Molecular classification of breast cancer using IHC markers: experience from a tertiary cancer center in south India

Authors

  • Shoaib Nawaz P. N. Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  • Nikhil Sebastian Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  • Raja T. Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  • Ramya A. Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  • Kumanan J. Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  • Uddiptya Goswami Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  • Vedanta Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  • Aishwarya Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Cancer Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20233027

Keywords:

Breast cancer, Immunohistochemistry, Molecular subtypes

Abstract

Background: Breast cancer is a very heterogeneous disease. Molecular or intrinsic subtypes of breast cancer are based on the gene expression profiling. Doing gene expression profiling in each case is practically difficult. So most of the labs depend on immunohistochemistry to classify breast tumors into various molecular-like subtypes. In this study, we have used immune histochemistry to classify tumors into various subtypes.

Methods: We have retrospectively collected the data of breast cancer patients treated at Apollo Cancer Center, Chennai, in whom ER, PR, HER 2 Neu and Ki 67 were done, and the data was analyzed.

Results: The commonest molecular subtype observed in the present study was Luminal B HER2 positive, constituting 40% of the cases, followed by a HER2 positive (non-luminal) subtype in 20% of cases. The triple negative subtype was the third most frequent, comprising 18% of the cases. The least frequent subtype was Luminal A, seen in only 8% of cases.

Conclusions: There is a higher proportion of luminal B HER2 positive and triple negative subtypes in our study population compared to the other studies in published literature. The proportion of luminal A was lesser in our study compared to the literature.

References

Kos Z, Dabbs D. Biomarker assessment and molecular testing for prognostication in breast cancer. Histopathol. 2015;68(1):70-85.

Rakha E, El-Sayed M, Reis-Filho J, Ellis I. Expression profiling technology: its contribution to our understanding of breast cancer. Histopathol. 2007;52(1):67-81.

Rakha E, Green A. Molecular classification of breast cancer: what the pathologist needs to know. Pathol. 2017;49(2):111-9.

Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, Penault-Llorca F, Poortmans P, Rutgers E, et al. Primary breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2015;26 (suppl 5):v8-v30.

Onitilo A, Engel J, Greenlee R, Mukesh B. Breast cancer subtypes based on ER/PR and Her2 expression: comparison of clinicopathologic features and survival. Clin Med Res. 2009;7(1-2):4-13.

Solomon J, Dell’Aquila M, Fadare O, Hasteh F. Her2/neu status determination in breast cancer. Am J Clin Pathol. 2017;147(4):432-7.

Tang P, Tse G. Immunohistochemical surrogates for molecular classification of breast carcinoma: a 2015 update. Arch Pathol Laborat Medi. 2016;140(8):806-14.

Sandhu G, Erqou S, Patterson H, Mathew A. prevalence of triple-negative breast cancer in India: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Glob Oncol. 2016;2(6):412-21.

Nadji M, Gomez-Fernandez C, Ganjei-Azar P, Morales A. Immunohistochemistry of estrogen and progesterone receptors reconsidered. Am J Clin Pathol. 2005;123(1):21-7.

Arpino G, Weiss H, Lee A, Schiff R, De Placido S, Osborne C, et al. Estrogen receptor–positive, progesterone receptor–negative breast cancer: association with growth factor receptor expression and tamoxifen resistance. JNCI. 2005;97(17):1254-61.

Wang B, Ding W, Sun K, Wang X, Xu L, Teng X. Impact of the 2018 ASCO/CAP guidelines on HER2 fluorescence in situ hybridization interpretation in invasive breast cancers with immunohistochemically equivocal results. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):16726.

Li X, Oprea-Ilies G, Krishnamurti U. New Developments in Breast Cancer and Their Impact on Daily Practice in Pathology. Arch Pathol Laborat Medi. 2017;141(4):490-8.

Cancello G, Maisonneuve P, Rotmensz N, Viale G, Mastropasqua M, Pruneri G, et al. Progesterone receptor loss identifies Luminal B breast cancer subgroups at higher risk of relapse. Annal Oncol. 2012;24(3):661-8.

Purdie C, Quinlan P, Jordan L, Ashfield A, Ogston S, Dewar J, et al. Progesterone receptor expression is an independent prognostic variable in early breast cancer: a population-based study. Brit J Canc. 2013;110(3):565-72.

Jagtap SV, Beniwal A. Invasive lobular carcinoma of breast histopathological subtypes: clinicopathological study. Int J Heal Sci Res. 2016;6(7):105-11.

Downloads

Published

2023-09-29

How to Cite

Nawaz P. N., S., Sebastian, N., T., R., A., R., J., K., Goswami, U., Vedanta, & Aishwarya. (2023). Molecular classification of breast cancer using IHC markers: experience from a tertiary cancer center in south India. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 11(10), 3729–3733. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20233027

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles