Oncotype DX 21-gene test has a low recurrence score in both pure and mixed mucinous breast carcinoma

被引:7
作者
Chen, Rui [1 ]
Wang, Yun [1 ]
Li, Taolang [1 ]
Lv, Junyuan [1 ]
Feng, Guoli [1 ]
Tan, Na [2 ]
Wang, Jinjing [2 ]
Cheng, Xiaoming [1 ]
机构
[1] Zunyi Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp, Dept Thyroid & Breast Surg, 149 Dalian Rd, Zunyi 563000, Guizhou, Peoples R China
[2] Zunyi Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp, Dept Pathol, 149 Dalian Rd, Zunyi 563000, Guizhou, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
mucinous breast carcinoma; 21-gene recurrence score assay; prognosis; chemotherapy; endocrine therapy; INFILTRATING DUCTAL CARCINOMA; CLINICOPATHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS; GENE-EXPRESSION; CANCER; ASSAY; POPULATION; UTILITY; WOMEN;
D O I
10.3892/ol.2021.13032
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
The Oncotype DX 21-gene test can be used to predict chemotherapy efficacy in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer; however, the data on the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) for mucinous breast carcinoma (MBC) are limited. The present study aimed to evaluate the distribution pattern and clinical value of the 21-gene RS in patients with MBC. A total of 38 pure MBC (PMBC) and 11 mixed MBC (MMBC) cases were retrospectively analyzed, and a total of 29 ER-positive and HER2-negative MBCs underwent the Oncotype DX 21-gene test. There were no statistically significant differences between the PMBCs and MMBCs in age, tumor size and molecular subtype; however, patients with MMBC showed a significantly higher incidence rate of nodal metastases compared with that in patients with PMBC (72.7 vs. 16.2%, respectively). Following surgery, 87.8 and 59.2% of the enrolled patients received endocrine therapy and chemotherapy, respectively. With a median follow-up of 65.6 months, the 5-year disease-free survival and overall survival rates were 97.0 and 100.0%, respectively. The 21-gene test revealed that the proportions of patients with MBC categorized into low (RS <18), intermediate (RS >= 18-30) and high (RS >= 30) risk groups were 51.7, 44.8 and 3.5%, respectively, and there was no statistically significant difference between the PMBC and MMBC cases. Notably, among the genes in the 21-gene RS testing, the expression levels of cathepsin V, progesterone receptor (PR) and CD68 were significantly higher in the PMBC group compared with that in the MMBC group. In conclusion, the current study demonstrated that patients with MBC had a favorable prognosis, and both PMBC and MMBC cases had a low- and intermediate-risk RS, which suggests that a considerable proportion of patients may be able to avoid chemotherapy. In addition, the high expression level of PR, based on the 21-gene test in PMBCs, indicated that they may have a more favorable response to endocrine therapy than MMBCs.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Chemotherapy and 21-gene recurrence score testing for older breast cancer patients: A competing-risks analysis
    Zhou, Ping
    Zhang, Wen-Wen
    Bao, Yong
    Wang, Jun
    Lian, Chen-Lu
    He, Zhen-Yu
    Wu, San-Gang
    BREAST, 2020, 54 : 319 - 327
  • [42] Comprehensive analysis of the 21-gene recurrence score in invasive ductal breast carcinoma with or without ductal carcinoma in situ component
    Zeng, Yufei
    Gao, Weiqi
    Chen, Xiaosong
    Shen, Kunwei
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2021, 124 (05) : 975 - 981
  • [43] Clinical Impact of 21-Gene Recurrence Score Test Within the Veterans Health Administration: Utilization and Receipt of Guideline-Concordant Care
    Hull, Leland E.
    Lynch, Julie A.
    Berse, Brygida B.
    DuVall, Scott L.
    Chun, Danielle S.
    Venne, Vicki L.
    Efimova, Olga V.
    Icardi, Michael S.
    Kelley, Michael J.
    CLINICAL BREAST CANCER, 2018, 18 (02) : 135 - 143
  • [44] Influence of a 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay on Chemotherapy Delivery in Breast Cancer
    Rutter, Charles E.
    Yao, Xiaopan
    Mancini, Brandon R.
    Aminawung, Jenerius A.
    Chagpar, Anees B.
    Saglam, Ozlen
    Hofstatter, Erin W.
    Abu-Khalaf, Maysa
    Gross, Cary P.
    Evans, Suzanne B.
    CLINICAL BREAST CANCER, 2016, 16 (01) : 59 - 62
  • [45] Breast Medical Oncologists' Use of Standard Prognostic Factors to Predict a 21-Gene Recurrence Score
    Kamal, Arif H.
    Loprinzi, Charles L.
    Reynolds, Carol
    Dueck, Amylou C.
    Geiger, Xochiquetzal J.
    Ingle, James N.
    Carlson, Robert W.
    Hobday, Timothy J.
    Winer, Eric P.
    Goetz, Matthew P.
    ONCOLOGIST, 2011, 16 (10) : 1359 - 1366
  • [46] Breast cancer histopathology is predictive of low-risk Oncotype Dx recurrence score
    Wilson, Parker C.
    Chagpar, Anees B.
    Cicek, Ali F.
    Bossuyt, Veerle
    Buza, Natalia
    Mougalian, Sarah
    Killelea, Brigid K.
    Patel, Natalie
    Harigopal, Malini
    BREAST JOURNAL, 2018, 24 (06) : 976 - 980
  • [47] Distribution, Chemotherapy Use, and Outcome of the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Between Chinese and White breast Cancer in the United States
    Li, Guan-Qiao
    Yao, Jia
    Zhou, Ping
    Chen, Dan-Xia
    Lian, Chen-Lu
    Yang, Shi-Ping
    Huang, Cai-Hong
    Wu, San-Gang
    CLINICAL BREAST CANCER, 2022, 22 (03) : 279 - 287
  • [48] Evaluation of the Sensitivity to Endocrine Therapy Index and 21-Gene Breast Recurrence Score in the SWOG S8814 Trial
    Speers, Corey W.
    Symmans, W. Fraser
    Barlow, William E.
    Trevarton, Alex
    The, Stephanie
    Du, Lili
    Rae, James M.
    Shak, Steven
    Baehner, Rick
    Sharma, Priyanka
    Pusztai, Lajos
    Hortobagyi, Gabriel N.
    Hayes, Daniel F.
    Albain, Kathy S.
    Godwin, Andrew
    Thompson, Alastair
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2023, 41 (10) : 1841 - +
  • [49] The budget impact of utilizing the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test from a US healthcare payer perspective
    Berdunov, Vladislav
    Laws, Ewan
    Cuyun Carter, Gebra
    Luo, Roger
    Russell, Christy
    Campbell, Sara
    Force, Jeremy
    Abdou, Yara
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ECONOMICS, 2023, 26 (01) : 973 - 990
  • [50] BREAST CANCER The 21-gene recurrence score - biology remains at the forefront
    Puhalla, Shannon L.
    Davidson, Nancy E.
    NATURE REVIEWS CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 13 (08) : 470 - 472