response effect was observed between the hazard of death and age and stage at diagnosis, with the greatest effect found for the HER2-enriched subtype (age: hazard ratio [HR] 7.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.68-11.81]; stage at diagnosis: HR 37.71 [95% CI 34.64-41.27]). Moderate comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index score 1 or 2) was associated with increased risk of death for triple-negative cancers (HR 2.42 [95% CI 1.36-4.31]), and severe comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥ 3) increased the risk for all molecular subtypes.InterpretationThe results indicate the importance of including molecular subtype, along with age, stage at diagnosis and comorbidity, in assessing breast cancer survival. They highlight the need to address outcomes related to hormone-receptor-negative cancers, for which survival lags behind that for hormone-receptor-positive cancers.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The risk of breast cancer to first degree relatives of breast cancer patients is approximately twice that of the general population. Breast cancer, however, is a heterogeneous disease and it is plausible that the familial relative risk (FRR) for breast cancer may differ by the pathological subtype of the tumour. The contribution of genetic variants associated with breast cancer susceptibility to the subtype-specific FRR is still unclear. METHODS:We computed breast cancer FRR for subtypes of breast cancer by comparing breast cancer incidence in relatives of breast cancer cases from a population-based series with known estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status with that expected from the general population. We estimated the contribution to the FRR of genetic variants associated with breast cancer susceptibility using subtype-specific genotypic relative risks and allele frequencies for each variant. RESULTS:At least one marker was measured for 4,590 breast cancer cases, who reported 9,014 affected and unaffected first-degree female relatives. There was no difference between the breast cancer FRR for relatives of patients with ER-negative (FRR = 1.78, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.44 to 2.11) and ER-positive disease (1.82, 95% CI: 1.67 to 1.98), P = 0.99. There was some suggestion that the breast cancer FRR for relatives of patients with ER-negative disease was higher than that for ER-positive disease for ages of the relative less than 50 years old (FRR = 2.96, 95% CI: 2.04 to 3.87; and 2.05, 95% CI: 1.70 to 2.40 respectively; P = 0.07), and that the breast cancer FRR for relatives of patients with ER-positive disease was higher than for ER-negative disease when the age of the relative was greater than 50 years (FRR = 1.76, 95% CI: 1.59 to 1.93; and 1.41, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.74 respectively, P = 0.06). We estimated that mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 explain 32% of breast cancer FRR for relatives of patients with ER-negative and 9.4% of the breast cancer FRR for relatives of patients with ER-positive disease. Twelve recently identified common breast cancer susceptibility variants were estimated to explain 1.9% and 9.6% of the FRR to relatives of patients with ER-negative and ER-positive disease respectively. CONCLUSIONS:FRR for breast cancer was significantly increased for both ER-negative and ER-positive disease. Including receptor status in conjunction with genetic status may aid risk prediction in women with a family history.

Project description:ObjectiveUsing linked cancer registry and administrative data to monitor, tumour, node and metastases (TNM) stage and survival from female breast cancer in Australia.MethodAnalysis of 2000-2014 diagnoses with linked population-based data to investigate: (1) sociodemographic predictors of advanced stage (stages III and IV), using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression; and (2) sociodemographic factors and stage as predictors of breast cancer survival using competing risk regression.DesignPopulation-based registry cohort.Setting and participants14?759 South Australian women diagnosed in 2000-2014.Primary and secondary outcome measuresStage and survival.ResultsAt diagnosis, 46% of women were classified as stage I, 39% as stage II, 12% as stage III and 4% as stage IV. After adjusting for sociodemographic factors, advanced stage was more common: (1) for ages <50 years; and although not statistically significant, for ages 80+ years; and (2) in women from socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. Compared with 2000-2004 diagnoses, stage and sociodemographic adjusted risks (sub-HRs (SHRs)) of breast cancer death were lower in 2005-2009 (SHR 0.75, 95%?CI 0.67 to 0.83) and 2010-2015 (SHR 0.57, 95%?CI 0.48 to 0.67). Compared with stage I, the SHR was 3.87 (95% CI 3.32 to 4.53) for stage II, 10.87 (95% CI 9.22 to 12.81) for stage III, and 41.97 (95% CI 34.78 to 50.65) for stage IV. Women aged 70+ years at diagnosis and those living in the most socioeconomically disadvantaged areas were at elevated risk of breast cancer death, independent of stage and sociodemographic factors.ConclusionsStage varied by age, diagnostic period and socioeconomic status, and was a stronger predictor of survival than other statistically significant sociodemographic predictors. Achieving earlier diagnosis outside the original BreastScreen target of 50-69 years (as applying <2014) and in residents of socioeconomically disadvantaged areas likely would increase cancer survival at a population level.

Dataset Information

In modern times, how important are breast cancer stage, grade and receptor subtype for survival: a population-based cohort study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

In modern times, how important are breast cancer stage, grade and receptor subtype for survival: a population-based cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets