Heterogenety of stage I breast cancer: biological and prognostic value

The introduction of breast cancer screening programs worldwide led not only to the increase of non-invasive carcinoma and stage I breast cancer percentage but also to the redistribution of biological tumor subtypes in female population screened. The proportion of stage I breast cancer is only 21,4% in our country; biological and predictive value of tumor size (T1a, T1b and T1c) is still undefined. We analyzed clinical and morphological characteristics as well as tumor size prognostic value (T1a-c) for the recurrence and death from progression risk determination in 1341 breast cancer patients with stage I tumors. We revealed progressive increase of “small” tumors proportion (T1a and T1b) in stage I breast cancer population within the last 25 years. The percentage of microinvasive carcinomas raised from 0,3% to 4,3% while T1bN0M0 proportion increased from 8,7% to 22,1%; this is the evidence of early breast cancer diagnostics improvement. Stage I breast cancer is the heterogeneous group of tumors with favorable prognosis in case of T1a (≤5 mm) and more aggressive behavior in T1b (6–10 mm) and T1c (11–20 mm). Only T1a tumors have favorable biological profile (huge proportion of luminal A subtype) which reflects upon the long-term treatment results (minimum recurrences and cancer deaths, improved overall survival). Biological behavior of T1b and T1c tumors is more aggressive with high rates of ductal carcinoma, luminal B and triple negative subtypes which significantly worsen the prognosis. The  biology of “small” tumors should be considered when choosing the optimal adjuvant treatment algorithm for breast cancer patients.

stage I breast cancer, T1a-b-c tumor size, biological subtypes of breast cancer, screening and “interval” carcinomas

1. GLOBOGAN 2012; www. http://globocan.iarc.fr.

2. Kaprin A.D., Starinskyj V.V., Petrova G.V. Current status of oncological health service in Russia in 2013. Moscow. Hertzen MSROI Publ. 2014. 235 p.

3. Aksel E.M. Breast cancer morbidity and mortality in Russia. Materialy bol’shoy konferentsii RUSSCO «Rak molochnoy zhelezy» [Mat.conf. RUSSCO «Breast cancer”]. Moscow. 2014, p.35–38.

4. O’Neill F1, Madden SF, Clynes M et all. A gene expression profile indicative of early stage HER2 targeted therapy response. Mol Cancer. 2013 Jul 1;12:69.

5. Abramovitz M, Barwick BG, Willis S et all. Molecular characterisation of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) breast tumour specimens using a custom 512-gene breast cancer bead array-based platform. Br J Cancer. 2011 Nov 8;105 (10):1574–81.

6. Strehl JD, Wachter DL, Fasching PA et all. Invasive Breast Cancer: Recognition of Molecular Subtypes. Breast Care (Basel). 2011;6 (4):258–264.

7. E. Senkus, S. Kyriakides, F. Penault-Llorca et all., on behalf of the ESMO Guidelines Working Group* Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up†Annals of Oncology 0: 1–17, 2013.

8. Clinical guidelines on the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer patients. Assotsiatsiya onkologov Rossii [Russian Association of Oncologists]. ROSC Publ. Moscow. 2014. p.1–46.

9. XVI Russian oncological congress (review of materials). Zhurnal «Opuholi zhenskoy reproduktivnoy sistemy» [“Women reproduction system tumors.» The Journal.]. 2012. no.3–4. p.6–7.

10. Pracella D, Bonin S, Barbazza R et all. Are breast cancer molecular classes predictive of survival in patients with long follow-up? Dis Markers. 2013;35 (6):595–605.

11. Prat A, Cheang MC, Mart n M et all. Prognostic significance of progesterone receptor-positive tumor cells within immunohistochemically definedluminal A breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jan 10;31 (2):203–9.

12. Kim HS, Park I, Cho HJ and all. Analysis of the potent prognostic factors in luminal-type breast cancer. J Breast Cancer. 2012 Dec;15 (4): 401–6.

13. Parise CA, Bauer KR, Brown MM et all. Breast cancer subtypes as defined by the estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) among women with invasive breast cancer in California, 1999–2004. Breast J. 2009 Nov-Dec;15 (6):593–602.

14. Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D et all. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 May 20;101 (10):736–50.

15. Wang Y, Yin Q, Yu Q et all.. A retrospective study of breast cancer subtypes: the risk of relapse and the relations with treatments. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Nov;130 (2):489–98.

16. Zhang HM, Zhang BN, Xuan LX, Zhao P. Clinical characteristics and survival in the operable breast cancer patients with different molecular subtypes. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2009 Jun; 31 (6):447–51.

17. Najafi B, Anvari S, Roshan ZA. Disease free survival among molecular subtypes of early stage breast cancer between 2001 and 2010 in Iran. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14 (10):5811–6.

18. Nofech-Mozes S, Trudeau M, Kahn HK et all. Patterns of recurrence in the basal and non-basal subtypes of triple-negative breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;118:131–137.

19. Elsamany S, Abdullah S. Triple-negative breast cancer: future prospects in diagnosis and management. Med Oncol. 2014 Feb;31 (2):834.

20. Bauer KR, Brown M, Cress RD et all. 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. 2007;109:1721–1728.

21. Lips EH, Mulder L, Oonk et all.Triple-negative breast cancer: BRCAness and concordance of clinical features with BRCA1-mutation carriers. Br J Cancer. 2013 May 28;108 (10):2172–7.

22. Dent R, Trudeau M, Pritchard KI et all. Triple-negative breast cancer: clinical features and patterns of recurrence. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:4429–4434

23. Foulkes WD, Brunet J-B, Stefansson IM et all. The prognostic implication of the basal-like (cyclin E high/ p27low/p53+/glomeruloid-microvascular-proliferation+) phenotype of BRCA1-related breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2004;64:830–835.

24. Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG et all. Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science. 1987 Jan 9;235 (4785):177–82.

25. Zurawska U, Baribeau DA, Giilck S et all. Outcomes of HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer in the trastuzumab era: a population-based study of Canadian patients. Curr Oncol. 2013 Dec;20 (6): e539–45.

26. Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N, et all. Adjuvant trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2011; 365:12731283.

27. Perez EA, Romond EH, Suman VJ and all. Four-year follow-up of trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: joint analysis of data from NCCTG N9831 and NSABP B-31. J Clin Oncol. 2011 Sep 1;29 (25):3366–73.

28. Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland- Jones B, et all. Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1659–72.

29. Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, et all. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1673–84.

30. Nagtegaal ID, Allgood PC., Duffy SW et all. Prognosis and Pathology of Screen-Detected Carcinomas How Different Are They? J Cancer. 2011 Apr; 1360–8.

31. Coldman A, Phillips N, Wilson C et all. Pan-canadian study of mammography screening and mortality from breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Oct 1;106 (11).

32. Garc a Fern ndez A, Chabrera C, Garc a Font M et all. Mortality and recurrence patterns of breast cancer patients diagnosed under a screening programme versus comparable non-screened breast cancer patients from the same population: analytical survey from 2002 to 2012. Tumour Biol. 2013 Oct 9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24114015.

33. Domingo L, Salas D, Zubizarreta R et all. on behalf of the INCA Study Group. Tumor phenotype and breast density in distinct categories of interval cancer: results of population-based mammography screening in Spain. Breast Cancer Res. 2014 Jan 10;16 (1): R3.

34. Bucchi L, Puliti D, Ravaioli A et all. Breast screening: axillary lymph node status of interval cancers by interval year. Breast. 2008 Oct;17 (5):477–83.

35. Theriault RL, Litton JK, Mittendorf EA et all. Age and survival estimates in patients who have nodenegative T1ab breast cancer by breast cancer subtype. Clin Breast Cancer. 2011 Oct;11 (5):325–40.

36. Curigliano G, Viale G, Bagnardi V et all. Сlinical relevance of HER2 overexpression/amplification in patients with small tumor size and node-negativebreast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Dec 1;27 (34):5693–9.

37. Livi L, Meattini I, Saieva C et all. Prognostic value of positive human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and negative hormone status in patients with T1a/T1b, lymph node-negative breast cancer. Cancer. 2012 Jul 1;118 (13):3236–43.

38. Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Litton JK, Broglio KR et all. High risk of recurrence for patients with breast cancer who have human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, node-negative tumors 1 cm or smaller. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Dec 1;27 (34):5700–6.

39. Schroeder MC, Lynch CF, Abu-Hejleh T et all. Chemotherapy Use and Surgical Treatment by Receptor Subtype in Node-Negative T1a and T1b Female BreastCancers, Iowa SEER Registry, 2010- to 2012. Clin Breast Cancer. 2014 Aug 18. pii: S1526–8209 (14) 00164–5.

40. С. Garbino. St.Gallen international breast cancer conference 2013. Panel voting results, p.1–30.

41. NCCN breast cancer guidelines professionals http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp#breast.

42. O’Sullivan CC, Bradbury I, de Azambuja E et all. Efficacy of adjuvant Trastuzumab compared with no Trastuzumab for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and tumors ≤2cm: a meta-analysis of the randomized Trastuzumab trials, ASCO meeting presentation, Chicago 2014.