A study of treatment modalities in breast cancer patients with help of triple marker test
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20250978Keywords:
Chemotherapy, Triple negative breast cancer, Targeted therapy, Breast cancer, Triple marker testAbstract
Background: Breast cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide. Advances in early diagnosis and molecular profiling have significantly improved treatment outcomes. The triple marker test, which assesses estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status, plays a crucial role in classifying breast cancer subtypes and guiding treatment decisions. Personalized treatment approaches based on molecular characteristics enhance the effectiveness of hormone therapy, targeted therapy, and chemotherapy.
Methods: This prospective study evaluates the impact of the triple marker test in determining breast cancer treatment modalities. Patients were classified based on their ER, PR, and HER2 status to assess their response to various therapeutic interventions. Data collection included clinical examinations, histopathological analysis, and treatment outcomes following neoadjuvant therapy, surgery, and adjuvant therapies.
Results: Findings indicate that ER/PR-positive patients benefit significantly from hormone therapy, while HER2-positive cases show improved outcomes with targeted agents like trastuzumab. Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) remains a therapeutic challenge, often requiring aggressive chemotherapy. The study also highlights the role of neoadjuvant therapy in reducing tumor size, facilitating breast-conserving surgery (BCS), and improving overall prognosis.
Conclusions: Molecular profiling using the triple marker test is instrumental in optimizing breast cancer treatment strategies. Personalized treatment plans based on receptor status enhance survival rates and quality of life (QoL). Integrating biomarker-driven approaches into clinical practice ensures more precise and effective breast cancer management.
Metrics
References
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(1):7-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21654
Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thürlimann B, et al. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: Highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(9):2206-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdt303
Lehmann BD, Bauer JA, Chen X, Sanders ME, Chakravarthy AB, Shyr Y, et al. Identification of human triple-negative breast cancer subtypes and preclinical models for selection of targeted therapies. J Clin Invest. 2011;121(7):2750-67.
Curigliano G, Burstein HJ, Winer EP, Gnant M, Dubsky P, Loibl S, et al. De-escalating and escalating treatments for early-stage breast cancer: The St Gallen International Expert Consensus Conference on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2017. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(8):1700-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx308
Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, Mehta K, Costantino JP, Wolmark N, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: The CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet. 2014;384(9938):164-72.
Sørlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, Aas T, Geisler S, Johnsen H, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98(19):10869-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.191367098
Prat A, Pineda E, Adamo B, Galván P, Fernández A, Gaba L, et al. Clinical implications of the intrinsic molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Breast. 2015;24(2):S26-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2015.07.008
Hortobagyi GN. Advances in breast cancer treatment. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(26):2594-606.
Adiga U. Clinical presentation and treatment outcomes in locally advanced breast cancer. Indian J Cancer. 2022;59(2):180-5.
Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, Fuchs H, Paton V, Bajamonde A, et al. HER2-targeted therapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(11):783-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM200103153441101
Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, Mehta K, Costantino JP, Wolmark N, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term outcomes. Lancet. 2014;384(9938):164-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62422-8
Mitsunori S. Triple-negative breast cancer: Characteristics and management. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;110(3):381-8.
Lehmann BD, Bauer JA, Chen X, Sanders ME, Chakravarthy AB, Shyr Y, et al. Identification of human triple-negative breast cancer subtypes and preclinical models for selection of targeted therapies. J Clin Invest. 2011;121(7):2750-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI45014
MD Anderson Cancer Center. Breast cancer surgery outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(4):1120-32.
Ligibel JA. Obesity and breast cancer prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(9):924-30.
Key TJ. Menopause and breast cancer risk. Lancet. 2001;357(9253):1359-63.
Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Type and timing of menopausal hormone therapy and breast cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis of the worldwide epidemiological evidence. Lancet. 2019;394(10204):1159-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31709-X
Ali NA, Wu J, Hochgräfe F, Chan H, Nair R, Ye S, et al. Profiling the tyrosine phosphoproteome of different mouse mammary tumour models reveals distinct, model-specific signalling networks and conserved oncogenic pathways. Breast Cancer Res. 2014;16(5):437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-014-0437-3
Cabrera-Galeana P. Prognostic value of Ki67. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;172(2):345-55.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
